15 Apr Popcorn Sutton: Whiskey Rebel by John Meyers

“Jesus turned water into wine, I turned it into damn likker” – Popcorn Sutton

Appalachia’s history is largely comprised of tales of resistance of one form or another.  The poster child of Appalachia’s rebellion against unjust authority has always been the Moonshiner, the maker of non-government approved distilled spirits. These spirits were commonly referred to in the southern lexicon as moonshine, mountain dew, white lightning, “painter piss,” or perhaps more simply “likker.” There is no moonshiner more infamous than the Smoky Mountain’s own, Marvin “Popcorn” Sutton. He was not only one of the most famous makers of illicit liquor, but he also led his entire life in defiance of government authority and was quite a character to boot.

Sutton was born in Haywood County, North Carolina, a rural mountainous county on the Tennessee border. At an early age he learned whiskey making from his family and local whiskey makers a like in Haywood and neighboring Cocke County, Tennessee. In due time, he became a well-known whiskey maker in the region. Taking full advantage of the legal jurisdictional confusion between the two states, he plied his trade to the fullest. This was a very common practice employed by bootleggers and moonshiners in years past, when one sheriff would get on your trail you hopped across the state or county line and continued your business.

The tradition of whiskey making as employed by mountain folk originates further back than many people realize. It comes from the Poitín tradition popular in the peat bogs and mountain regions of Scotland and Ireland where most of the ancestors of the southern mountain people originated. While the mountain region of the Southern states lacked wheat, rye or barley for malt historically, residents of the region adapted using Indian corn and malted corn for the fermenting agent. Whiskey making is considered as sacred a right as bearing military style and cosmetically offensive “assault weapons” or keeping livestock. Moonshining in the southern mountains is not only justified on the grounds of natural rights, but also on even simpler grounds. Many makers of illicit whiskey, when asked why they do it have the simple answer of “… my daddy made whiskey, and his daddy made whiskey, and his daddy before him made whiskey, so I’m just gonna keep makin’ it to.”

Popcorn was a dyed in the wool capitalist and largely libertarian in his dealings and belief system. What set him apart from the rest was his unique marketing strategy. He boasts in his book “Me and My Likker,” that him and his father were not political beings, but instead sold moonshine to folks at the polling place on Election Day. This is a much more effective use of time than trying to vote yourself free. He was fiercely independent even to the extent of purchasing his own casket, flowers and the shovels needed to bury him before he died. He is on record of stating that even though he was extremely sick late in life and had amassed a pile of medical bills, “the government nor the county doesn’t pay my bills, I do.”

Popcorn’s first run in with the law was in 1974. He was arrested and later convicted on illegal production of untaxed whiskey, among other charges. In typical mountain fashion, the day after he was released on bond after his arrest, he went right back to the same spot where he was arrested and set his still back up. He figured that was the safest place to be back in business.  When speaking of his arrests he was fond of saying “I didn’t steal anything here… I paid for the copper, the sugar, the corn…so I don’t see where I broke the law anywhere.”

Over the years he built up quite a reputation. From selling jars of likker directly out of his junk shop in Maggie Valley, NC to even being close friends with a Federal Judge. He had a unique marketing strategy of writing books about himself and even appearing in documentary films. Many stores in Maggie Valley, North Carolina carried his books and movies and for 50$ each they could be yours. Many still do to this day, years after his death. When confronted about why it might be a bad idea to appear in a movie that depicts him breaking the law, his response was, “You cant sell it if nobody knows you got it.”  He would charge $3 to have your picture made “with a real mountain moonshiner” at his store.

Popcorn set up whiskey making demonstrations at a number of public events and fairs throughout the area over the years. At one event at the Museum of Appalachia, he was running real whiskey out of his still and people were complaining to the owner that he was getting everyone drunk. When he was told to stop, he packed up and left. When he talked about quality of his product, he displayed a wonderful and basic free market sense. He stated that he didn’t sell any bad whiskey and he made the best because ‘no one would come back for more’ if it wasn’t the best. He was in it for repeat business, not a ‘one time show.’

Soon Sutton’s business took a turn for the worse. In 2007 he found his still house on fire on his property in East Tennessee. The responding Fire department and Sheriff’s office quickly discovered his moonshine operation. Three 600 gallon stills were discovered and gallons of mash and whiskey. He urged them not to report him, however these state actors being the good little goons that they are, soon had ABC agents and ATF on the scene where he was charged with possession and manufacturing of illegal and untaxed distilled spirits and felony possession of firearms. Like many mountain men, Popcorn was commonly known to always carry a pistol in his pocket, no CCW permit or state permission needed.  Another Haywood County, NC resident, 5-Time Banjo Champion Raymond Fairchild carried what he refers to as “the law” in his pocket, a small revolver. This was during a time when the concept of a CCW permit didn’t even exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akpndr7nzhs)

Popcorn was sentenced to probation. He didn’t quit making whiskey. He went bigger than before. He set up a few 1000 gal. stainless steel stills. He soon found himself the victim of under cover buying operations by federal and state alcohol enforcement agents. He was charged again with possession, manufacturing and selling of illegal and untaxed whiskey. They reportedly found 1700 gallons of whiskey in his possession. He was convicted soon after in federal court.

On an ironic note that is pertinent to us in the Liberty movement, the head of this ATF operation was none other than the Butcher of Waco, James Cavanaugh. This man had the audacity to claim he was ridding society of vermin by arresting Popcorn Sutton and that “the truth though, is that moonshine is a dangerous health issue and breeds other crime.”  This man has the audacity to say such a thing after he is personally responsible for being behind an operation in 1993 that killed and burned 80 innocent men, women and children at a church in Waco, Texas. It seems James Cavanaugh is still on the job keeping America “safe.” (Lord, help us)

While on house arrest waiting his sentencing to be handed down, Popcorn Sutton remained ever defiant. When the letter came for him to report to federal prison to serve 18 months for his ‘crimes,’ he channeled Patrick Henry. Sutton died for his beliefs. Instead of reporting to serve this unjust sentence to the federal gulag, he committed suicide by gassing himself to death in one of his automobiles, known as the “3 Jug Ford” (He paid 3 jugs of whiskey for the car). When news of Sutton’s death in 2009 was reported, an entire region mourned.

Appalachia celebrates The Resistance.  Mountain culture nullifies bad laws. Most of history is a celebration of the law-breakers. Do we celebrate the Jewish Resistance in the Warsaw Ghetto in 1943 or the Nazi Troops “just doing their jobs?” Stories abound to this day of Popcorn’s death. Some residents of Haywood and Cocke counties believe he faked his own death and is still alive. A Judge spoke at his public memorial service, praising this notorious outlaw. Hank Williams Jr., the country music legend, also appeared. It is nearly unanimous among folks in the region that the arrest of Popcorn for these non-crimes was not only unjust but also despicable. They cite nothing but the Non-Aggression principle in his defense.

While Popcorn had a troubled personal life and can be accurately described as a ‘dead beat father’ his estranged daughter, Sky Sutton, commented that Popcorn went out in a ‘blaze of glory’ and ‘on his own terms…flipping his middle finger as he went.’

The Appalachian region displays a unique example of resistance to arbitrary authority. It was not until the mid 20th century until the various governments had much affect on the region. For much of its history, the region was largely operated on a stateless model. Disputes to this day are often settled without interference of state sanctioned law enforcement. Federal revenue agents tasked with capturing moonshiners and busting up distilling operations in years past often never returned home after entering the mountains.

