Marching is one thing, but is marching with loaded weapons in a city where this is illegal (and Washington, D.C. no less) really the most prudent type of march possible? Especially when all it takes is for one dumbass to fire his gun and make a most likely tense situation into a possible bloodbath?
How does that differ from any other moment of any day anywhere, since guns were invented? Sounds like Piers Morgan. More guns = more death. If anything this march is good to expose the inner statist of this 'liberty movement'.
You're right, I forgot that MLK and Gandhi marched with loaded weapons.
My bad.
Yeah, cus, that even remotely addresses what I said.
It's not like you addressed what I said.
@Habba
Because what you wrote was unintelligible
Short answer: I don't know. It's never been done. Your turn to prove how two guys who were murdered is a good example of protests not resulting in death.
No, I'm pretty sure that the burden of proof is on you to establish a cause and effect relationship between the two events before I have to try and disprove anything.
You brought it up???
Whatever. I don't really care. You already pulled a "most likely" and "possible" in one sentence.
lol ok bud.
EDIT: You will notice that I talked about prudence in my post, not about a definite cause and effect relationship. Feel free to ignore that word and interpret what I said however you want.
What you mean to say is, all it takes is one undercover gov't agent to fire a bullet before a bloodbath breaks out.
Just ask Clayton, he'll tell ya.
That could happen, as well as a tense cop firing the first shot, or whatever. I don't know if you remember when this cop completely overreacted to this situation and punched a woman in the face. Now what happens if you get a cop like that but he pulls a trigger instead of just punching someone?
You have every right to walk down a dark alley by yourself in a high crime neighborhood, I just wouldn't consider that a prudent action.
It is interesting to see how people side on this topic.
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Indeed. It is interesting to see the usual suspects (in my book) lining up in favor of a government plant.
Clayton -
So, Kokesh's goal is to show to the government that the people will no longer bend over backwards. Why? As if the government cares. How many of us are here because we saw Kokesh (or someone else) march down the street?
I think a better solution to no longer bending over backwards is, simply, to act in disregard to the state and persuade others to do the same. Go live life. Have business, and preferably a black market one. Have a family and home school the children. Spread the idea of liberty.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
Malachi: wait a minute, this is illegal? hes managed o.
wait a minute, this is illegal? hes managed o.
+1 Malachi.
We (sorry, "Libertarians") don't need washington. We just need our own land. Revolution stinks and spells disaster, secession however...
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
NonAntiAnarchist: But education has diminishing returns. There are only so many people who have the capacity and patience to understand arguments and change their views. .. The VAST majority of people in this country will NEVER become libertarians.
But education has diminishing returns. There are only so many people who have the capacity and patience to understand arguments and change their views.
.. The VAST majority of people in this country will NEVER become libertarians.
Failure of imagination. Every single day it becomes easier to communicate good ideas with other people.
In the last month, r/libertarian (reddit) grew by 3.7%, r/anarcho_capitalism by 4.3% and r/austrian_economics by 3%.
In the last 30 days, my Youtube channel alone enjoyed 6,805 hours of viewtime (actual watched time). The Mises Institute channel likely gets a lot more. And those are only topics that are directly related to liberty. There are many things people are continually learning about that indirectly make them more susceptible to liberty.
So, on the point of whether I actually agree with the rally.. I'm not sure. But, I sure as hell am NOT concerned with how it affects the rest of the country's perception of the libertarian community. Not one iota.
So what's the goal then? Pointless self-sacrifice?
.. will need to be carried on by a vocal few who are willing to stand up for their rights simply because they posess those rights.
A right is not something you have. It is something that continually has to be granted to you by other people. This is why ideas matter. Once you stop caring about what people believe, then you've already lost.
Congratulations. First I thought this was silly of Kokesh, but then I saw how the reaction to his silliness is even sillier so that now I have to side with Kokesh. Congratulations for making me pro-Kokesh march. Guy wants to do something that's ballsy and that he has a right to, and all you can think about is how this is going to make *you* look? Hey, you're totally way less self-centered than Kokesh is. NOT! Hey you know, it's marketplace of ideas, marketplace of activism flavors. Pursue different avenues. Let him do his thing and let's see in the long term what works. Or are you a socialist, or a psychic maybe, you know in advance there can't come anything good from his course? Viva activism central planning commission, and licensed-activists only.
