DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS: The Incrementalist Strategy to DIVIDE and CONQUER

Work as a Death by a Thousand Cuts - Abolish Work

(For a continued ease of access, I have included a downloadable audio version of this blog post that is available in the “Download Audio” tab of this website. Enjoy!)

Death by a thousand cuts; what kind of imagery does such a euphemism produce in your mind? For me it speaks to the ability for most people to be able to sustain numerous superficial injuries, but that over time cut after cut after cut is going to eventually kill us. What if most legislative efforts, particularly as they relate to gun control, is a calculated effort to slowly erode the foundation by which this nation sits upon? Incrementalism has been the preferred methodology for approaching gun control in the US for decades. After all, you can’t just immediately go after all guns because of the immense blowback. Although they staunchly deny it, we all know that the long-term goal is the complete dismantling of the 2nd Amendment. Instead of telegraphing your truest intentions you introduce legislation slowly — imperceptibly chipping away at freedoms. Such a strategy can best be elucidated with the ‘Boiling Frog’ experiment. If you immediately place frogs into extremely hot water they, like most creatures, will jump out of the water instinctively. However, it has been noted through experimentation that if you incrementally heat up the water that the frog adapts to the temperature increase degree by degree. They get so comfortable, in fact, that they aren’t even aware that they are literally dying slowly and because it is imperceptible to the frog, they will casually sit in the water until it rolls into a boil and kills them without ever jumping off to safety. This example describes the strategy behind incrementalism. If you did not understand the reference then more than likely, you’re the frog. 

Before I delve deep into this next installment, I really feel as though I should offer a similar disclaimer as I did at the beginning of my manifesto, “Reimagining Delusion.” This post is going to be fairly long, detailed, and will venture off into different avenues. During your reading/ listening, you may find yourself asking “what does this point have to do with your previous point?” Be patient through the process of expatiation, as what may first appear as an unrelated tangent will later become clearer. While reading/listening to this, I want you to keep the central theme of this post in the back of your mind. If I had to summarize what this entire post is about in a single word, that word would be: CONTROL

George Orwell’s dystopian novel, “1984”

Life, I have come to find, can best be summarized as a series of hills and valleys. During my tenure in this plane of existence I have been inside the depths of many valleys. If I am being honest though, I have to admit that I have had the privilege of spending much more of my time in existence basking on sun-kissed hills with a gentle and comforting breeze. I did nothing to earn this. In fact, probably the greatest reason is that it was a birth-right bestowed upon me by either fortuitous happenstance or by divine providence. I was blessed to have been born in the free world — in the United States of America. Having been born in a country such as this, certain realities experienced by people outside of its borders are difficult to conceptualize. Even though this nation has experienced several instances where it was challenged mightily, in my lifetime I have been fortunate to have avoided many of the pitfalls that befell many of my forebearers. Be that as it may, within the last 5 or so years, I have been noticing the US inching ever-so-slightly backwards in many ways.

During the height of the shit-show that was the year 2020, I asked my father which year he thought was the worst that he had ever experienced. He sat there for about 30 seconds in silence, his brow furled, as he clearly was pondering the question deeply. He then said, “2020.” My father is in his mid-70’s. He’s lived a lot of years and has experienced a lot of things. I retorted incredulously, something to the effect of, “Really? 2020 is even worse than the tumultuous 60’s?” He, again, paused briefly before this time answering with certitude that, yes, 2020 has been the worst year of his entire life. Well, shit, then it obviously was my worst year too by default…  

The world feels very different than in simpler times and I don’t just mean how it’s been weird to have been wearing a mask for more than a year; although that is certainly way outside of the norm. It feels… deeper than that. This feeling feels…. Foreboding. Maybe it’s all in my head but it feels like there is a storm on the horizon; a storm of epic proportions. This feels almost apocalyptic. Everyone seems to be ready to put this all behind them and move forward. Certainly I want that too but if I’m being honest there is this uneasy feeling in the pit of my gut as this nagging thought keeps creeping into my head — that perhaps the best years of my life are now behind me — that whatever conceptions of normalcy I might have had in the past are now all but distant memories and that we may very well never experience life in the same simplistic way ever again. Maybe this is as good as it is going to get moving forward as we trek off into the unknown. Worse still, perhaps not only will things not get better but maybe they will get infinitely worse, making the year 2020 seem like a summer vacation. It’s a frightening prospect but I think we would be foolish to not prepare for the worst while still hoping for the best.