Due to geographical isolation and terrain, governments have historically had very little effective rule in mountainous areas. We need only mention the Pashtun’s of Afghanistan or the mountain peoples of Southeast Asia to illustrate this point. Nearly every community in the southern mountains from Georgia to Maryland has a story or three of how these men resisted authority they never consented to. During the Whiskey Rebellion in the late 18th century, it is reported that at least one tax collector’s nose was ground off on a grinding wheel in western North Carolina. The voluntary clan-like structure and kinship among mountain people created a sort of guerrilla underground. News of ATF and ALE/ABC agent activity was trafficked amongst this network. Mountain men are by nature suspicious of the outsiders or ‘outlanders’ due to being exploited by government and carpet baggers for generations. Informants are still considered the scum of the earth in these parts, as are ATF and alcohol enforcement agents. Historically, the ‘revenuers,’ a branch of the US treasury department, when they made their first big push into the mountains in the later 19^th and 20^th centuries, were largely comprised of agents recruited from prison and the criminal elements of society. Much like how most cops are now recruited from Middle-east war veterans.

The culture was so entrenched in nullification of so many of these tyrannical laws that it often allowed the laws to be broken out in the open, as Popcorn Sutton is a vivid example of. Much like Ireland’s guerrilla mastermind, Michael Collins when he appeared at a funeral with a very large bounty on his head, with support of the population, you can be successful. “Illegal Likker” and marijuana grow plots are still found in quantity nearly anywhere in the southern Appalachian region to this day.  A jar of likker can be found at any college party or bartered amongst neighbors. At one point, being in mere possession of a piece of a whiskey still was a “crime” punishable with prison time. Many people did not take lightly the idea of their family, friends and neighbors being sent to jail for possession of inanimate objects. Later in life, Popcorn Sutton drove around a restored Model T Ford with a retired copper whiskey still in the bed of the truck proudly on display.

Cocke County, Tennessee, where Sutton spent a large part of his time was once considered the “Moonshine Capital of the World.” Locals bragged that at one point you could buy whiskey every 100 yards on Cosby Creek. Brothels and Cock fighting rings were also common.

Appalachia remains a fiercely independent region to this day. An underlying theme in most stories relating to the region is that for every injustice, the government is generally behind it. Folks are taught to celebrate the outlaws and those that resist oppression. Someone who opposes the State is very likely to gain popular support in the hills. In one of his last and best acts of defiance, Sutton created a lasting legacy. He is featured in documentary films such as “This is the Last Dam Run of Likker I’ll Ever Make” or “The Last Run” demonstrating his craft from beginning to end, ultimately teaching entire generations of people across the world how to make whiskey and defy government encroachment of their natural rights. Even in his death he is inspiring more folks to take up the cause. Popcorn defied authority until the end. His foot marker is shown below.

04 Apr Profiles in Resistance: The Calculus of Defiance by Joshua Van Buskirk

Georgio Grivas

Joshua is a former student of mine and I am honored that he is inaugurating our new series, Profiles in Resistance, with a real firecracker of an opening salvo.  Every new millenium is filled with hope of changing the eternal dynamic and ratcheting back the factors in human slavery.  Many suggest this may well be the Chinese century and I would like to hope that may not be the case at all; it may very well be the final century that the predatory state and its apparatchiks retain humanity in its clutches.

Joshua’s timely Cypriot observations dovetail nicely with the frustrated British experience trying to keep the Irish under their thumb from 1916-22. -BB 

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the

oppressor, it must be demanded by the oppressed.

– Martin Luther King, Jr. “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

Resistance is not a new part of the human experience. Resisters have challenged the meddlers of the world for as long as anyone has asserted authority where it ought not be asserted. Those that challenge the meddler known as the state have several unique qualities that enable them to resist and, in many cases, win against overwhelming odds. The principles that make resisters successful are critical thinking, forcing the enemy to fight on the resister’s terms, exposing the vulnerability of the state, and economic sustainability.

    Critical Thinking

Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe, but in their readiness to doubt.

– H. L. Mencken

Resisters are the contrarians among us. Skeptics by nature, resisters ask “why” until the answers become insufficient. The ability to ask these types of questions requires critical thinking. Therefore, the resister is often middle class, highly educated and skeptical. For example, Fidel Castro and Mohandas Gandhi studied law before leading revolutionary social movements. Both Abimael Guzmán, of the Shining Path, and Martin Luther King, Jr. had PhDs in philosophy before they challenged their respective governments. Mao Tse-Tung worked as a librarian before taking on both the Japanese and the Chinese Nationalists. Ernesto “Che” Guevara  was a  medical student before joining Castro in Cuba.

Not only must the founders of revolutions be critical thinkers, but the foot soldiers and junior leaders of a resistance movement must also be independent-minded. Often operating using a de-centralized model, the resister must be able to think for himself and act in the absence of orders from his chain of command. A good example of this is the cell structure implemented by the Shining Path. Although highly centralized at the strategic level, at the tactical level, the Shining Path’s decision making was left to individual commanders:

Local militants were organized into cells, similar to contemporary terrorists cells, and for security reasons had limited contacts outside their immediate five- to nine-member unit. Even a regional commander had direct contact with no more than eight other insurgents.^[1]

The Shining Path, like many resistance movements, was forced by military necessity to operate independently, thereby enabling its fighters to adapt their plans to the situation on the ground. Such flexibility and the capability to operate without guidance from higher headquarters allows the resister to out-think and out-maneuver his government opponent, whose focus is not on critical thinking.

Government forces are focused on blind obedience and ensuring that orders are not questioned. The ability to think independently may lead to soldiers having thoughts that deviate from government-approved opinions and, consequently, dissension in the ranks. The soldiers of the state spend their time implementing a national policy drafted by academics and politicians, not considering whether something is right or wrong. These soldiers are also unable to think about the long-term effects of such policies when applied to the local situation. The government’s steadfastness to policy and doctrine enable the resister to out-maneuver state forces by being flexible and adapting to the situation. By being a critical thinker, the resister forges his own path and refuses to fight a traditional battle.

Fighting on the Resister’s Terms

The Guerrilla has the initiative; it is he who begins the war, and he who decides when and where to strike. His military opponent must wait, and while waiting, he must be on guard everywhere.

            -Robert Taber

Part of being a critical thinker is doing what works. Typically, governments rig the rules to ensure that the customary or acceptable means of opposition are ineffective. In Guerrilla Warfare, Mao Tse-Tung illustrates how the successful resister will do the opposite of what is expected. When the conventional forces zag, the resister zigs.  During a resistance, Mao says to:

“…select the tactic of seeming to come from the east and attacking from the west; avoid the solid, attack the hollow; attack; withdraw; deliver a lightning blow, seek a lightning decision. When guerrillas engage a stronger enemy, they withdraw when he advances; harass him when he stops; strike him when he is weary; pursue him when he withdraws. In guerilla strategy, the enemy’s rear, flanks, and other vulnerable spots are his vital points, and there he must be harassed, attacked, dispersed, exhausted and annihilated.”^[2]

Mao says that fighters should be contrarian and use the advantages that being small affords the movement: speed, agility and being seemingly undetectable to the heavy hand of conventional forces and conventional thinking. Do not play by the rules or use the conventional wisdom; make your own rules. As Malcom Gladwell has pointed out, the Davids of the world beat their Goliaths by refusing to do what was expected by the opposition. By following this advice, the resister leaves the conventional forces of the state baffled, confused and, in many cases, bankrupt.

