Back on January 6th there was that protest-turned-riot. The Media and Leftist politicians were soon out in force and the words they were using were “armed insurrection.”
Um, there is a problem with that. “Riot” I’ll cop to, but “insurrection”? At most it might be considered a “warning shot across the bow” of what might arise if the concerns of a large and growing portion of the population are not adequately addressed. But actual insurrection? No. The folk making those “insurrection” claims are banking on You the People not having any idea what an actual armed insurrection would look like.
To give you some idea, consider some of the following:
I have a friend, lives not too far from me and many of you will probably know of whom I speak, who could by himself arm a reinforced company or a light battalion (at least–that was based on the last count I had from him which was some time ago). By himself. And while it would be somewhat weak on crew-served weapons for units of that size it wouldn’t be entirely lacking in that department either.
I know more who could arm at least a rather eclectic squad where everyone would have something to shoot.
I have friends who have dealt firsthand with actual insurgencies. They know what works, and what doesn’t.
Me? I was in intel puke, about as far away from actual combat as you can get. We were told “you’d be evacuated before women and children” (darker rumors were that the Security Police had…other orders…in case of a danger of overrun, not that there was one when the closest I got to a “danger zone” was RAF Chicksands–since closed–in Bedfordshire, England).
Those in power have little to fear from me. I’m just a voice, and not much of one (I mean, despite how outspoken I am, I’ve only been in Facebook Jail once, that’s how small my footprint is), but there are other folk out there that should have them sleeping with one eye open if they really mean to reduce those of us who still believe in freedom into outright peonage. Indeed, I have argued, more than once on this blog and elsewhere that an armed insurrection would be a very bad idea, not just for the suffering and death it would inflict on the innocent but because that suffering and death is unlikely even to lead to a good end. The most likely result is simply exchanging one tyranny for another. Things truly have to be in extremis for such a long-shot to be worth the risk.
If there were an armed insurrection, you wouldn’t need politicians and media pundits to tell you. Did the people of Beirut need to be told that an insurrection was going on? Did the people of Northern Ireland need the BBC to inform them that the IRA was engaged in insurrection? No. They knew because of what was happening around them.
So, if you need the media, if you need pundits and political leaders, to tell you that “it’s an armed insurrection”, then it isn’t.
When it is, you’ll know it.
The Writer in Black 
Yeah. And people staging a “coup” don’t show up unarmed, without a plan, and mostly wander around the building taking selfies while doing a minimum amount of vandalism.
LikeLike
What riot? It was a Mostly Peaceful Protest.
LikeLike
It makes me smirk – grimace, even – when I ponder what would be the reaction if they *really* understood what realities some of those easily misused words entailed…
“Racism…”
“Insurrection…”
“Hate…”
To quote Indigo Montoya:
“You keep using that word; I do no think it means what you think it means.”
I hope that they never do… I truly hope not.
There is too much real ability beyond their comfortable comprehension that they are best off not provoking.
LikeLike
The press’s usual double standard: Republican protests are “riots and Democrat riots are “protests”.
LikeLike
One looks at history to learn, what happened before elections were invented. How were bad governments checked by the people? By assassination or revolution. Now that elections are fraudulent, a bad government still needs to be checked by the people, what can we look forward to? In like manner, one asks, before the invention of judges, how were disputes resolved? By murder of one of the parties. Now that judges are either corrupt or cowardly, disputes still need to be resolved. What can we look forward to?
LikeLike
The elimination with extreme prejudice of judges.
LikeLike
“you’d be evacuated before women and children”
Sounds like you were possibly a “202”, or some other associated skill.
“Women and Children, and XXX’s first, and there’s no room for Women & Children.
LikeLike
208X3a at the time (The “X” being a number that represented the individuals “skill level”). They’ve changed the AFSC code system since then and I haven’t kept up with that. Our own joke was that, if we were over run to shout “Не стреляйте. Я знаю секреты.”
LikeLike
Windtalkers KBC
LikeLike
This was less damaging than the burning of Seattle and the other dem run cities and states.
Wait a while and you will really get what you ask for.
LikeLike
The most likely result is simply exchanging one tyranny for another.
Sadly, at this point, that’s really the only possibility, no matter what. We no longer have a “moral and educated” electorate, and it is therefore impossible to have a free republic. If you could pull together all the people who meet those criteria into certain states, we might manage a minor secession, but not really much more. We might be forced to go through the stage of a benign monarchy to recapture the elements necessary for a republic.
you wouldn’t need politicians and media pundits to tell you
But, in a large enough nation, with the media playing Pravda, and enough control of the internet, plenty of folks may not be close enough to the fight to really know.
LikeLike