Marching is one thing, but is marching with loaded weapons in a city where this is illegal (and Washington, D.C. no less) really the most prudent type of march possible?
Facebook a tool of liberty?? Sheesh.
Clayton-
"No, it is not the most prudent type of march possible. Apparently they aren't aiming for prudent. It's not the highest value for them. They're aiming for some other value they rank higher."'
Any clue as to what that is? Because besides sheer defiance and drunken patting each other on the back pride I'm at a loss, because seriously, this plan sounds like something a drunk might have come up with
Hey, you're totally way less self-centered than Kokesh is. NOT!
Um. So what?
Or are you a socialist, or a psychic maybe, you know in advance there can't come anything good from his course?
No, I know my history books and I've read Sun Tzu. You never attack your enemy where he can easily defend. As GL pointed out, it takes just one testosterone/steroids-addled cop, just one agent provocateur, just one FBI plant to turn this thing into a bloodbath. And I can assure you that it would play well for the government on MSM news. "An armed rally in nation's capital headed by promoter of illegal drugs ended in tragedy today as police were fired on. Two officers were shot and killed and it is uncertain how many of the protesters died but the last information we received on the ground was that at least seventeen protesters died while exchanging gunfire with the police. Many of the protesters surrendered quickly but police were forced to put down the core contingent with armored vehicles and helicopter support. This tragedy, on the eve of yesterday's school shooting, reminds us just how important it is to get America's gun problem under control."
Of course, TPTB are fairly predictable on this point and they will never let this protest get that far because they have better things to do before it even gets that far. Like recording all the names of everyone who signs up on the facebook page and registering them on some DHS watchlist. Remember, by signing up to go, you are informing the world that you own at least one gun.
And just a refresher on facebook's policy regarding page names:
What names are allowed on Facebook?
Facebook is a community where people use their real identities. We require everyone to provide their real names, so you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe.
Names can’t include:
Symbols, numbers, unusual capitalization, repeating characters or punctuation Characters from multiple languages Titles of any kind (ex: professional, religious, etc) Words, phrases, or nicknames in place of a middle name Offensive or suggestive content of any kind Other things to keep in mind:
The name you use should be your real name as it would be listed on your credit card, student ID, etc.
Nicknames can be used as a first or middle name if they're a variation of your real first or last name (like Bob instead of Robert)
You can also list another name on your account (ex: maiden name, nickname, or professional name), by adding an alternate name to your timeline Only one person's name should be listed on the account – timelines are for individual use only
Pretending to be anything or anyone is not allowed
Bringing loaded weapons is a recipe for disaster, especially since it only takes one guy to fire his to cause a serious problem between the marchers and the police.
As GL pointed out, it takes just one testosterone/steroids-addled cop, just one agent provocateur, just one FBI plant to turn this thing into a bloodbath. And I can assure you that it would play well for the government on MSM news. "An armed rally in nation's capital headed by promoter of illegal drugs ended in tragedy today as police were fired on. Two officers were shot and killed and it is uncertain how many of the protesters died but the last information we received on the ground was that at least seventeen protesters died while exchanging gunfire with the police. Many of the protesters surrendered quickly but police were forced to put down the core contingent with armored vehicles and helicopter support. This tragedy, on the eve of yesterday's school shooting, reminds us just how important it is to get America's gun problem under control."
But, my guess is that it doesn't even happen. he said he won't do it without ten thousand people.