Countless successful insurgents have utilized these principles. For example, insurgents often hide in mountainous terrain, where conventional forces have difficulty with both the physical and human landscape.

A mountainous physical terrain is difficult for large mechanized forces to traverse and easy for guerrillas to hide in. By refusing to fight in the open, the resister forces the government to fight on his terms. A good example of this is Fidel Castro in the Sierra Maestra. When Castro’s men  were pursued into the mountains, the Cuban government’s forces were frustrated through ambushes, thick vegetation, and an elusive enemy that seemed to be everywhere, but at the same time nowhere to be found. Castro so effectively fought the government’s forces that he was able to convince the Cubans in the urban areas that opposing the Batista government was possible. Without the myth of state invulnerability, Batista was forced to flee the country, thereby dissolving his government.

In the mountains, the human terrain is also inhospitable to government forces. These rural areas tend to receive less government funds and services. Rural people are also unaccustomed to having others tell them how to live their lives. Zomia is perhaps the best example of this principle. As a mountainous rural region, its people remained, as James Scott stated, masters of “The Art of Not Being Governed.”

This type of resistance is not limited to Southeast Asia. In Peru, for example, the government only provided security, infrastructure and money to those of European descent residing in the lower elevations of the coastal region. Simultaneously, it ignored the needs of the indigenous people in the mountainous interior of the country. Such disparity made the area ripe for revolution and led to the rise of the Shining Path.

The Shining Path was able to use the mountains to hide within the countryside and among the people. The leader of the Shining Path, Abimael Guzmán, directed his followers to engage in hit-and-run tactics against the Peruvian government, steal from the government, and assassinate political opponents. By adopting unconventional tactics on difficult terrain, the Shining Path pushed the Peruvian government outside of its comfort zone. Had Guzmán not been captured in 1992, it is possible that the interior of Peru would have won de facto independence from the coastal areas.

Destroying the Invulnerability of the State

The government is not concerned about the loss of a few policemen, or even an arsenal, but it is terrified of the attendant publicity,which casts doubt on its stability.

            -Robert Taber

Part of not playing by the rules is ensuring that military operations come second to the battle of persuading the people. Ultimately, a government cannot exist without some sort of consent by the governed. At the very least, the ruled must resign themselves to government control. The two most dangerous ideas to state are therefore 1) that the people do not need it, and 2) that the government can be defeated. Once the people are persuaded of these two points, no government can exist.

Of these two ideas, proving the vulnerability of the state is the more difficult. The state has a powerful Army, Navy and Air Force, all outfitted with the latest technology. Many believe the only thing that could beat such power is another state with an equally powerful military. The resister proves the vulnerability of these conventional forces by opposing them and surviving to tell the tale. Most people assume that any one individual opposing the state would be crushed by the full might and power of an empire. However, when the state fails to crush that individual, it shows that resistance is possible and lowers the cost of others joining the resister’s movement. It also makes the resistance leader appear larger-than-life. For example, Mullah Omar and members of the Haqqani Network actively opposed the Soviet Union and the United States in Pashtunistan and are still alive to inspire others. The inability to stop these individuals illustrates the failing of massive armies with overwhelming technological superiority. Of course, the loss of such leaders is a propaganda coup for the government. However, as Al-Qaeda has proven, such leaders are easy to replace at a very low cost.

 The Economics of Resistance

He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men’s weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue… In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns.

 –Sun Tzu, the Art of War

Perhaps the best trait the resister brings to a war against the state is economic sustainability. Unlike traditional states, resisters can fight at significantly reduced rates compared to their opponents. As it stands today, for instance, insurgents in Afghanistan can make highly effective Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) for the shockingly low rate of 265 USD as of 2009. Compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the Counter-IED Operations Integration Center (COIC), it is not surprising that the US government has racked up 16 trillion USD in debt in order to fight people who refuse to play by the rules.

The concept of counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency being financially unsustainable is not isolated to recent times or to the mountainous terrain. On the small Greek island of Cyprus, Georgios Grivas was able to frustrate British forces between 1955 and 1960. Grivas was able to force the British Empire to hemorrhage both men and resources while fighting against a relatively small group of guerrillas. By 1956, the British had increased their forces to 22,000 men to fight 273 of Grivas’ full-time soldiers.^[3] Fielding such a large army came at large expense for the British. On the other hand, Grivas’ men maintained their supplies by raiding remote British outposts, from which they stole food, ammunition and weapons. By the end of the conflict, the British had increased their presence in Cyprus to 43,000 soldiers. The increased number did little to stop Grivas’ forces and did much to convince both the British people and the British government that the occupation of Cyprus was not economically feasible. Due to exhaustion, cost and lack of political will, the British granted Cyprus its independence in 1960.

The example of Cyprus is one of many. One can look to Tito’s struggle against Hitler, Castro’s against Batista and many others to see how a small band of dedicated resisters can be an expensive opponent. Moreover, it is an endeavor that often only forestalls the inevitable defeat of the state.

 Conclusion

 The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.

– Thomas Jefferson

As the internet and technology continue to spread information and even the battlefield between non-state and state actors, this problem will only get worse for governments and empires. In the American military, it costs billions to build a surface ship, but the missile that destroys it costs merely a fraction of that. Empires fall for financial reasons, and governments may collapse for the same reasons. When that happens, we can thank the resister.

24 Mar Sovereign What? by Bill Buppert

“He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.”

– Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

One of my favorite internet commentators, ZenPundit, was recently talking about the religiosity and the secular nature of the American sovereignty movement, he has a far deeper interest in things religious than I now or ever would but scintillating commentary nonetheless.  He makes this observation:

“But but but… please!! Even Christ recommends we should “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”. And When the Taoist Chuang Tze expresses his lack of interest in governance, he does so not by way of refusing to pay parking tickets or taxes, but by politely refusing an offer of high office.”

Now I find every objection possible to the notion that the Book of Abraham invariably and unmistakably dictates through emanations (dare I say penumbras) from Romans that all rulers are just and they must be obeyed even if they violate God’s law such as the funding and protection of the pro-death practitioners in the abortion business.

It finally struck me why despite my legion of objections to the Sovereign Citizen movement and my anecdotal exposure to them in north Idaho that further soured my impression why there is still a remnant within their actions that resonates with me.

They seek a legal or religious means to opt out, drop off and no longer participate in a system they object to.  But they seek to be sovereign citizens.

A citizen is by way of the Oxford Dictionary:  “a legally recognized subject or national of a state or commonwealth, either native or naturalized”; a subject or one may say an object in society to be steered by the state in the way that pleases the rulers.  So to me it is a contradiction in terms much like a literal interpretation of a text or rigid flexibility in a fixed variable.  These things cannot stand together.

You either is or you ain’t.

(more…)

19 Feb Repeal the Second Amendment by Bill Buppert

“You only have power over people so long as you don’t take everything away from them But when you’ve robbed a man of everything, he’s no longer in your power – he’s free again.”

– Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Sometime back there was a brief flash in the pan to make contemporary taxpayers pay for the slavery imposed on blacks until the passage of the Constitutional amendment granting their freedom from chattel slavery but not releasing them from the tax and regulation plantation that is America.  The reparations movement sought to redistribute current wealth to any Americans who could prove their ancestors were in chains and they would be granted reparations or a payment for restoration into the original condition they were seeking.

I am always unsympathetic to any forcible wealth transfer and especially one that would be fraught with the peril of fraud and the creation of yet another nightmarish bureaucracy charged with imposing tolls on living and breathing human beings to be vacuumed out of their wallets and tucked into others’ coffers after the government takes its usual sizeable “maintenance fee” to administer such a program.

There was one laudatory effect of such a proposal though; nothing focuses people’s attention more than the potential hijacking of their wealth or rights for specious political reasons such as the latest economic illiteracy and fiscal cliff diving that characterized the recent wholesale takeover of healthcare by the government.  The reparations movement did the same thing, nothing would have focused the national race conversation more than the shenanigans I just described.  The addition of yet another government theft scheme to rob from Paul to pay Peter.

Now we are facing down a lame duck administration and all its apparatchiks in the fight to keep guns in the hands of the private citizens (or subjects depending on your point of view).  After a four year silence on the weapons possession question, the rhetorical cavalcade from the Offal Office and its collaborators in the government and media are clamoring to extinguish all such rights in the march toward turning America into a curious amalgam of modern Great Britain, the former USSR and more regrettable aspects of tin-pot dictatorships around the planet that are terminally frightened by well armed citizens.

The call for repeal of the Second Amendment is nothing new, a cursory internet search will reveal hundred of opinion-editorials and the usual suspects calling for this to happen; they, of course, hail from the government supremacist viewpoints of the collectivist keening and whining that is the national media voice in America on both Fox and CNN.

I am calling for repeal because I think every gun law on the books is wrong without exception and they all need to be eliminated so this appeal is rather lonesome and hails from an individualist perspective that is skeptical of all state power.  Those who have read my work in the past know that I am not only a Constitutional skeptic but believe it is the machine to create and expand big government.  I happen to think the “Founder’s lexicon” has lost all descriptive power such as the term “unconstitutional” and Constitutional, they both mean the same thing in a country that regulates and taxes nearly every form of human transaction without exception.

(more…)

17 Feb Christian Anarchy: Paradigm or Paradox? by Steve Korenek

Publisher’s Note: As most everyone is aware, I am not a Christian nor an atheist yet I am surrounded by friends and neighbors who tend to this religionist disposition.  While I think some of the Christian beliefs in the system are used to excuse or rationalize the state, there is a small but growing number of Christians who are genuinely seeking freedom in this mortal coil and using their scripture to do so.  Steve is one of those. -BB

…And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free…

As a Christian Voluntaryist who resides in the land of the ‘fee’ and the home of the ‘slave’, I have a great interest in knowing the Truth. We all know that every person has their own selfish idea as to what true freedom and liberty consists of, and this equally true among Christians. I wish to examine the idea of Anarchist Christians, whether such a breed even exists on earth, or if the Neo-conservative ‘utopia’ purported is ultimately Heaven on Earth. “They hate us for our freedom,” was a past President’s mantra and to this I retort that there is no one more hopelessly enslaved than those that falsely believe they are free. Counterfeiting ‘government’ is big business as we already know. Please explain the labyrinth of Man-made Federal, State and Local ‘Laws’ that one must know in order to stay out of prison, and how that somehow makes us free? Orwell’s “Slavery is Freedom” rings a familiar tone. This author had a close brush with the law when such sent an item to Canada in exercising free commerce. Well, unbeknownst this was a no-no as such item is regulated under a not-so-well-known list of Federal restrictions regulating export. A knock on the door ensues and I was happily introduced to the DHS / Customs Enforcement. Fortunately, after many days of toil and nights of worry, this issue was resolved after a simple phone call to the agent. Why all of the drama you wonder? It all happened because I did not have firm grasp of the litany of Federal Laws requiring a license to export said item. If this is freedom, I consider it to be a pretty lousy version.

Others have not been so fortunate. Some are still staring at the innards of a Federal pen with 8 years left to go. And with special thanks to USA Inc. and the Corrections Corporation of America, there are still vacancies for all those who wish to visit.

It is my hope that we can all start this discussion with the basic understanding that Anarchy is synonymous with Abolitionism or Voluntaryism. This is the abolishing of the centrist State and that the virtue of self-ownership and accountability is the highest moral virtue. Let us at once dispense of the distorted view of Anarchy as representing nothing more than mass hordes of out of control thugs aimlessly throwing Molotov cocktails at innocents. I believe with every fiber of my being that anarchism is the only life path to follow as a believer in Jesus Christ. In fact going further, it is the ONLY philosophy that I can see that is consistent with Scripture. It is a fact that most of the Evangelical Christians in America vote on the Right side of the ticket. They will even vote for the mythical lesser of two evils. What kind of testimony is it when a Christian votes for a lesser, evilcandidate? What makes him an authority on evil? What credibility is there? What is being stated in essence is we will not steal, but will only kill. Is it ‘less’ evil to only invade two countries as opposed to three, believe that abortion is wrong, EXCEPT in instances of rape? Or even, pro-death penalty for that matter? It is better to let 3 guilty men go free, than to convict and execute one innocent man. Thanks to the disinformation arm of the Government, a large number of Christians now want the U.S. to invade Iran. Remember the command to love thy neighbor as thyself? Apparently, many modern Christ-followers do not consider Iran to be their neighbor and therefore does not apply. My Bible does not except us from this obligation and is applicable to all peoples of all religions and races. Christians would be a better testimony if they (we) were consistent in our dealings with other people. We may actually win others to Christ when we apply Anarchism to our lives.

In the Garden of Eden, The devil cast a semantic war of words upon the first man and woman. He employed a manipulative Neurolinguistic Programming-style, positive thinking approach in stating,” Yea, hath God said…? upon Eve. Within the final conflict of humanity we see that in order for folks to be deceived on a massive scale, there must be a war on the meanings of words and / or information. A twisting of words, if you will. The books ‘1984’ and ‘Brave New World’ proposed two different plans of attack. The former was a restricting of information and the latter was such an onslaught of information, so much so that one could not effectively wade through the vast ocean of words and definitions to make sense of it all.

Anarchy is one word whose definition has been demonized to such a degree that it is used to be synonymous with ‘chaos.’ Other words whose demonization come to mind?Discrimination, Extremism, Fundamentalism, Compound, Militia, Terrorism, Racist, etc.

All Voluntaryists would do themselves a great favor by studying a Book known as 1st Samuel Chapter 8 in the Old Testament as read from the Authorized King James Version. It is in this chapter that mankind singularly curses himself with Government when God had already given his people Self-Government / Ownership. They wanted to have a king ‘like the other nations’ and several times in two chapters it says that God was displeased with their desire for a King.

Georges Lechartier wrote that “The true founder of anarchy was Jesus Christ and … the first anarchist society was that of the apostles.”