As 2020 came to a close and as I reflected on all the shit thrown my way, I came to the realization that freedom, precious freedom, is so much more fragile than I thought. And to be very clear I thought I had a solid grasp on how fragile freedom really is. To my chagrin, I didn’t. Freedom is so much more fragile than even my lowest expectations. Ultimately, I arrived at the inescapable conclusion that there are, indeed, powerful interests that seek to subvert freedom because freedom, afterall, is inherently a lack of control that others would otherwise exert against your will if they are able. To be free means to be exempt from most forms of constraint and control; to be left alone to live life on your own terms. But as we are seeing there is an increasing effort to exert control on you in ways that we could have only imagined in a hell hole like North Korea. Of course, please understand that I am not deliberately trying to embellish our current state of affairs to be commensurate with that of North Korean oppression. We certainly are quite a ways off from that level of dysfunction. Regardless, there nevertheless is a noticeable degradation in civil liberties and who is to say that, if we were to continue on the current trajectory, that eventually we won’t end up in a similar hellscape of oppression?

Salisbury News: 06/05/16
The fragility of freedom

When the COVID-19 virus was first being discovered in China, it was mildly disconcerting but over my years we have had quite a few previous scares and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) or other powers that be were able to monitor it and mitigate mass exposure until it was successfully suppressed and eventually forgotten. SARS and MERS come to mind. Then a resurgence of Ebola caused an epidemic in West Africa. A few carriers even managed to make it to America before being isolated. I was in college at that time taking a science course when the news of the epidemic broke (epidemic being mass, localized transmission and pandemic being mass worldwide transmission). My professor’s daytime job was as an epidemiologist. Because this interested him and because he could relate it back to course material, he showed the class a computer model he developed which demonstrated how easily an epidemic can turn into a pandemic and how a virus can proliferate exponentially. 

Let me be clear that Ebola is a horrific encephalitic, hemorrhagic fever that has a fatality rate approaching 90%. Your brain swells, you bleed from every orifice, and your last excruciating hours of life are in agony until you flatline. So, by the time a novel virus came along, COVID-19, and it became apparent that it had jumped continents, people obviously were rightfully terrified in the interim. The coronavirus that started as an epidemic in Wuhan, China, had managed to jump continents and became an out of control global pandemic. Nobody quite knew the lethality of it during its infancy. Even when Dr. Fauci, head of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases came out on national television and lied to the public, stating that masks don’t do anything, people rightfully questioned his motives. Turns out their intuitions were correct because he intentionally lied because the United States, the most powerful country in the world, ran out of masks. In a desperate effort to reserve masks for frontline employees, he knowingly and deliberately misled the public. It would not be the last time where he employed deliberate subterfuge against the American people.

Later, he backtracked and has assured the public ever since that masks are vitally necessary to curb the rate of transmission. The damage had already been done though and his credibility has been in question ever since. As time went on, it became more and more apparent that Covid was nothing like Ebola and more closely resembled SARS (a respiratory infection from the Asian subcontinent). Make no mistake though, if Ebola got out in the same way Covid did, we would have had a death toll similar to that of the Bubonic Plague which wiped out approximately 60% of the entire Eurasian population. Still, we had concerns that it might be as deadly as the Spanish Flu which, bizarrely, presented the greatest morbidity to the most healthy! For whatever reason the ages of 15-35 years old paradoxically experienced the most deaths.

COVID-19 Resources and Updates | University of Tampa
Covid-19 virus magnified

Time continued on and we knew more and more about the disease. Quite unlike the Spanish Flu, Covid had a mortality rate of about 1.5% meaning that of all people who contracted the disease, 98.5% would survive. The greatest factors determining death or severe complications were comorbidities such as obesity, heart disease and lung disease. Turns out, Covid is about 3 times more deadly than your average seasonal flu. So while it didn’t present an existential crisis it also was certainly nothing to scoff at. And so, for a time, everyone was asked to self-quarantine by sheltering in place and to only go out for essentials; and while out to mask up, watch out for cross contamination, and use good hygienic practices. Given the sense of urgency, it seemed reasonable to hunker down for a couple of weeks, let it run its course, reemerge, declare victory, and move on with our lives. The problem is, weeks turned to months, and months turned to several months, and several months turned into a year, and… well…. Here we are over a year with no clear sign of abatement. 

