Virginia is for fighters & militias

489ab0512a097b1b

1 Like

That is what happens when you have liberal city dwellers who outnumber the rural folks.

I truly believe Governors should be elected via an Electoral College to balance the scales.

1 Like

There is no doubt that the militia movement needs to sit down and think about public relations. And there is certainly a strand of its membership who have a kind of épater les bourgeois attitude, which is not helpful.

However, when the press want to cover the militia movement, or someone writes an article on them, what photograph will they choose, if the choice is between camo-clad bearded middle-aged guys with frightening black rifles, or, say, a group of people watching a First-Aider demonstrate how to deal with a penetrating wound? There is not conspiracy here – one sells newspapers, the other not so much. I would do the same if I were doing an article on Anti-Fa.

This can’t be helped, much. Hopefully, in a few months, every active militia unit in the US will ahve received a document on how to do public relations, how to deal with the press, etc. Perhaps this will have some effect. That master of guerilla warfare, Mao Tse Tung, prescribed 10 PR people to each batallion, and he knew what he was talking about.

Hat’s off to VCDL for putting that out.

The worst possible thing people could do is show up carrying, especially openly.

Guranteed the left will be hoping for and trying to instigate a situation where shooting starts. If they succeed we lose.

Novel idea. Unfortunately the founders never envisioned that a majority of Americans would be living in cities, much less huge metro areas rather than on farms.

If you want to know why these things are happening now in Virginia, after all these years, see this topic:
The real reason behind the showdown in Virginia

An armed movement isn’t going to accomplish anything, it all has to do with demographics.
As they say, “Demographics is Destiny”

It’s about 30 years of careful manipulation of the demography by moving more and more federal employees into the state.

It’s also about a depressed and somewhat demoralized non democrat electorate going into 2018-19.

Well, VCDL Sure seems to be approaching it with the proper attitude. :+1:

As to what photography the press uses, is wholly dependent upon people following VCDL’s directive.

I agree absolutely.
If you go on to YouTube, and put ‘Virginia rally’ into the search bar, you will retrieve several videos related to this rally.
If you load one, and look at the comments section, you will find many huffers-and-puffers saying we should bring our guns to the rally, we should arrest the governor, we should hang the legislature for treason… along with various supposed legal justifications for doing these things, by people who very obviously have no historical knowledge or legal expertise whatsoever. They’re just mesmerized by big words.

I assume half of these people are Hard Left agents provocateurs. And the other half are just bullshitters who have not the slightest intention of risking their persons at the demonstration and probably won’t even show up at all. They’re the sort of people for whom a weapon is a substitute metal penis.

But … there is the possibility that among them are one or two genuine nutters, who have the capacity to turn this demonstration into a disaster by bringing a weapon and then refusing to be disarmed. The mainstream media will of course be hoping fervently that this happens. I hope the real patriots at this rally are hyper-vigilant for either provocateurs or lunatics and take them down without hesitation if they try to destroy the demonstration.

It’s a moot point as the legislature already passed a resolution banning guns at the capital where this rally is suppose to take place. All speculation on your part.

And if those type people show up talking and acting that way, that’s the face that will be on the rally and the larger objective will have been lost.

You loose me when you make that leap. Can you substantiate that???

Exactly the position I’ve been taking on another board where apparently a lot of those nutters are members.

They call me some kind of traitor for wanting to disarm them and make them all victims of ANTIFA attacks and attacks from other leftwing loons.

Nothing would benefit the anti gunners more than this event turning into a bloodbath and no matter how it starts it would be the organizers and marchers who will be blamed.

On the other hand if some of them end up being casualties because of obviously unprovoked attacks it would swing public support to their side.

Patriots and those willing to stand up and fight evil used to be considered heroes, in the modern era it’s the victims who are elevated to such a position publicly.

As for being agents provocateurs … no, I’m being rhetorical there. Probably most of them are working for free. Although I can tell you that it’s widely believed within the militia movement that one ‘General Bloodagent’ is an FBI employee. I don’t necessarily believe that myself – no one could fake being that destructive and narcissistic.

It’s not ruled out that the informants planted in the militia movement – and you can be sure that there are many – will be urging extremist actions, though. There were 15 informants involved in the (unwise) Malheur occupation by the Bundy son, the one that resulted in Lavoy Finicum being killed.

If you’re not familiar with how informants behave, read up on COINTELPRO … the Wiki article is a good place to start, for a deeper dive, read Days of Rage.

