Do they want a civil war?

The latest round started with a restaurant throwing out the President’s Press Secretary because of who she worked for.  Okay, there prerogative.  I believe in freedom of association, including the right not to associate with people you don’t want to.  And since I actually mean it, that means I agree that it also applies to people I disagree with.  Bad business move maybe, but their prerogative.

However, then comes that idiot Maxine Waters (but who’s the more stupid?  The idiot in office, or the idiots who keep putting her there?) using this case as some rallying cry, to wit:

“If you think we’re rallying now you ain’t seen nothing yet,” Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif, told supporters at a rally in Los Angeles over the weekend. “If you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.” A video of her remarks was posted on Twitter on Sunday.
NPR

Then, of course, there’s protests against actually enforcing our immigration laws.  We have Peter Fonda:

Wanna stop this f—ing monster? Really wanna stop this giant asshole?” Fonda asked. “90 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE STREETS ON THE SAME WEEKEND! THESE REPUBLICAN ASSHOLES ARE ALL IN ON IT! THE CHIEF ASSHOLE IS HAPPY WE ARE ALL VERY UPSET. WE HAVE TO GET EVEN MORE ANGRY WITH THESE REPUBLICANS.”

“WE SHOULD HACK THIS SYSTEM, GET THE ADDRESSES OF THE ICE AGENTS CBP AGENTS AND SURROUND THEIR HOMES IN PROTEST. WE SHOULD FIND OUT WHAT SCHOOLS THEIR CHILDREN GO TO AND SURROUND THE SCHOOLS IN PROTEST. THESE AGENTS ARE DOING THIS CUZ THEY WANT TO DO IT. THEY LIKE DOING THIS. F—,” he added in a second tweet.

A third tweet from the actor, posted several minutes later, called for activists to target President Trump‘s youngest son, Barron Trump, who attends a school in nearby Montgomery County, Md., claiming (apparently for effect) that activists should “rip” him from the first lady’s arms and put in “in a cage with pedophiles.”

“WE SHOULD RIP BARRON TRUMP FROM HIS MOTHER’S ARMS AND PUT HIM IN A CAGE WITH PEDOPHILES AND SEE IF MOTHER WILL WILL STAND UP AGAINST THE GIANT ASSHOLE SHE IS MARRIED TO. 90 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE STREETS ON THE SAME WEEKEND IN THE COUNTRY. F—,” he tweeted.

He deleted the second and third of those tweets but the Internet is Forever.  Like they used to say about Vegas:  What happens on the Internet, stays on the Internet.

We have protesters not just targeting government offices or even places of business, but gathering outside people’s homes.

Protesters gathered outside of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s home in Alexandria early Friday morning.

Demonstrators gathered to express their anger with Nielsen and the role they claim she plays in family separations.

Several people stood along the sidewalk near her home with some holding signs. One demonstrator held a sign with Nielsen’s face on it featuring the words “child snatcher.”

Fox 11 News, Green Bay, WI

If the home was of a black family and the protestors were wearing sheets, would that change your opinion of it?

The problem is, these people have convinced themselves they are “on the side of history”.  They are in good company with that.  Lenin thought he was on the side of history.  Stalin did too.  So did Mussolini and Hitler.  And let us not forget Mao.  All, or at least their ardent followers, thought they were “on the side of history.”

The problem with not only thinking history has a side but that you are on it is that it justifies anything.   When your cause is inevitable and you are supremely secure in your rightness, anything you do in that cause is right.

Some of the worst atrocities in history have been committed by people believing they were “on the side of history.”  Look at that list of names again.

In a post a few days ago, I described how I thought a future civil war would start.  There would be no equivalent to “Lexington” or “Fort Sumter” but it would rather simply start as an increase of politically motivated violence without any distinct starting event.  It would only be in retrospect that we’d look back and see that we are in a civil war and had been for some time.

It’s looking very much like we’re in the early stages of that right now.  Mostly, it’s just talk, but it’s the kind of talk people use to work themselves up to acting on it.  And so the appropriate response to this speech is more speech, speech in opposition.

Because if this keeps on it’s going to get ugly and there will be no winner except death.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Do they want a civil war?”

  1. I do not subscribe to freedom of association because the government destroyed it with the civil rights laws. All male clubs or fraternities? Try refusing to bake a cake to a faggot for his “wedding.” No some animals are more equal than others so unless all are treated alike I can’t agree.