Somewhere along the line the definition of Anarchy was flipped to mean ‘disorder’, when previously it simply meant to have self-ownership. My fellow believers with whom I am close with are die-hard Minarchists. They want the full benefits of self-ownership while all the while feeding the illegal Income tax system and some type of supreme government. Then out of the other side of the mouth, they cry, “Nullification! States’ Rights! Secession!” It’s like giving money to a drunk on the street. He smells like booze, he slurs his speech, but you still give him money. Why? Because, “He told me he needed something to eat. It’s not my problem if he spends his money on booze.” Then he drives a car, kills a family and you financed it! What they are not seeing is that taxation is slavery. Just try not filing the all-powerful 1040 form and see how many letters will start showing up in your mailbox. It is coerced taxation. A cursory study of 1st Samuel Chapter 8 would easily confirm for you that having a Monarchy was a curse, brought on by heady, impatient people upset with the Prophet Samuel’s sons. They already HAD the perfect set up, being self-governing in nature and the most lenient. Their impulsivity is the similar rush-job that resulted in the calumniation of the Articles of Confederation and ended with the deification of the Hamiltonian Constitution. HOW could you SAY that about the CONSTITUTION? Easily. Because this document either created the Federal Insanity we have today or has been powerless to prevent it.

There are Three General examples that describe Anarchy. For the sake of brevity, I will only examine one of these in this essay.

1. Do not initiate violence against anyone.

In The Gospel of Luke 3:14, it states. ”
And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.”

Now, fast forward roughly 2 millennia and examine this in the light of real world conflict. As Orwell so eloquently prosed, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever.” The modern LEO-Complex is the exact, polar opposite of Jesus’ command. The amount of violence that soldier-police employ is extreme, leading up to the expiration of the individual, and all in the name of ‘Officer-Safety.’ It is blatantly obvious that individuals within the modern Armed Forces are obligated to obey this command. But just because Jesus did NOT address the evils of the modern Military that maims, tortures, imprisons or kills different races around the world inthis verse; does not imply that a man (or woman) should even remain in a wicked and morally corrupt Armed Service. He starts with people, where they are, and then works onward from there. Christians are commanded to reprove the unfruitful works of darkness. Is it fruitful or loving to employ 20mm cannons against a mini-van of Iraqis, including children? If you have ever beheld the online account of this incident, it would not take to long wonder if such behavior is the fruit of the video-game generation? The two helo-pilots were hastily begging for permission to engage them, and did so with horrific lethality. Heartless.

If we were alive in the early 1900s, you could just ask the South African Boers what they thought of the British missionary Imperialist David Livingstone. A strong argument could be made that Livingstone, of all people, intiated conflict through his involvement in affairs of the Transvaal. His fellow Christian Boers were a rugged, peaceful, self-sufficient agrarian people who bravely fought the British Empire through the years 1899 – 1902. Boer President Paul Kruger said that, while they admired Livingstone for his dedication to the Missionary work for Christ, they disdained the fact that he was emboldening a nation which ended up committing of atrocities against those Boer Christians! It was the first genocide on record in the 20th Century, in the name of Conquest, and a travesty of the highest order. I believe the Boer Society were much closer to the Anarchist life than we are today, although they did have a President who was a genuine heart felt friend of the Afrikaan people.

These two general ideas below are two others that can be looked into at another time.

2. Fulfill all contracts entered into voluntarily to the letter.

3 Your self-ownership cannot be abridged without your consent.

A Stranger in a Strange Land: Living Stateless Within the State

How does Christian Anarchy measure in the real world?

One needn’t look any further than the Amish / Mennonite communities in Rural Amerika. Their wisdom is impressive on an unparalleled level, even their refusing to be photographed. While this may have changed, they used to consider any picture of themselves off limits and this certainly has certain benefits in a hyper-surveillance society as well. They freely exchange their goods and services in peace and assist each other in many ways. Now while it is not improbable that they have their own problems to deal with, we can conclude that they have a living, working model of living untethered to the State.

UNINCORPORATE – This means, get out of major metropolitan areas and move to more rural locations. The Reign of Terror which occurred in France from 1793 to 1794, did not affect those living in the countryside to the same degree as those residing in Paris. Learn to be self-sufficient; grow your own food, build your own home and be a frontiersman of sorts.

Followers of Jesus, please stop paying lip service to the state and confusing your allegiance to the state as being obedient to Romans 13. To the contrary, God himself has nothing good to say about those who will not stand against evil no matter what form it shows itself. It does come with a price, though, as many in ages past have found out. The author of the classic ‘Pilgrims Progress’ John Bunyan spent many years in jail (off and on for 12 years), all because he would not take a license to preach the Gospel. Every Voluntaryist, whether Christian or not, should develop a profound respect for Baptists such as Roger Williams who fought for the right to freely choose your own religion. Agnostics likewise owe these men a debt of gratitude as the set the tone in for freedom of conscience in Old America.

Christian Anarchism is a redundant statement. In closing, let’s remember for posterity the words of Lechartier.

“The true founder of anarchy was Jesus Christ and … the first anarchist society was that of the apostles.”

14 Feb What Would Michael Collins Do? by Bill Buppert

“We have a weapon more powerful… than any in the whole arsenal of the British Empire! That weapon… is our refusal!” 

– Michael Collins

The police in America have proven once again that they are above the law and have a license to kill as the charred remains of Christopher Dorner were cooling in the cabin in California.  The more thuggish aspects of the constabulary were on the mainstream news despite the twisted and sycophantic relationship of the press in lionizing tyranny everyday in the hero worship of the thin political black and blue line.

The readers who have read my essays over the years are aware of the case I have made for why cops are the primary danger to all individual freedom and liberty in any tax jurisdiction on Earth. No political bad actor in any account of human history could deprive anyone of liberty or enforce tyranny absent a police force.   The vicious and nonsensical drug war has so retarded human progress with the caging and maiming and killing of hundreds of thousands of Americans and permeated the entire American society with laws piled on laws to do everything from making every financial transaction transparent to the rulers for “money laundering” to the creation of a legal system whose only sense of justice is in name only, I am surprised America even continues to chug along..

Two important questions have surfaced after the Dorner tragedy; first, have the police in California stepped over a Rubicon with the summary execution of Dorner in broad daylight?

The increasing militarization of police and the literal criminalization of everything has seen the rise of the fabled and dreaded Orwellian state where no one is safe and if one pays close attention to what just happened in the mountains of California, you discover that all judicial processes and civil rights niceties were overlooked and the police immediately murdered Dorner by burning him alive.  They were even so brazen as to casually issue the orders to fire the cabin most likely under the guise of officer safety, the curious mantra that gives the police their license to kill and get away with it.  The officer safety conceit releases them from all responsibility that saddles the averages citizen in self-defense thus the hundreds of thousands of videos on the internet and written and oral testimonials of victims of this officer safety madness.  Will Grigg, the most able chronicler of police misbehavior in America, has already made the rock solid case of just how risk-free and safe is the occupation of the praetorians in America.

Dorner was hunted in the fashion he was because he was not one of the 98 percent of bad cops that give the two percent a bad name.  The media is between a rock and a hard place because if Dorner were a “right-wing” man who did not belong to an Federally accredited victim group whose opinions of gun possession were quite the opposite of his manifesto, he would be the poster child of why the police are not only right but should immediately move to phase two of seizure and confiscation of all cosmetically offensive weapons in individual citizen’s hands who are not wearing a statist costume of one stripe or another. But Dorner is Diane Feinstein in male drag with the usual government supremecist superstitions that so pollute the minds of our rulers and their sycophantic media.  The notable exception is that the Senator would not deign to handle weapons herself (except the pistol she has a permit for) and leaves those to her peons in her security detail.

