“Stay And Fight”: Is This Realistic?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by nutmeg, Jun 18, 2011.

  1. Simon Black of Sovereign Man
    Before leaving New York, I was enjoying a perfectly nice afternoon yesterday walking around the Upper West side. When I got to Lincoln center, roughly at the corner of Broadway and W 62nd Street, reality set in.

    No fewer than ten NYPD storm troopers were ‘patrolling’ the sidewalk outside in full combat gear: Kevlar helmet, flak vest, semi-automatic 9mm sidearm, and Colt model 933 with M900 foregrip and M68 aimpoint. A few of them had M203 variety grenade launchers fitting snugly underneath the barrel.

    And to what did we owe the deployment of such unnecessary firepower? An invasion of the Canadian hordes? Terrorists on the loose? No. Some visiting politician… clearly an individual who feels important enough to merit an intimidating death squad in his vicinity.

    This is the nature of the system. Police are armed to the teeth… and while their official marketing slogan may be to ‘keep people safe’, their real function is to be the protectors and enforcers for the political class, all while keeping the people in check so that the know who’s boss.

    On this note, we received a lot of comments this week from readers who reject the idea of considering greener pastures overseas and instead choose to “stay and fight.”

    Reader Jay K, for instance, wrote that “sooner or later you’re going to have to fight. It might as well be in your own home, city, neighborhood, and country.”

    This ‘stay and fight’ mentality does seem incredibly noble. It invokes images of Paul Revere and the original patriots standing their ground in battle against the red coat British forces. Unfortunately, the world just doesn’t work that way anymore.

    There is no real enemy to fight… no clearly defined opposing force conveniently dressed in a different color like the rival baseball team. The battle is one of ideas.

    At its simplest, the conflict comes down between those who believe that government is the problem, and those who believe that government is the solution. Most people are brainwashed statists who unquestioningly hold the latter as their ethos.

    And then there is the big faceless void of government itself… politicians, bureaucrats, low-level workers, regulatory agencies, etc. We’re not talking about a single individual here, but an entire institution.

    It begs the question– for all the ‘stay and fight’ people, who exactly are you fighting? And more importantly, how?

    Of all the hundreds of similar notes we’ve received from people who claim they are going to ‘stay and fight’, I am still waiting for one… just one single email… from someone telling me exactly how they plan on doing that.

    Are you going to go to the polls and kick the bums out? Go right ahead. If you can convince the majority of other voters (most of whom probably don’t share your ideology), then you’re just going to vote in another set of bums.

    Politicians are politicians because they either (a) are attracted to power, and/or (b) think that government is the solution, not the problem. Replacing one set with another is hardly a credible course of action.

    What else is the plan– armed conflict in the streets? I don’t understand this fantasy. The people are going to arm themselves and join together for an Old West style shootout against the police, the people will win, and then a new nation will be rebuilt espousing limited government principles?

    It sounds like a great movie… but pinning your hopes on being able to win a revolutionary style victory against a military police state that has superior tactics, firepower, and combat experience is simply unrealistic.

    Besides, real turmoil in the west is just getting started. Right now the conflict is in Greece and Spain. It will spread to Italy, Belgium, UK, etc., and then finally to the US.

    When it does, people will find out first hand that the police have absolutely no problems turning into violent thugs… and this police state grows stronger every day.

    Truthfully, there is no way to fight a faceless enemy. The government is essentially the same as your credit card company– no single individual or front, just a collection of various departments and bureaucracies.

    What do you do when your credit card company raises your fees, takes your money, provides you with poor service? Do you petition for change? Do you try and convince fellow credit card holders to demand new management? Do you stalk the customer service center in Sioux City, Iowa? No, of course not. You simply get a new card.

    This is ultimately the solution that I’m advocating, and I’m here to tell you that there are a lot of great cards out there in the world.

    If you recognize that the trend is bad, at least have a plan to safeguard yourself, your family, your livelihood, and your assets… something that extends beyond the unrealistic (voting the bums out) and the mythical (doing battle in the streets).

    It’s time to reject bombastic fantasies and check in to reality. Make a grounded appraisal of the situation, and if you decide to stick around, great. Just make sure you have strong safeguards in place, a plan to execute if you ever deem it necessary, and most of all, a clear idea of your breaking point.

    After all, the boiling frog only survives when it senses danger and jumps out.
  2. Great piece. However, this is basically just boils down to a call to emigration. The question is, to where? The writer claims that there are "many great cards out there". But, as any well traveled person knows, there are few with living standards on par with America. Also, if all the nations mentioned + America fall into civil chaos, just how long do you think that your new home (wherever that is- which will probably be Australia or New Zealand, if you're looking for nations on par with America) will survive in it's current form? "Stand and fight" seems like it may be the only option, if your primary concern is survival of your civilization in it's current form.