Typically, informants always support the most extreme faction, or tendency, within the movements in which they are embedded. They have an immediate material reason for doing so – the more scary the group appears to be, the more important the informant. But their handlers usually want them to do this, as well.

That’s why all the FBI informants at the last convention of SDS in 1969 supported the Weatherman faction-- and the victory of Weatherman and its allies there led to the total destruction of SDS almost immediately. (Before the Weathermen began their terror campaign – they were in charge of the National Office in Chicago, where the membership records were … and they destroyed them, throwing them all into Lake Michigan. The organization never recovered.) A mass organization of 100 000 members, poised to multiply its membership … gone, overnight. (Hooray for Weatherman, say I.)

I lived through this period – and in fact was in at least five local groups which later turned out to have police informants in them – and so COINTELPRO and Weatherman etc etc are completely familiar to me, but I realize many people reading this may not be 70 years old or more. So if you’re interested, you’ll have to look these terms up. Lots of lessons for today.

I’m familiar with the working of informants. Since you are too, you realize that the militias won’t be able to mobilize against the federal government.

The Bolshevik party was riddled with informants. Google on ‘Roman Malinovsky’,
the head of their fraction in the Duma. The editor of Pravda was one. There were
no doubt many many more at lower levels.

Revolution is not made by conspiracies – that was the mistake of August Blanqui in France.

What you can’t do, normally, is to overthrow an intact state, with an intact
military. But in revolutionary situations, the state does not remain intact: it
reflects society, which begins to polarize in various ways.

We already see the American Left changing almost before our eyes – on the elite, 99% liberal
campuses, conservatives can expect to have their meetings attacked and disrupted.
This was absolutely totally inconceivable a few decades ago. This sort of thing was
first started by a communist front group, Progressive Labor Party’s ‘Anti-racist coalition’
(or some such name), who attacked the world-famous expert on social insects, Edmund Wilson,
for his belief in ‘sociobiology’. This was back in the 1970s.

Now we take it for granted.

The Right is changing too. Trump is evidence of that.

But America has remained relatively prosperous, and has not suffered any major military
defeats. (We’ve just withdrawn from wars we could not win without using the tactics of the Wehrmacht.)
So, so far, we’re moving forward as if it’s business as usual. You win, we win, you win, we win.
Social and economic changes are gradual, the ones that don’t work get reversed, or modified.
(Privitization, the ‘Clinton’ welfare reforms.)

Let either or both of those conditions change, let the Progressives succeed in opening the borders even wider, let them succeed in making whites the new pariah class … and things will change rapidly.

So we – my side – need a few hundred thousand people with rifles and the rudiments of military discipline and an understanding of Mao’s dictum about the origins of political power. If the FBI want to help out, let them. They do us a service by removing the psychos from our ranks. I think the taxpayers’ money would be better spent keeping an eye on the Allahu Akhbars and M13 and the ‘Army of God’, but I never expected government to be very efficient.

Can I distill that down to your argument is that militias WILL be able to effectively mobilize against the federal government???

They have in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

1 Like

If the “federal government” is an intact body, with majority support, retaining the loyalty of its bodies of armed men, then no “militia” will stand a snowflake’s chance in a Hell’s Angels convention of prevailing.

However, those assumptions may not hold in the future.

Furthermore, a government with a technically-legal mandate, but without enthusiastic support behind it, may well hesitate before attempting to enforce some law which has dry legal validity, but which is seen by many – albeit a minority – as unfair. And if that minority includes a substantial armed component, the hesitation will be amplified.

The American civil rights movement in the South in the 1960s was non-violent, in the main, and that was the correct strategy. (If the Palestinians had followed their example, they would be miles ahead of where they are now.)

But in the background there were guns in the hands of Blacks, including organized Blacks (the Deacons for Defense and Justice), and I suspect that their existence helped speed up the federal government’s prodding of local law enforcement to stop blatantly discriminating against Blacks. (I was a civil rights worker in Tennessee in 1964, registering Blacks to vote in Fayette County, and after being chased down the highway by whites in a convertible, throwing things at us in our car, we started carrying a rifle. Probably an unwise decision, looking back on it. But the Deacons definitely helped Blacks get the protection of the law extended to them, or so many think. I’m happy that I raised money to buy ammunition for them.)

I will grant you that the militia movement as it stands, includes people who have a romanticized, unrealistic view of their capabilities. They need to learn more about the ‘guerilla war’ waged by young Leftists in many countries in Latin America during the 70s, which almost always led to their demise, sometimes after brutal torture. But the basic point, that political power is ultimately dependent on firepower, is correct.