(more…)

09 Feb LAPD and Mainstream Media Faces its Greatest Fear: One of Their Own Goes Rogue! by Phillip Parham

    The Los Angeles Police Department is in the grips of a challenging moment as it seeks to eliminate, read kill, one of its own gone rogue, Chris Dorner.  The curious thing concerning this incident is the one undeniable fact, mainstream media has no choice but to cover an event they would prefer to fade to black.  The cops and media are both caught in a conundrum.  It is not the fact this guy is on a rampage of murder and mayhem, but he is not a right-wing bitter clinger.  How do the cops, cop apologists and main stream media spin this left-wing racist, socialist government supporter, anti-gun cop killer into someone they can use to confiscate lawful citizens weapons?

The first question is what set this loon off on his killing spree.  He posted his manifesto on Facebook for all to see and analyze.  https://wap.myfoxla.com/w/main/story/84473837/  I find it intriguing he posted this on my birthday.  A small present perhaps to me showing what one dedicated man can do to established authoritarian rule if willing to sacrifice his life?  I issue my thanks for letting me see the results though I do not agree to his tactics.  Killing innocents is not the approach of a libertarian such as me, but I digress.  Mr. Dorner states in his manifesto, “

In 8/07 I reported an officer (Ofcr. Teresa Evans/now a Sergeant), for kicking a suspect (excessive force) during a Use of Force while I was assigned as a patrol officer at LAPD’s Harbor Division. While cuffing the suspect, (Christopher Gettler), Evans kicked the suspect twice in the chest and once in the face. The kick to the face left a visible injury on the left cheek below the eye. Unfortunately after reporting it to supervisors and investigated by PSB (internal affairs investigator Det. Villanueva/Gallegos), nothing was done. I had broken their supposed “Blue Line”. Unfortunately, It’s not JUST US, it’s JUSTICE!!! In fact, 10 months later on 6/25/08, after already successfully completing probation, acquiring a basic Post Certificate, and Intermediate Post Certificate, I was relieved of duty by the LAPD while assigned to patrol at Southwest division. It is clear as day that the department retaliated toward me for reporting Evans for kicking Mr. Christopher Gettler. The department stated that I had lied and made up the report that Evans had kicked the suspect.

This tidbit of information is a common thread in the law enforcement community.  One does not cross the thin blue line and identify the criminal element inside the force.  Once in the force the only illegal activity taking place and subject to justice is OUTSIDE of the force.  The die was set for Mr. Dorner and he crossed the line in the view of his fellow “law” officers.  He was an aberration in the force.  How dare him!  Of course LAPD now has to reopen the investigation into Mr. Dorner’s firing. As reported on FOXNEWS.com,  On Saturday, Chief Beck said officials would re-examine the allegations by Dorner that his law enforcement career was undone by racist colleagues. While he promised to hear out Dorner if he surrenders, Beck stressed that he was ordering a review of his 2007 case because he takes the allegation of racism in his department seriously.  The key takeaway to watch for here is an identified scapegoat.  Yes, he was fired unjustly and we found the offending culprit who will be rightly excoriated publicly.  This is if the offending person is not conveniently retired and beyond the LAPD’s purview.

The LAPD is now crapping enough bricks to build a new pyramid.  It could be the 8^th wonder of the world, a dung tower built and dedicated to the fear of individuals generally only accustomed to dishing it out on the population.  It is an example of turning the tables on a group who operate without fear of retaliation for their brutality.  Yes, there are limited cases where a cop is brought to face the music but generally this only takes place if the citizenry provides irrefutable video evidence of their actions.   As stated by a friend of mine, the 98% of bad cops making the 2% of good cops look bad.  The point he makes if there really is only a small percentage of “bad” cops abusing their power all cops are indicted because of their refusal to expose fellow cops, not crossing the thin blue line making them all guilty participants.  Peruse the available pictures and stories available on the Internet and gauge the reaction of the police.  Fear has driven these gun happy cops over the deep end in the pursuit to terminate Mr. Dorner.

Other than expending an immense amount of taxpayer money to track this killer down the people of the state of Kalifornia are faced with two more facts.  First, they are subject to being gunned down by overzealous jackbooted public protectors.  Dorner manhunt: 7 cops mistakenly fired on newspaper carriers – latimes.com  The LA Times story tells us, “At least seven officers opened fire on a mother and daughter team delivering newspapers, mistaking their blue Toyota Tacoma for the grey pickup being driven by a disgruntled ex-cop suspected of killing three people in a violent revenge campaign, law enforcement sources said”.  It seems delivering papers in LA when the police are in a frenzy does carry with it some risk, especially if you are in a pick-up truck.  The fact these two women, one 47 yrs old and the other 71, posed a clear and present danger to these seven highly trained law enforcement personnel.  Second, the Kalifornia taxpayer can fully expect to pay a high financial recompense to these unfortunate women.  Glen T. Jonas, the attorney representing the women, said the police officers gave “no commands, no instructions and no opportunity to surrender” before opening fire. He described a terrifying encounter in which the pair were in the early part of their delivery route through several South Bay communities. Hernandez was in the back seat handing papers to her daughter, who was driving. Carranza would briefly slow the truck to throw papers on driveways and front walks.  This is a must read article since it truly highlights the actions of out of control police with those dreaded assault rifles.  This story reminds me of the Tucson SWAT murder of former Marine Jose Guerena on May 5, 2011.  They also defended their actions vehemently after letting him bleed out as his wife begged the onsite command to allow EMT to treat him.  The cops in LA opened fire, allegedly without warning, at these two Hispanic women without verifying their targets.  Law enforcement sources told The Times that at least seven officers opened fire. On Friday, the area was pockmarked with bullet holes in cars, trees, garage doors and roofs.  Gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling knowing how accurately these cops are when called to lay down fire.  Most reports indicate they fired over 47 rounds but only managed to hit the little ladies twice.  Gives me hope.  Not surprising though is the LAPD Police Chief’s statement concerning this shooting.  “After the investigation is completed, Beck and an oversight board will decide if officers were justified in the shooting or made mistakes that warrant either punishment or training”.  I find it amazing any rational person can believe these uniformed clowns are justified in the ambush of these women.

Kalifornia, prepare to pay as these idiots walk scot free.  Not surprising, the LAPD is attempting to buy these women off with trinkets.  LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith says the department’s Chief Charlie Beck met with the women in their Torrance home Saturday to apologize and tell them he had arranged for someone to donate a new pickup truck.  They continue in the police statement to classify the shooting as an accidental shooting.  This is absurd at face value.  Did the rounds accidentally fire themselves?  Almost 50 accidental discharges and only two accidental hits on target for these highly trained professionals.  Only in the land of cop reality could this possibly be construed an accidental shooting.  Beyond the realm of rational thought.  Maybe it is time for Kalifornians to question whether the uniformed thugs should have their cosmetically offensive assault rifles with large capacity magazines taken from them.  It is apparent from this behavior the results would be a safer community.  Misidentified, cars, trees, and surrounding neighborhoods would be a safer place, at least we know two Hispanic women who might agree.  I can only think of a few reasons the LAPD would offer this vehicle and the women would accept.  The legal counsel for the women is incompetent, the legal counsel feels threatened, or the LAPD will attempt to add language to the acceptance document absolving them of all future claims from the women.  Buyer beware.