    I do, however, question the writer's take on " being able to win a revolutionary style victory against a military police state that has superior tactics, firepower, and combat experience is simply unrealistic". As the government has become more "diverse" and increasingly taken in many idiots and affirmative action hires, it has become increasingly stupid. I think that the writer may be giving the government a bit too much credit in this way.

  3. Max E.

    Max E.

    Good article Nutmeg, thx for posting.
  4. achilles28


    We hang together, or we hang separate. The Founders risked everything to build this Country. The Grace Generation risked everything to defend it. And here we are, the children of heros, rationalizing cowardice. Should we abandon the last ship of liberty on an ocean of filth? You think after America goes down, any of you will have a fighting chance in Guatemala, or Brazil, when China is top dog?

    Truth is, had a lot of you older guys actually resisted this growing tyranny decades ago, we wouldn't have our backs against the wall now. But most of you turned a blind eye for a quick buck. Tyranny was "cute". Why stick your neck out? The same excuses you told yourselves then, you're telling yourselves now. "Cut and run". "It's not worth it". etc Now, we're all in for one hell of a shit storm.

    As far as chances go, 30% of Americans own a gun (90 Million). If only 5% resist, God forbid America goes into a Dictatorship, that's 4 million lone wolfs out there. And please let me be clear, I don't encourage any type of violence against Government. But, we have to be realistic. The Shit will hit the fan soon, and those are the numbers. There is nowhere to escape. The Social Controllers who took us up to this cliff (read: NWO) are the same ones who intend to control the world. We're all in the same boat. Right now, we must use every peaceful means to affect change. When the Government rescinds the Constitution and goes house-to-house to confiscate firearms, what will you do? Go quietly into the night and watch America turn into something horrific?
  5. achilles28


    The majority of political donations from the Armed Forces went to Ron Paul.

    In order for this Police State to work, the Military (and Police) must be willing to use force against the American people.

    Close to 50% of the Military are strict Constitutionalists and will not go along with a coupe d'etate. Nor will many of the heroic veterans who bled for this Country who still pack heat. The Social Controllers have a very serious problem and they know it.
  6. LOL!!! For the record, everyone. AK 47 just challenged Achillies' claim that most military donations went to Ron Paul. Then deleted the post a few minutes later, I'm sure after he checked and verified that he was wrong. LMAO! Classic AK 47 nose dive. :D
  7. Fair point, except when I checked around with friends and family, no one else knows what the hell happened either. It's not like we're a bunch of dummies but if all of these laws, etc created collective dire situations beyond our control, it's nobody we went to school with, Ya got me, how this happened.

    The subtle changes in our public schools curriculum, well you couldn't fight city hall. Lump it or leave it. The boomers left the city and it wasn't like we had more school choices as in the city (parochial, private,etc).

    As private unions grew in power, management couldn't fire anyone (great for morale). Public unions sought parity with private unions, you think anyone is turninng down 6 weeks vacations? No way, the rank and file didn't ask for it, it was handed on a silver platter.

    In the early days of unions, negotiations were a two way street, unions had give backs, that ended with fuck the corporate"man" we ain't giving nothing back.

    This is not an anti union rant, just saying. little here little there, are sensibilites got numb.

    Individual leaders of the past are replaced with bureaucratic leaders, faceless, nameless - lead by consensus, no one knows where the buck stops.

    Same with business, gone is the guy who knew the business, replaced and run by a hedge fund, unheard of years ago.

    Dozens of books out there plus articles everyone is familiar with -"What happened to common sense?" ya got me, maybe tort reform (back in the 60's laws were changed to "sue anyone, everyone for anything), creative law, at any rate, us old guys are out of steam.
  8. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3601542&page=1

    Obama, Paul net most military workers' campaign donations

    Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Ron Paul have little in common politically, except their opposition to the Iraq war.

    Both top a new list of presidential candidates receiving campaign contributions from people who work for the four branches of the military and National Guard, according to a study released Thursday by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.

    Obama, an Illinois senator, brought in more donations from this group than any White House contender from either party. The Democrat announced Wednesday his plan to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2008.

    Paul, a Texas congressman and the only GOP presidential hopeful who supports an immediate troop withdrawal, comes in second.

  9. http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/08/troops-deployed-abroad-give-61.html

    Troops Deployed Abroad Give 6:1 to Obama

    By Luke Rosiak on August 14, 2008 9:52 AM
    | More

    According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.


    Military donations favor Obama

    Posted 8/14/2008 6:41 PM

    WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. soldiers have donated more presidential campaign money to Democrat Barack Obama than to Republican John McCain, a reversal of previous campaigns in which military donations tended to favor GOP White House hopefuls, a nonpartisan group reported Thursday.
  10. Classic Artful D0dger nose dive
    #10     Jun 19, 2011