Wednesday, October 22, 2008

How does one resist their Government?

The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. almost invariably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries t change it. And if he is not romantic personally, he is apt to spread discontent among those who are. ~ H. L. Mencken.

What is the difference between a terrorist, a patriot, a freedom fighter and a rebel? The McCain Camp has been pushing a connection between Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground and Obama. Why?

ZombieTime published a post highlighting, Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism a book produced by Ayers and other members of the Weather Underground. Interestingly, the post starts with the following: William Ayers is a communist. Then disclaims there is nothing illegal about being a communist but ends with the (I suppose) stinging reproach;
William Ayers is a communist. By his own description. He was a communist then, he is a communist now, and he was a communist for the entire time that Barack Obama worked with him and was associated with him.

The Weathermen conducted activities against the United States Federal and State and Local governments (across the US but also in Chicago, the Weathermen twice destroyed a statue of a police officer which stood in Haymarket Square) during the US war in Vietnam and stated they planned to "seize power". The Weathermen used bombings, demonstrations and prison breaks.

There is a loud contingent, led by such luminaries as Sean Hannity and Bill Cunningham, claiming what Bill Ayers did in the Sixties was beyond redemption and when Obama wins, have convinced themselves he will install a islamic marxist police state, which will take their property and curb their freedoms. But, what can they do to resist such an evil government? Clearly they can not physically resist because of their stance against violent resistance used by Ayers. They have placed themselves in a quandary.

The problem is these people who are touting Ayers as ultimate evil have constrained themselves into accepting the Hobbesian Ideal of Government. Once a government takes power the people have no voice and no role in government and the every action of the government is by axiom, legitimate. This is clearly the view of the two Dicks, Nixon and Cheney. As typified by the famous Nixon line ‘If the President Does It, That Means It’s Not Illegal’ and Cheney's 'So?' in response to the fact 2/3rds of Americans think the war in Iraq is not worth fighting.

So does Bill Cunningham think resisting the government is immoral or prima facie evidence of treason? No, Bill Cunningham has stated many times if Obama is elected he will fight like a Scottish Warrior Poet or like Patrick Swayze in Red Dawn.

But by what LEGITIMACY does Braveheart Cunningham have in resisting Obama's Federal Government?

The early history of the United States is founded on the Polybian belief in order to avoid revolts a simple government of one of the 3 classic types (monarchy, aristocracy, democracy) is to have a balanced government combining the 3. The One, The Few, The Many. The problem is those men were the product of the Enlightenment as well versed in Ancient Greek and Roman History as with contemporary thought. Such men are in short supply today. But, to them the problems of modern America are not new, they are simply an extension of the problems faced in Ancient Greece and Revolutionary America. However, the United States was founded with the active resistance (The Revolution) to the ruling government. Which causes a problem; If violent struggle can legitimately be used once can it be used again? Or was the American Revolution a one-time aberration?

Toranaga: There is no mitigating factor for rebellion against your liege lord. Blackthorne: Unless you win. ~ from James Clavell's Shogun.

On what side would those who rage rage rage on the Obama/Ayers connection have fallen with regards to Sophie Scholl and White Rose, with the government or the radicals?

Are these they same people who cheered when the US military rolled into Iraq and deposed the ruling government of Saddam Hussein? Would they have been pro-Sadr when his father was against Saddam and anti-Sadr when the son is against the current government of Iraq?

Do these people cheer the Kurds on against the government of Turkey? Do they champion a Kurdish Free State? Or do they snicker and roll their eyes at Biden's not new idea of a tripartite Iraq?

Are these the same people who cheered Georgian military aggression against South Ossetia?

Do these people think the Irish resistance to British rule is unconscionable and the deaths and bombings in the Troubles are all the fault of Irish criminals who have no basis for resistance?

Getting back to the Weatherman bombing tactics. What is the difference between the bombing of the Haymarket Square statue and when the American Founding Fathers and Patriots destroyed a statue of King George III, which stood at the foot of Broadway on the Bowling Green in New York to make bullets?

Sometimes, in the beginning of an insane shabby political upheaval he is strongly moved to revolt, but he doesn't do it - he knows better. He knows his maker would find out - the maker of his patriotism, the windy and incoherent six-dollar subbeditior of the village newspaper - and would bray out in print and call him a traitor. ~ Mark Twain, As regards Patriotism.

Funny how Twain knew what tactics would be used against those who stand against their government.


ran said...

Whether a resister is a terrorist or a patriot can mostly be determined by one simple factor...whether you agree with what they are fighting for.

If you view freedom as a zero-sum game, as Cunningham seems to, then you support those that fight for your causes, so that you can retain the freedoms you want exercised, but will oppose those that fight for freedoms you oppose. It doesn't matter how hypocritical you look from an outsider's point of view. Only a few people that are very self-aware would notice the inconsistency in themselves. And if you surround yourself with only people that agree with you (which most of us tend to do), you'll never notice a problem with yourself.

“As soon as laws are necessary for men, they are no longer fit for freedom.” - Pythagoras

Grung_e_Gene said...

Thank Gosh I don't have any inconsistencies, I know you agree with me Ran!