The media, doing whatever it can to stay relevant, inundated the public with an unending stream of terror, which could only reasonably be described as “fear porn.” As Charlie Chester illuminated, who is a CNN technical director who was surveilled by Project Veritas, stated, “Fear Sells.” He isn’t wrong. The irresponsibility of the media has helped to create an atmosphere of sheer terror. Let me be very clear that this isn’t to say that COVID is a “hoax,” but it is to say that what has happened to the lives of millions of Americans and to the American economy is, by far and away, worse than the disease itself. And the duplicity of our leaders, who follow a “do as I say, not as I do” philosophy have squeezed the soul out of the common people and have further eroded trust between government and citizen. 

Predictably, and in no small part because of the media’s incessant around-the-clock immersion in fear has, yet again, polarized the country. Masks, of all things, has become something of a political statement — a kind of virtue signal. One side thinks that anti-maskers are selfish and the people who believe the economy should open back up believe that the ‘cure is worse than the condition.’ 

fear-sells-advertising-graffiti | POLITUSIC
Buy the fear, sell the greed

So what is my personal position on the matter? COVID is real and it has proven to be deadly to the elderly, to the infirm, and potentially poses permanent risks to the pulmonary and cardiac systems of patients who contract it. At the same time, I question the legitimacy of their death claims. A piano from the 10th storey could crush a person below and so long as the decedent tested positive for COVID, they’ll chalk that up to a Covid-realted death. This isn’t to say that Covid isn’t deadly to the infirm, I am sure that it is. But what are the ancillary dangers related to Covid along the periphery, in the sense of what these lockdowns have wrought? I would be very curious to tally up the numbers of deaths related to Covid measures and compare them with actual Covid deaths. When people lose their jobs, for no other reason than the government refuses them the ability to make a living and support their family, it has a profound effect on their mental and physical health. How many businesses have been crushed into oblivion? How many people have committed suicide as a result? How many families have been fractured and broken? How many people are now unemployed that otherwise wouldn’t have been? How many more homicides in 2020 compared to 2019? How many more domestic disturbances and family violence as the stress mounts? How many foreclosures? How many evictions? How many vehicles were repossessed? How many people lost their health insurance because their employers became insolvent? 

Hmmm, yes, I suppose death by starvation is a lot better than death by Covid. And not to be insensitive to anyone who has died of Covid or who lost family members, but why are we talking about fucking masks and 6-feet distances when we should be talking about preventative medicine??? Why isn’t Dr. Fauci emphasizing exercise or healthy eating? Masks?! Oh, wait, now it’s two masks to offer 75% protection and THREE masks that offer 95% efficacy! 

Whether by design or whether by mere happenstance, COVID has been a wonderful little experiment in terms of finding out what the masses are willing to put up with and to the degree of their longsuffering. I am not suggesting that COVID is some grand conspiracy, but it seems to me that, much like 9/11, there are three possible scenarios. As the 9/11 “truther” conspiracies go, 9/11 was a deliberate false flag attack to provide the government with the moral impetus to go to war with Iraq and secure its oil fields. The other is that the NSA and CIA were aware of an impending terrorist attack but allowed it to happen to also provide the moral impetus to go to war with Iraq and secure its oil fields. The third is that 9/11 happened organically, but ultimately provided the US with the moral impetus with which to go to war with Iraq and secure its oil fields. In any event, regardless of the starting point you subscribe to, the end result is still the same in either scenario — control. So it is with Covid-19. Whether that control was manufactured, whether there was no direct collusion but they allowed it to happen so as to give themselves a blank check, or whether they had no foreknowledge but seized upon it and took full advantage of the situation once it presented itself, it seems to me the outcome is still the same. 

The finding of 4 unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV, all of which have identity /similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature. This work provides yet unknown insights on 2019-nCoV and sheds light on the evolution and pathogenicity of this virus with important implications for diagnosis of this virus.

Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag

While I am not a virologist I have done enough research from those that are, but who have no skin in the game, who have described the virus’ signature such that it almost certainly was grown in a laboratory setting and was not due to the tepid conditions of a Chinese wet market. There just so happens to be a biological laboratory in Wuhan. Whether Chinese virologists were simply studying how a novel coronavirus behaves in lab animals or whether it was specifically designed with the intent of studying the effects of a potential biological weapon, that it was nevertheless formed in a lab appears to be evident. It seems unlikely though that it would be the former reason than the latter given the extremely low fatality rate. It’s obviously possible that it was released intentionally, but that also makes little sense since the Chinese would have much more incentive to infect another nation and not their own. It seems far more likely that the Wuhan lab, due to a lax adherence to safety protocols, negligently allowed it to escape and then attempted to cover it up to avoid negative publicity. Prior to the grand opening of this lab, scientists worldwide expressed concerns about some of the nastiest pathogens

“Some scientists outside China worry about pathogens escaping and the addition of a biological dimension to geopolitical tensions between China and other nations. But Chinese microbiologists are celebrating their entrance to the elite cadre empowered to wrestle with the world’s greatest biological threats.”

Supposing it was manufactured in a laboratory setting, what was the purpose if not designed as a bio-weapon? “Gain of Function” research is a microbiological principle that manufacturing viruses synthetically, particularly those that can cross vector between different species, offers insights on how to combat future viruses that may form organically. Seems simple enough in theory, except in principle we now see why the Obama Administration placed a moratorium on the practice for the EXACT reason such as we are seeing — that its simply fraught with so much danger of terrible diseases leaking that its not worth it. Guess who was specifically told not conduct Gain of Function testing? Dr. Anthony Fauci. Guess who specifically said Gain of Function testing was “worth the risk?” Dr. Anthony Fauci. Guess who wiped his ass with the moratorium and outsourced Covid to Chinese researchers in Wuhan? Dr. Anthony Fauci.

In a 2011 article written by Dr. Anthony Fauci and published by the Washington Post, this exact principle of Gain of Function testing was presented against a backdrop of what could happen if the virus either behaved unexpectedly outside of a laboratory setting or supposing there was an escape of such pathogens before the completion of testing. Like a tragic foreshadowing, we see now the juice wasn’t worth the squeeze and, moreover, that we are taking medical advice from the very person who had a hand in the creation and proliferation of the Covid-19 virus. And yet the media hangs on to his every word as if spoken from the lips of God almighty. The average person doesn’t know these facts because the media buries this information and most people simply defer to what they perceive is an authoritative source on the matter. They have certainly managed to produce a cult-like following of the man who is directly responsible for their own misery; a man who has now capitalized on your misfortune.

Again, though, I am sure you are asking what is the relevance? Well, just like 9/11 you don’t need a grand conspiracy to take full advantage of a situation — to seize upon the opportunity as if it were a gift bestowed upon them from the heavens. For instance, I am certain that every hostile nation to the United States is watching very closely at how unsuccessful we have been to curb the spread of transmission given that, far and away, the US has done the most poorly on the entire planet. This probably gives Russia, Iran, and China a lot of comfort when it comes to them considering the use of biological weaponry in the event of a full-scale war. 

But another thing that comes out of this is that, again, whether intended or whether they simply capitalized on it after the fact, the government certainly must be gathering valuable data points about human behavior in America. Look at what the collective are willing to put up with when the government demands it from them. This looks like a goddamn social experiment! Look at the level of control that has been exerted and the corresponding level of acquiescence to it. Think about the level of control; some people actually listened to the government when they said they couldn’t have a funeral for their loved ones. Some said, yeah, fuck it…. I just won’t work. My kids don’t eat that much anyway. And then think of the sickening duplicity when, apparently, the virus magically takes a day off when it comes to protesting social justice. Who told protesters it wasn’t a good idea to gather in a seething mass, frothing at the mouth and spitting all over one another as they hiss in utter contempt for pigs? No one dared! Heaven forbid anyone mention the obvious hypocrisy, because to mention it is to immediately and unceremoniously be branded as a racist. We all know what the reason is and that reason is because political correctness trump’s national security in the middle of a global pandemic. We need to “flatten the curve!” You can’t go to grandma’s funeral, but you can attend George Floyd’s funeral no questions asked. This is political theater going on before our eyes and it is blatant hypocrisy in the name of political correctness. How can you expect the masses to take you seriously if you don’t even possess the fortitude to go against today’s high-tech lynch mob — the Twittersphere? Imagine being so feckless that you capitulate to what amounts to a mob of dejected, angsty teenagers… because that is more or less what is happening. 