Exactly why should I care? If you want to make a humanitarian/pacifistic argument as to why nineteen lives lost is a tragic event then that's fine. But acknowledge that is a distinct argument as to why that would be bad thing for the cause of freedom
What is the "cause of freedom"? Why should I care about that? Why should anyone die for any cause, freedom or otherwise?
as claimed by the OP whose side you seem to have taken. We're talking here as libertarian/anarchist strategists not as Mothers For Prayers In Schools And Other Touchy-Feely Crap. No emotionalism, only calculus. Are you familiar with the story of the Easter Rising and the subsequent British overreach as it is commonly told? I don't think it will ever come to that, but if it did I'm not psychic, I'm not going to claim I know for a fact seventeen martyrs isn't *exactly* what is needed. If there were persons willing to throw themselves on the altar (I'm not) in order to find out why would I try to stop them?
No emotionalism, only calculus. Are you familiar with the story of the Easter Rising and the subsequent British overreach as it is commonly told? I don't think it will ever come to that, but if it did I'm not psychic, I'm not going to claim I know for a fact seventeen martyrs isn't *exactly* what is needed. If there were persons willing to throw themselves on the altar (I'm not) in order to find out why would I try to stop them?
Well, there's a difference between saying "It's a bad idea" - which I am - and trying to stop them - which I am not.... the police and pundits will handle that well enough.
There's a certain wisdom to old-fashioned class society... you need to know when you're out of your depth. Kokesh is way out of his depth... among other things.
This thread is full of fear, and that's normal. In fact, that's how we arrived here. Conditioned respect for authority and fear of injury or death enable many self-proclaimed 'conservatives' and 'libertarians' to delude themselves into thinking it is Kokesh that is planning on breaking the law.
In the real world, it is D.C. that is breaking the law by violating the Constitution. Is your fear of authority so intense that you perform mental mutilations to rationalize inaction and distract from your cowardice?
Free yourself of the psychological contortions of believing compliance in the face of tyranny is a virtue.
The fact that you are able to tolerate the continuous infringement of your individual liberties is nothing to be ashamed of – it’s natural to want to live and avoid injury. There is a growing minority of Americans, however, that are no longer able to tolerate these breaches.
Our first course of action is to be heard. All recourses protected by the Constitution must be employed. THAT is the Contract we have with the Government.
That is what the march is about - EVERYONE must obey the Constitution - especially government. The Constitution trumps any federal, state or local law - no exceptions. It's that simple, but the reality of our lawless government is so disturbing, it's easier for most to side with the government lawbreakers. Especially if they're OUR elected lawbreakers.
Put up or shut up.
“A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.” `Paine
“A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.”
`Paine
“The Framers [of the Constitution] knew that free speech is the friend of change and revolution. But they also knew that it is always the deadliest enemy of tyranny.” ~Hugo Black
“The Framers [of the Constitution] knew that free speech is the friend of change and revolution.
But they also knew that it is always the deadliest enemy of tyranny.”
~Hugo Black
We got a lot of these in this thread:
Firewall, you're framing this argument as if you think anyone who isn't FOR the man's scheme is AGAINST the Constitution, which is silly. Also, you might not find as many people on this forum as you think you will, who hold the Constitution in incredibly high regard.
I don't have much respect for a leader who asks his followers to risk what I believe is still a year in prison plus a fine for first-time offenders; and I can't imagine how this protest would be perceived by lawmakers or non-2nd amendment supporters EXCEPT as a thinly veiled threat. That's not the kind of action I believe in, and I betcha I'm the biggest gun nut on this forum.
That is the correct way to frame the argument.
If we were talking about DC banning carrying signs in public places, it would be pretty clear that although persons doing such would be in violation of DC law, that the law is illegitimate since it violates the Constitution. I assert that using force to prevent citizens from carrying signs in public places is certainly against the Constitution.
Criticize them for violating illegal ordinances? Are you really going to criticize a victim for their own rape?
If the DC law is illegal, as SCOTUS already declared, then the police are the criminals.
As far as the Constitution goes, it's not holding a high ideal to believe we should have legal contract to define the scope and responsibility of government. What's in the Contract is going to change and can be debated, but is wanting to live in civil society a "high ideal"?
What’s happening now isn’t new – a minority are speaking-out against a lawless, criminal government.
I've seen cowardice first hand. The lowest form is mocking those that support and defend your rights.