There are a few takeaways from this event.  First, one determined shooter has scared the living daylights out of the authorities in southern Kalifornia and paralyzed normal operations.  The authorities will not even release the number of “law” enforcement agents roaming the streets, highways, and now mountains searching for Mr. Dorner.  He has them in such a quandary they are no longer allowed to patrol without being in teams.  Second, he has been able to effectively elude them because he understands their tactics and Standard Operating Procedures.  Third, everyone is in danger while this guy is on the loose.  Not from him since he identified his enemies, cops, but from the “law” enforcement agencies.  Fourth and paramount in my mind, one guy did this to the establishment.  Imagine for a minute multiplying this scenario by 100, 1000, 5000, 10000 angered citizens as the government attempts to circumvent our right to bear arms.  I do not mention 2^nd Amendment Rights in this since it is irrelevant.  Bearing arms is our birthright, endowed on us by our creator.  Our right to protect family and property usurp any manmade document endorsing the ability to protect life, family and property.  Actions on a scale this large would cripple the government.  They could not field a force large enough to address the resolve of this many angry citizens without violating the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.

The question begs to be answered in light of this event.  Will the government gun grabbing zealots recognize the danger they face?  Will they be able to comprehend the simmering anger floating just below the surface in the country?  Will they extrapolate the numerical advantage this angry population poses to an out of control tyranny?  Based on Kalifornia’s latest proposed 10 page gun grabbing idiocy I doubt they understand.  Are California Democrats creating ground zero for the next revolutionary war?  This event is one to watch as it plays out.  What if he had simply had two coordinated partners in this drama?  Scary thought to think about if you are a cop or mainstream media mouthpiece.  What if it would have been media figures as the targets instead of cops?

02 Feb Même Qu’il Ne l’a Jamais Eté: French Lessons in Vietnam by Bill Buppert

If the US is capable of anything, it is the author of an imperfect future in which the best of intentions always seems to yield bad fruit. In order to project the potential consequences of what the American defeat in Afghanistan will look like, it is instructive to reflect on the US involvement in Vietnam. History certainly does not repeat itself but it certainly rhymes over time.

Could the United States have secured a free South Vietnam?  Did the United States have all the necessary political and military capital to prosecute a major land conflict in Southeast Asia and create a self-sustaining nation neutral or beneficial to American security interests in the area?  I would suggest the United States did not and will not for the foreseeable future have the capability to answer the latter in the affirmative and therefore the answer to the former question is a definitive no.  America, despite it formidable might with no technological peer will lose.

The Vietminh in Saigon accidentally gunned down LTC A. Peter Dewey of the office of Strategic Services (OSS) in September 1945.  What is important to know from this solitary death is that Ho Chi Minh and his Vietminh regretted this and did what they could to atone. Uncle Ho had his finger on the international pulse both within the ranks of the small and large C comintern and the importance of crafting and staying on message first and consistently. Dewey would not be the first American to fall there.  He would be followed by tens of thousands of other dead and hundreds of thousands of physically and mentally injured Americans during the long American night in Vietnam that would emerge within a generation.

The North Vietnamese and its attendant unconventional legions were tough, resourceful, well-trained and consistently had their eyes on the end-state Ho Chi Minh sought – a unified ideological peninsula with like-minded neighbors that suborned all colonial influence to self-determination.

The French had a robust religious and commercial presence in Vietnam since the 17^th century but it remained of minor influence due to the constant in-fighting and civil wars between Vietnamese rulers and the sheer breadth and depth of the country. In 1861, things came to a head and the French militarily invested themselves in the country and established a vigorous colony. Vietnamese resistance to the French was to maintain a low boil, robust renewal during the Japanese occupation in WWII and literally see the French kicked out of the country after the disaster in Dien Bien Phu in 1954.  The French were to suffer the same fate with eerie parallels in Algeria by 1962.Throughout its long history, the Vietnamese had bested Mongols, Chinese and the French. The Americans would be next.

Ho Chi Minh, hoping for U.S. support, confided to an OSS agent that he would welcome “a million American soldiers… but no French”.  Giap echoed that theme, telling a Hanoi crowd to regard the United States as a “good friend” because “it is a democracy without territorial ambitions” In early September, U.S. intelligence agents in Hanoi reported to Truman’s Secretary of State, James Byrnes, but the Vietnamese were “determined to maintain their independence even at the cost of their lives,” since they have nothing to lose and all to gain”.  But the United States and its wartime partners, inexorably if not deliberately, preceded to restore French rule.” [1]

This would be the other nail in the coffin for US ambition in the region.  America’s cultural intelligence for the region was near zero and the threat of a communist “domino effect” hastened decisions that would haunt American top policy makers for decades.

(more…)

24 Jan The Second Amendment is Dead, Long Live the Right to Bear Arms by Bill Buppert

45 human beings legally disarmed the state of New York under the leadership of the Governor Cuomo.  A state with a population of 19 million people has been disarmed in a significant fashion for those foolish or sheepish enough to comply with the law.  The country is bombarded with media propaganda on a continuous basis on the moral high ground and fairness of democratic processes. In one fell swoop, the rulers of the tax jurisdiction of New York have proven not only the folly and charade that is representative democracy but abridged the most fundamental right of all – the right to self-defense.  Ironically, the legislators had accidentally disarmed the only ones who should be subject to total disarmament in the prosecution of their duties – the police.  This was quickly remedied by the worthies in Albany and all is well with the continuing weaponization of the police.

As I have mentioned before, absent the police, no political bad actor in history has any power to deny rights or exploit tyrannical rule. None. This would be a reason why the politicos would behave in a most uncharacteristically efficient manner to correct that oversight. Now the governor and his entourage will continue to have heavily armed private praetorians at their beck and call to provide security much like the Private Security Detachments (PSD) that protect VIPs and general officers overseas and in the combat zones in America’s neo-imperialist quagmires around the globe.

As with so much in government, what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the mundanes that dot the fruited plain and have their wealth and resources filched at gunpoint on a perennial basis.

Not only is there a tremendous government animus toward any aspect of self-reliance as I discussed earlier but there is a very real fear of the general population having a peer competitive capability to defend themselves at the same level of a government’s military offensive capability. I will leave it to others to drone on endlessly about the Constitutional Second Amendment and its mystical and sanctified capability to keep Americans in arms.  The evidence would prove otherwise with the endless parade of legislation and laws that have effectively removed modern military analogs such as fully automatic firearms and crew served weapons and suppressors and grenades and mortars and the list is endless on what you cannot legally possess without going through a government probe search that would make the NKVD blush in admiration.  Most of these items are simply prohibited.

I believe the “20,000 gun laws” is a canard and that 300 may be nearer the number according to the Brookings Institution: All 300 or whatever the true number may be certainly infringe in a substantive and material way on the ability of the common folk to maintain a peer armory and capability against their oppressors.

The most informative answer to the question of “how many gun-control laws?” is then “about 300 major state and federal laws, and an unknown but shrinking number of local laws.”

In my state of Arizona, the local laws are shrinking due to state preemption and the heroic efforts of the Arizona Civilian Defense League.  Since the systematic disarmament of blacks toward the end of the nineteenth century and the raft of weapons prohibition legislation since 1934 to include Ronald Reagan using the black possession of firearms a causus belli in 1967 to get the 1968 Gun Control Act rolling, the government assault on individual possession has not ceased.