What has this pandemic provided to the powers that be? The ‘ends justify the means’ form of control and the moral high ground to grant themselves free reign vis a vis a new global initiative they have entitled, THE GREAT RESET

“Building back better means getting support to the most vulnerable while maintaining our momentum on reaching the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. This is our chance to help your pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality, and climate change. Canada believes that a strong, coordinated response across the world and across sectors is essential. This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset.”

Canadian Prime Minister; Justin Trudeau
Has golden boy Justin Trudeau lost his magic touch ...

Note the reassuring, flowery, politically correct language in an effort to soften the tyranny that lay beneath the substrate. Afterall, what kind of a monster wouldn’t want to address extreme poverty, inequality, or climate change through the imaginative reimagining of economic systems?! For however noble Trudeau attempts to frame it, you have to read between the platitudinous lines to get to the substantive issue — notably that the language emphasizes ideology before outcome — you have to drink our Kool-Aid if you want to see the results. Anyone dumb enough to actually believe that they can solve poverty is naively idealistic. All forms of social programs or economic systems that attempt to equalize have never been able to solve the only real problem — the human condition. Communism, socialism, every single social program in the history of history fails because it has not and can not account for the insurmountable, which is that we are inherently unequal — unequal in thought, unequal in intellect, unequal morally, unequal physically, mentally, etc. Trudeau and the people like him don’t want what is righteous, which is an equal opportunity to compete. He and demons of his ilk want an equality of outcome, which crushes innovation, crushes motivation and reduces everyone to the lowest common denominator. Trudeau believes that you can change a person through external means; meaning if there is an issue with poverty, then just build homes for poor people. Wrong. No government program that has ever existed or will exist could ever change someone internally through external means. And therein lies the fatal flaw of all social programs that has been demonstrated time and again, but obstinate fools think they can change the human condition. The only way to make people equal is to drag them down to the lowest common denominator, so that we can all be equally miserable in the depths of despair. Every utopian dream that has ever been sold ultimately all deteriorated into a dystopian nightmare. You can never raise them up to a level they are either unwilling or incapable of attaining or maintaining. It’s just reality. Blowhards like Trudeau and his army of mindless idiots fail to accept reality as it is and not how they wish it to be. 

Trudeau and others like him are using the Covid lockdowns as a means of control. He wants to utilize this time to hit the reset button. Covid has been such a blessing, again, whether you believe it was manufactured, allowed to happen, or powerful special interests took full advantage of it after the fact. I think it is the latter but it doesn’t really matter when the outcome is still the same. We know that even the mention of Covid passports is an encroachment upon civil liberties that sets a nasty precedence that, if passed, will produce even more government intrusion in the future. When has the government ever given back ceded ground from the People? If you think this will stop with a Covid passport, you are sorely mistaken.

Look at the “2030 Agenda” he referenced. This is a globalist agenda headed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in concert with the United Nations (UN) and International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Spear-headed by gajillionaires, like Klaus Schwab,

World Economic Forum 2019: Davos chief Klaus Schwab sends ...
Klaus Schwab

Kristalina Georgiva,

Conversation with Kristalina Georgieva, the International ...
Kristalina Georgiva

George Soros,

George Soros One of Top Caesars Shareholders Since ...
George Soros

 and other oligarchs who are so removed from ordinary society that it’s hilarious that they have the balls to ingratiate themselves in the lives of us lowly plebes to try and fix that which was not broken. The Great Reset was called out on its naive bullshit in a piece that called it:

“a coronavirus-themed rebranding of all the things Davos does anyway, now hastily repackaged as a blueprint for reviving the global economy post-pandemic by “seeking a better form of capitalism.” The Great Reset was a place to hawk for-profit technofixes to complex social problems; to hear heads of transnational oil giants opine about the urgent need to tackle climate change; to listen to politicians say the things they say during crises: that this is a tragedy but also an opportunity, that they are committed to building back better, and ushering in a “fairer, greener, healthier planet.”… Less a conspiracy theory than a conspiracy smoothie, the Great Reset has managed to mash up every freakout happening on the internet — left and right, true-ish, and off-the-wall — into one inchoate meta-scream about the unbearable nature of pandemic life under voracious capitalism. I’ve been doing my best to ignore it for months, even when various Reset “researchers” have insisted that all of this is an example of the shock doctrine, a term I coined a decade and a half ago to describe the many ways that elites try to harness deep disasters to push through policies that further enrich the already wealthy and restrict democratic liberties.”