    But a civil war is coming. Based on my experience overseas for 28 years, when someone calls you deplorable and irredemible the next step is a free train trip to a vacation camps with special showers. I will not tolerate cancer, I will not coexist with AIDS, and I will not overlook the insanity of the Left. Their chimp anger makes war inevitable.

    The difference is this. Most non Leftists are patriots to some degree. They believe in law and order and cherish their nation. So who is going to win, the side that owns weapons or the side that doesn’t know which bathroom to use and needs safe spaces.

    A storm is coming and my patience is about used up. And I don’t give a raqt’s ass what my parole officer told me about violence.

    1. I do not subscribe to freedom of association because the government destroyed it with the civil rights laws.

      So you let the government dictate your beliefs?

      Well, whatever works for you.

  2. From my observation, they WANT the civil war. They’re expecting our side to be pushed into shooting in self defense as they move from screaming ‘kidnap their children’ to actually doing it, and trusting the media to spin them as victims (and regardless of the truth, they’ll see themselves as the victims and thus justified in attacking at that point onward) and then – from their thoughts- it’s game on and they’ll ‘crush the opposition!!!’

    1. What they don’t get is that aside from those already on their side, people are caring less and less what the media spin is.

      they’ll see themselves as the victims and thus justified in attacking at that point onward

      Oh, we’re already past that point. We’re at the “psyching themselves up” stage.

        1. I wouldn’t underestimate this assumption. For many public servants, police and military included, their livelihoods, pensions and medical care for their families is tied up in their job. Most public employees don’t even own their own retirement nest eggs.

          They don’t knock your door down for no cause. They knock your door down because they’re arresting you for refusing to pay the fine for your grass being an inch too tall (or your doors being too narrow, or watering the lawn on the wrong day, or….). We like to think that the average “good cop” would stand up against that sort of thing, but how many people are going to risk all those things and the additional legal consequences for a stranger who’s refusing to pay a fine?

          Of course, if you’re already vulnerable you might be tossed in prison for a parole violation…

  3. Wow! Things are really going too far. I hope it doesn’t escalate further, but like you, I have long felt that a storm is brewing. Funny, that even though a lot of people not on the left hated or disliked Obama, the level of vitriol against him and his party never reached such levels as what the left is doing now that their preferred puppet in chief is not sitting in the oval office. And there’s no excuse form threatening children, ever! Oh there was something I read about laws, though I can’t recall if it was from Celtic or Nordic origins… It was about when a law could be changed and when a law had existed long enough to be considered to have proved it’s worth and when a situation arose in which there was no law, no ruling could be made without the entire tribe coming together for the þing and agreeing unanimously. Also, at a certain point, I think after a hundred years, a law would be written onto the walls, and once this happened it could not be changed, since it had withstood the test of time. Ah, this was definitely Norse/Scandinavian. Well, I thought about that and how that differs from our modern era in which nothing is sacred, nothing that has been tried and proven is permitted to remain intact, and how our society is unravelling, and I can’t help but feel that we could learn a lot from our ancestors when it comes to how we deal with law. Also, they were opposed to establishing laws except where absolutely necessary, much in contrast to our leftist friends who so inaccurately use the word liberal to describe themselves. Well, I suppose it could be considered accurate if referring to how liberally they toss laws about. Haha! Laws for everyone! Come on, line up and get some laws! 😂

  4. No, “they” don’t want a civil war. More accurately, “they” don’t expect the Right to respond in kind or worse. They’ve gotten away with their nonsense for long enough that they’ve come to believe that they’ll get away with it indefinitely, with no unpleasant consequences.

    That’s our fault, frankly. We ought to have responded long ago at a level that would persuade them not to do it. But our attachment to norms of civility the Left has discarded inhibited us…and now the Left is upping the ante. So we’re at the edge of the abyss. Congratulations, all you courteous types who felt deterring the Left by punishing their bad behavior was “beneath you.”

      1. There are always some. Benjamin Franklin was trying to negotiate a peaceful settlement with Britain right up until the eve of Lexington and Concord. But once the war was finally set off, he just as quickly started negotating with the French for the aid we needed to defeat Britain.

        1. Yeah, but Ben Franklin’s loyalties were to the American people, as well as their interests. The problem is, our side is already getting attacked (harassed, beaten, shot, driven out of livelihoods, stalked, dragged through courts of law with false accusations) and it’s still our side getting told to be nicer and hold the moral high ground. What’s the breaking point?

  5. I’m fairly sure they /want/ a civil war.

    I’m quite sure they’re /not/ going to like it, if/when it happens…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s