Clayton: And just a refresher on facebook's policy regarding page names: What names are allowed on Facebook? Facebook is a community where people use their real identities. We require everyone to provide their real names, so you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe. [...]
Facebook is a community where people use their real identities. We require everyone to provide their real names, so you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe. [...]
And it's also official policy of the dry cleaner around the corner that discounts for long-time customers are only to be shared with spouses and immediate family. What's your point?
I can't believe you seriously just pasted the entire section of facebook policy as if it were some sort of law of nature. As if every f-ing account features the account holder's actual real name. (And as if anyone even reads TOS's.)
There are roughly 1.11 billion accounts on Facebook. Do you honestly believe those represent 1.11 billion people? Hell I'll go create new one right now and call myself "Clayton Isnaive" if you really think that post was actually worth posting.
DanielMuff:How many of us are here because we saw Kokesh (or someone else) march down the street?
I think the better question is "how many of us are here?"
DanielMuff:I think a better solution to no longer bending over backwards
I'm sorry...you think Kokesh has been bending over backwards up till now?
DanielMuff:act in disregard to the state and persuade others to do the same.
Hmm.
so confused as to what we've been talking about Kokesh doing for this entire thread...
DanielMuff:Go live life. Have business, and preferably a black market one. Have a family and home school the children. Spread the idea of liberty.
Hey great idea, chief. Why don't you go do that instead of worry so much about what other people do and how you think it might reflect on you.
Marko:But theorethically I can't think of a reason why I, as an anarchist, would want to rain on their parade if they wanted to walk around not violating anyone's rights, yet imprudently "courting" aggressor trouble from the organs of state repression.
buhbuhbuhbbecause they might make uss loook baaaad!!!!!
Clayton:We got a lot of these in this thread: [Rambo with a keyboard]
Well now I'm confused. Looking at that picture it would appear you're mocking people who think like this. But your commentary in this thread would imply that you agree with them.
Which is it?
The Firewall:EVERYONE must obey the Constitution
Why?
Seconded
Well now I'm confused. Looking at that picture it would appear you're mocking people who think like this. But your commentary in this thread would imply that you agree with them. Which is it?
Seconded.
Rambo with a keyboard seems more like a 60 year old man forum activist-ing than a 30 year year old man marching in the streets of DC...with...out a keyboard.
Further, the constitution is supposed to bind the government not the people. that is why it is supposed to be obeyed.
Why must everyone obey the Constitution?
First of all, the statement is predicated on the assumption that you want to be a Citizen, and not an 'outlaw' or 'sovereign citizen’. If you want to be an outlaw, as long as you’re not infringing on others rights – by all means pursue your happiness. You do recognize though, there will be a majority that want to live in a State for a very long time, and it’s hard to get away from them.
If you do want to be a Citizen, then the Constitution contains the rules. Specifically, it defines what other people are 'allowed' to do to you. The idea being, if they don't follow the rules, you have recourse - up to and including exercising your natural rights. In return for the protections afforded to you by the State, your singular obligation is to support the Constitution.
Simple.
2nd Amendment infringements are but one example of the trespasses being committed in the name of security and greater good. You don’t have to be armed to attend the march, and most people won’t be armed. There will be families of Citizens love their country.
Remaining silent and keeping your eyes away from the face of tyranny – far from keeping you safe from harm – actually places you in greater danger.
Firewall, the subject of this discussion is whether or not the demonstration is a stupid idea. It is not a discussion about the 2nd amendment as a concept or about its relationship to DC law.
I agree 100% that citizens should be permitted to carry weapons, openly or otherwise, anywhere in this country. I disagree 100% that a goofy publicity stunt that asks people to risk their legal rights is a good idea. Anybody who would ask that is immoral.
The NAP means something important to me. It means that change is a dialog involving real understanding by all involved parties.
I don't like mindless flag-waving and I don't like shows of force. I'm pretty darn sure I don't like Kokesh, either.
"there will be a majority that want to live in a State for a very long time, and it’s hard to get away from them"
Is this supposed to have anything at all to do with us, on this forum???