Naomi Klein of “The Intercept”

I heartily agree with this assessment; that this “Great Reset” is just a power-grab by power brokers and elitists who, more than anything, want to control you as a means for their production, all the while pretending to have your best interests in mind. It is a favorite mechanism for people of this ilk to frame things like global pandemics, capitalism, Climate Change, etc as existential crises that you need to be saved from. First order of their business model is to bloviate the proliferation of disinformation and fear and the grim prognostication of failing to heed their foreboding missive concerning the future. 

Then when the enormity of the situation seems impossible offer up a savior and a foolproof plan. Framing certain things antagonistically will betray the sentiment they want portrayed, so it is incumbent to frame it as some kind of “crisis.” It is the same reason why gun control is now being reframed as a “public health crisis.”

Gun Violence as a Public Health Crisis - YouTube
Dishonest framing

By rephrasing it as such it lends more credence than the actual unpalatable truth, which is, “we don’t like the fact that you are armed and uncontrollable.” The United States is one of the last strongholds on the planet where common citizens have the right to defend themselves against aggression and tyranny. But this has not gone on unopposed, of course. There are powerful lobbyists who in the past, now and into the foreseeable future seek to repeal the 2nd Amendment, as armed citizens have been a perennial thorn in the side of tyrants and dictators. The problem for them is that the 2nd Amendment, which is the right to keep and bear arms, is a fundamental right recognized through Natural Law that was codified through the Bill of Rights. Unlike many other amendments, which have well-defined clauses that use unambiguous speech to convey the intent, the 2nd Amendment lacks a similar clarity. Because of this it had been subjected to much debate and scrutiny since the formation of the Republic. Those in favor of firearm reform have used the ambiguity of the language to suit their own agenda. For instance, the exact verbiage reads as such:

Why does Republican want to revisit gun rights legislation ...

The greatest source of contention has historically come between the distinguishing words of “well regulated militia” and “the people.” Gun-grabbers have stated, aha!, see?! Firearms are only supposed to be provided for by something like the military, which is the well regulated militia. Gun Rights advocates have countered that “The People” ARE the “Well Regulated Militia,” and they aren’t incorrect. Context is everything since it provides the intended conveyance as a means to avoid misconstrual. In that vein the context of the Framers was such that the People and the Militia were one in the same. After all, the Continental army was formed by commoners and obviously was not sanctioned by the Crown of England. 

Penn & Teller’s Bullshit!

A very simple way to know what the author’s intent was is to review their own personal memoirs or letters of correspondence to one another, which oftentimes flesh out details that in the case of the wording in the 2nd Amendment is otherwise conspicuously absent. So let’s look at the context by allowing the Framers and the signatories of the Constitution to explain their intent. 

Sally Hemings, Thomas Jefferson, And The Normalization of ...
Thomas Jefferson

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

– Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”

– Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

– Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion on your walks.”

– Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785
George Mason (eBook) | George mason, Founding fathers, George
George Mason

“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”

– George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”

-George Mason, Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12 1776
Christian Quotes from the Founding Fathers - Christian ...
Noah Webster

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”

– Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787
Founding Fathers Quotes - James Madison
James Madison

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.”

– James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”

– James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
Founding Fathers Quotes from America's Courageous ...
Richard Henry Lee and his pseudonym persona of “Federal Farmer”

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms…  “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

– Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788
patrick-henry | Founding fathers, American revolution, I ...
Patrick Henry

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”

– Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”

-Patrick Henry, Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution
Henry St. George Tucker, April 29, 1831-May 3, 1841 ...
Henry St. George Tucker

The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”

– St. George Tucker, Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803
» Thomas Paine: Champion of the Common Man - MULE
Thomas Paine

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves.”

– Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on Defensive War” in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775
File:Alexander Hamilton, by Trumbull.jpg - Wikimedia Commons
Alexander Hamilton

“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.”

– Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

These are but a few unambiguous and unassailable examples that make it patently clear what the 2nd Amendment is for and who may enjoy such a freedom. And then, of course, the Supreme Court has ruled in a similar fashion in several landmark cases so as to make incontrovertible. It can no longer be argued from the historical perspective and the leftists who want to subvert it have had to combat it in different ways. Why would any lawmakers honestly have such a big problem with an armed citizenry? Well, let’s look at the efficiency of an armed society that the government itself subordinates to. 