The Second Amendment of the vaunted but toothless Bill of Rights has been ravaged, savaged and rendered to the point of being a nice slogan and perfect bunting for a rally but effectively an empty promise and a worse protector of individual arming.

One can get all the quaint quotes from the Founding Era and make all the legalistic arguments one wants but you find yourself in the same pathetic position of the wacky and deluded Sovereign Citizens adherents trying to outwit the robed government employees with their rapier wit and deep Blackstonian understanding of the law. Not.

The Second Amendment will do nothing to stop gun prohibition in America.  The Constitution was built to create a system first and foremost that fleeces and relieves citizens from their wealth and will concomitantly disarm its citizens if the objections to the former become too disturbing to the rulers.

Those who think another case in front of the Supremes will seal the deal and sanctify their individual rights to bear arms are in for a rude surprise.  Remember Scalia’s infamous words in the Heller decision reserving the right of rulers to remove “dangerous and unusual weapons” from the ruled class.  It was a curious and ambiguous drawing from the US v. Miller decision concerning the employment of a militia weapon (in this case, a trench style shotgun).  As we have seen from so many decisions, the Supremes will find a way to twist the language to suit their propensity for restricting rights instead of expanding them.

Much like the recent decisions on police surveillance, the government rule-enforcers will simply find other means or suborn the law.  It is what they do.

I am suggesting that a sole reliance on the Second Amendment will never fail to disappoint if decriminalization of weapons is not the first and only effort.  Much like the illegal mood enhancers chased by the Drug War, the worst thing that can happen is legalization because then the Forces of Darkness can regulate and tax to their heart’s content. Decriminalization of weapons and self-defense is the only course of action.

I would like to briefly address the “need argument” so popular with the disarmament talking heads in the government and media.  The common canard is that a free people must establish some kind of need and until such time as permission is given by the rulers, this is forbidden. Why do I need a Kalashnikov or grenade or fully automatic firearm?

The answer is deceptively simple: any population in any tax jurisdiction on Earth should be a peer competitor in weapons and training to the standing military and constabulary within those boundaries for a very simple reason; no government on Earth has ever remained within the confines of its creation and none has ever disarmed its population without severe penalties to individual rights and freedoms.  At one end of the spectrum, the Communist nations used it as a means for wholesale pogroms against the disarmed citizens and at the other end have guaranteed a hazard-free workplace for those who break laws for a living (the private sector criminal element) leading the ironic position of the vaunted United Kingdom being the most violent nation in Europe.

When politicians ask after the mere needs of a citizen, there will always be an agenda designed to deprive the populace of their loot or their liberty.  After all, it is a favored tactic of the collectivists to satisfy their constituents in the Free Shit Army by rhetorically asking why the wealth should not open their wallets wider and be dragooned into surrendering more of their private earnings for the herd.

Why do we need cars that exceed the speed limit?  Why do we need to have 120” LCD televisions?  Why do we need to have ball bats, hammers and pipe wrenches if they are so harmful?

Some of the worthies and talking heads in the media and blogosphere spend countless hours wringing their hands over the baleful effects of firearms yet they ignore the far greater death toll at the hands of government approved doctors or the government subsidized hell-holes in the inner city where the ruler’s policies have created perverse family structures and the inevitable obesity epidemic that result from following the government diet program.  Whatever government touches, it blackens, deadens, and deepens the crisis it raced to resolve.

Draw a line in the sand and just say no to disarmament.

12 Jan Government Control Not Gun Control by Bill Buppert

Gun owners are second-class citizens in America viewed with severe derision and contempt by the elites in both the halls of political and media power in the US.  Much like rednecks and pit-bull members, they are rhetorical punching bag that gets knowing sneers from the freedom-phobic salons at the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Department of Fatherland Security alike.  They have been tucked into a rhetorical cubbyhole with preppers, private food gardeners and other such miscreants for whom self-reliance is a watchword if not a lifestyle.

The modern American gun owner is in the same position as the Irish and blacks of yore who not only suffered official sanction as less than equal but were subject to penalties up to death in both government and private hands.

ALL governments despise private gun ownership because it is not only a primary threat to their ability to control and harness subject populations but existentially all collectivist are perversely uncomfortable with the atomistic ability to not only a threat but to make that neutralization lethal.  The battle at Lexington and Concord that inaugurated the divorce from Great Britain was over weapons and munitions ownership – nothing less and nothing more.  Not only was the fight about guns, it was about that ultimate divorce proposition marrying guns and secession.  One can suppose that the rulers in America have an abstract fear of the individuated ability to defend and also project power but the true fear on their part is the self-reliant aspect.  If the singular American can defend himself then the most important cog in any political machine, the cop, becomes irrelevant if not an anachronism and without cops, no nation can sustain tyranny and enforce bad laws.

James Yeager, an outspoken gun trainer in TN, recently had his CCW suspended because he dared to exercise his free speech rights.  The police spoke-mouth was priceless:

James Yeager, 42, had his permit suspended based on a “material likelihood of risk of harm to the public,” the department said in a statement. 

Col. Tracy Trott of the Tennessee Department of Safety said it didn’t take him long to reach a decision after viewing the comments on the Internet.

“I watched it twice to make sure I was hearing what I thought I heard,” Trott said. 

“It sounded like it was a veiled threat against the whole public. I believed him. He had a conviction in his voice, and the way he looked into the camera, I believe he’s capable of a violent act,” Trott said. 

This from a privileged and badged member of the praetorians for the nomenklatura yet this is the modus operandi for cops everyday.  The current discussion on guns is a curious house of mirrors where the individual American gun owner must be wary day after day for new depredations against his right to defend himself yet the talking heads make no mention of the sanctioned government murder of innocents on a daily basis by cops in America and the imperial machine abroad.

The other irony is not only that Yeager is a former small town police chief himself but this great advocate of revolution and tactical savvy submitted and compromised by getting the permit in the first place so the line in the sand may be more mercurial than he lets on.

Many gun rights advocates make the critical mistake that the argument must rely upon the Constitution and the Second Amendment as the touchstone for preserving the right yet the very same documents have given the rhetorical nod to such rights atrocities as the 1934 National Firearms Act, The 1968 Gun Control Act, the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act and the raft of anti-armament nonsense that has been endorsed by ALL the political entities in Mordor on the Potomac.  The Constitution is to the protection of individual gun rights what the crucifix is to the vampire;  the Second Amendment has the same teeth that Scalia applied to the Heller decision when he discussed “dangerous and unusual weapons”, the asteroid sized loophole the government can use to ban the possession of any weapons it considers injurious to its safety and existence.

It is fortunate the drug-addled (official government sanctioned psychotropics, of course) young man who gunned down the children and their state stewards in the government school in CT did not employ a hammer or pipe wrench, otherwise carpenters and plumbers would be rubbing their hands in angst at the possible loss or confiscation of their tools.  Joe Biden would be discussing the valorous and critical legislation necessary to prevent any more such holocausts.

This national discussion frames the argument incorrectly.  The trope concerning the need for such weapons in private hands being a question by the government is a chimera; the state is not in the business of safety of the population; its business is the safety of government interests and nothing else.  This is not about high capacity magazines and cosmetically offensive weapons, these are merely the tools of last resort that make very citizen a peer in lethality and self-ownership.

And the government will have none of that.