As to the efficacy of an armed society, one only needs to look at how just a few armed and determined people can put up a substantial fight using asymmetrical warfare. The United States’ military, in conventional wars, tends to do exceedingly well. However, when outside of a pitched battle that employs unconventional warfare, the machine tends to get bogged down. 20 years and we still don’t know how to topple the Taliban once and for all. While the US has killed more Taliban fighters than the US has lost to attrition, and while the number of Viet Cong deaths ultimately was greater than the loss of US life on the battlefields of Vietnam, victory was not determined by attrition alone; it was determined by sheer will. Now extrapolate that power in terms of a society with over 400 million guns in circulation, in a vast expansive land, with abundant natural resources, populated by a defiant people who know their birthright grants them the ability to fight creeping authoritarianism and what you are left with is an endless quagmire should an invading force attempt disarmament. And for this reason, the opposition knows that in order to effectively disarm the populace, it must come from a death by a thousand cuts. 

Thinking Aboot: Asymmetric Warfare Everywhere
Sun Tzu’s infamous dictum, “The Art of War,” concerning concepts of asymmetrical warfare

As it relates to the topic, the government understands that in order to get support that the media has to play to the crowd. Every time there is a shooting that appears to be outside of gang violence, the fear factor increases tenfold, there is mass exposure and the audience is inundated with the notion that gun violence is out of control. In reality, 60% of the numbers they use come from suicides by gun which is obviously disingenuous and deceitful to distort the numbers. The media is certain to almost never carry a story where a law-abiding gun carrier successfully defends life and thwarts an unlawful use of a firearm because then it legitimizes what responsible gun owners have been saying for decades. This is all systematically geared to present a narrative that mostly crazy, racist, right-winged, white males are responsible for violent outbursts with guns. Demonize and mischaracterize in an effort to sway the general public. Look at how Big Tech, the government, the media and the entertainment industry has created a society that stigmatizes people that play fast and loose with the Covid lockdowns. You don’t necessarily need constant government intrusion in order to perpetrate your plan. You just need to incentivize the general public by enforcing new social norms in order to pressure businesses and individuals to play along. More or less this is the primary way that North Korea maintains control. Any government has finite resources and so they can only do so much to monitor millions or even billions of people. But if you incentivize families, neighbors, coworkers or strangers to rat each other out so that the totalitarian government won’t come after them, this is how you truly control the masses.

So it is with gun control. Anytime there is a shooting of more than two people (outside of gang violence, of course, because it disrupts their other agendas) the media blasts it everywhere and the government responds with a solemn and plaintiff cry about “how many more tragedies need to occur before we make real reform?” And then all of a sudden the masses buy into the propaganda and are willing to trade in essential liberty for the sake of what they believe will offer them security. 

No society will ever rid itself of violence completely and without question, when firearms are removed from the equation human beings will find other means to kill. People have been slaughtering one another for millennia looooong before the advent of the gun and nothing is going to prevent that. In feudal Japan and China, dynasties refused to allow commoners the right to self-defense. For instance, despite a common fallacy nunchucks were not originally designed as a martial arts weapon. Nunchucks were designed as a farming tool for threshing heads of grain from their stalks. But what did people do in response to their inability to protect themselves? In the absence of designated weaponry to stand a fighting chance against an armed opponent, they weaponized it out of what they believed was necessity. They say that necessity is the mother of invention and I find that truism to be of absolute certainty. Consider prison to be the ultimate example of what human ingenuity can accomplish for determined people. Aside from fashioning shivs and shanks from hard objects, some prisoners have even used cellophane wrappers from cigarette packs, tightly wound with a tapered end, and melted it into a hard plastic to create a weapon. So, what? Are you going to ban all plastics now or are you going to finally start asking the infinitely more salient question, which is, why does this prisoner feel the need to make it at all?! As I have said before, governmental policies tend to dismiss the reality of human nature and they believe by changing the external that they can change the internal aspect of a man. They cannot and will not — not in a trial of a thousand years can they undo what nature has selected as beneficial and instinctual. This is because you aren’t addressing the actual issue. 

Violence can start at any corner in the direct structural-cultural violence triangle and is easily transmitted to the other corners. With the violent structure institutionalized and the violent culture internalized, direct violence also tends to become institutionalized, repetitive, ritualistic, like a vendetta. This triangular syndrome of violence should then be contrasted in the mind with a triangular syndrome of peace in which cultural peace engenders structural peace, with symbiotic, equitable relations among diverse partners, and direct peace with acts of cooperation, friendliness and love. It could be a virtuous rather than vicious triangle, also self-reinforcing. This virtuous triangle would be obtained by working on all three corners at the same time, not assuming that basic change in one will automatically lead to
changes in the other two.

Johan Galtung, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 27, No. 3. (Aug., 1990), pg. 302

Why are we focused on inanimate objects that possess no will and no intent when we should be focusing on the one who wields it inappropriately? To curb gun violence in urban ghettos they think removing guns is going to solve crime, but it never will because the infinitely more pressing question is why some people feel compelled to victimize others. Address the actual fucking root of the problem! Stop trying to cure the disease by treating the symptoms! You take Naproxen, Acetaminophen or Aspirin to treat the symptoms of a headache without ever wondering why you have the headache at all! Maybe your goddamn body is telling you to drink some fucking water, asshole! And so it is with cultural violence, where some cultures, even armed cultures, like the Swiss, have much lower instances of violence, period, and why other cultures are mired not only in gun violence but violence of any kind.

In Democrat-run cities across the United States, often where the strictest gun laws exist, is gun violence an epidemic. Ironically, places saturated with lawfully possessed firearms, tend to produce a much more egalitarian and polite society. Is that a tacit admission that gun laws which, in my estimation, are almost always unconstitutional, a reflection that the larger problem is why people are homicidal is the more salient question than how do we disarm them? Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws of any country and they kill more people in an afternoon than some countries killed in 20 combined years. Switzerland, a country armed to the gills, has extremely low instances of gun violence and violence of any kind for that matter. But gun-grabbers will continue to obfuscate the issue and instead of wondering why people in Chicago want to kill one another, they try to pass more laws which prove ineffective. Can you imagine going through life being that obtuse and blind to the obviously more pressing matter of why a culture of violence is left to proliferate? If you took every gun away, Chicago would dwarf London in rampant knife violence. Stop believing the misnomer that you can change the internal through external means. It will NEVER work! Stop treating the symptoms and start treating the disease. 

As to the current administration’s position on guns, look at what Joseph Biden’s inauguration has brought? He has single-handedly armed more Americans than ever before! They can’t manufacture enough weapons or ammunition fast enough because he and his draconian views on firearms have made it so that the demand far outweighs the supply! There are an estimated 5 million new gun owners in this nation since 2020 on top of the already 400 million guns in circulation in the United States! Covid, a Biden administration, rampant uncertainty all speaks to the fear Americans have and their desire to inherently take care of themselves because they know the government is inept and corrupt. We know what is coming our way and that is a death by a thousand cuts, as the current administration attempts to erode civil liberties bit by bit until no one is armed except the government. 

Make no mistake, this includes the cops too… at least the ones that respect the Constitution.

The powers that be, admittedly, have the heart and spirit of America on the ropes… I would never claim otherwise. But when the People finally come together as one and usurp a government that seeks to enslave them, we will see a nation that cannot be controlled. We will see the imbalance finally being righted. I will NEVER give up on freedom. You can try to muzzle me, you can try to shackle me, you can try to silence me, you can try to kill me, but so long as blood pumps in my heart and oxygen flows in my lungs I will NEVER capitulate to tyranny and if I have to become a martyr to stir others to action, so be it. You are either on my side or else you are in the way; either stand behind me or you will stand in front of me. This is no longer only about the fate of a single nation, this is a fight for the entire free world. Act accordingly. Find the courage, find the sheer will, and never, ever, ever, ever give up on liberty. As Thomas Jefferson eloquently admonished, “the tree of liberty needs to be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” I’m not asking you to start the Revolution, but I damn sure am I asking you to fight with me to finish it if it comes to that. Violence should ALWAYS be the last option…. But it is an option, and don’t you forget it. This is my attempt at diplomacy through reason! But if I can’t get through to you with reason and persuasion and you continue to threaten the sanctity and Natural Rights of the People, then all I can do is what I was instructed to do by my forefathers.

Most Patriotic Songs Ever You Need to Hear Before ...
Until next time…. this is Centrist Servant signing off…. Keep fighting the good fight.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *