Post New Thread Reply
 
Thread Tools Share
Old 01-04-2014, 07:29 AM   #1
Fred O'Malley
Administrator
 
Fred O'Malley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: American Dystopian Utopia
Posts: 61,236
Rep Power: 50
Fred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations God
Default Violence In The Face Of Tyranny Is Often Necessary

It was the winter of 1939, only a few months earlier the Soviet Union and Hitler's Third Reich had signed a partially secret accord known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact; essentially a non-aggression treaty which divided Europe down the middle between the fascists and the communists. Hitler would take the West, and Stalin would take the East. Stalin's war machine had already steamrolled into Latvia. Lithuania, and Estonia. The soviets used unprecedented social and political purges, rigged elections, and genocide, while the rest of the world was distracted by the Nazi blitzkrieg in Poland. In the midst of this mechanized power grab was the relatively tiny nation of Finland, which had been apportioned to the communists.

Apologists for Stalinist history (propagandists) have attempted to argue that the subsequent attack on Finland was merely about “border territories” which the communists claimed were stolen by the Finns when they seceded from Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution. The assertion that the soviets were not seeking total dominance of the Finns is a common one. However, given the vicious criminal behavior of Russia in nearby pacified regions, and their posture towards Finland, it is safe to assume their intentions were similar. The Finns knew what they had to look forward to if they fell victim to the iron hand of Stalin, and the soviet propensity for subjugation was already legendary.

The Russian military was vastly superior to Finland's in every way a common tactician would deem important. They had far greater numbers, far better logistical capability, far better technology, etc, etc. Over 1 million troops, thousands of planes, thousands of tanks, versus Finland's 32 antiquated tanks, 114 planes which were virtually useless against more modern weapons, and 340,000 men, most of whom were reservists rallied from surrounding farmlands. Finland had little to no logistical support from the West until the conflict was almost over, though FDR would later pay lip service to the event, “condemning” soviet actions while brokering deals with them behind the scenes. Russian military leadership boasted that the Finns would run at the sound of harsh words, let alone gun fire. The invasion would be a cakewalk.

The battle that followed would later be known as the “Winter War”; an unmitigated embarrassment for the Soviets, and a perfect example of a small but courageous indigenous guerrilla army repelling a technologically advanced foe.



To Fight, Or Pretend To Fight?


Fast forward about seven decades or so, and you will discover multiple countries around the globe, including the U.S., on the verge of the same centralized and collectivized socialist occupation that the Finnish faced in 1939. The only difference is that while their invasion came from without, our invasion arose from within. The specific methods may have changed, but the underlying face of tyranny remains the same.

In America, the only existing organization of people with the slightest chance of disrupting and defeating the march towards totalitarianism is what we often refer to as the “Liberty Movement”; a large collection of activist and survival groups tied together by the inexorable principles of freedom, natural law, and constitutionalism. The size of this movement is difficult to gauge, but its social and political presence is now too large to be ignored. We are prevalent enough to present a threat, and prevalent enough to be attacked, and that is all that matters. That said, though we are beginning to understand the truly vital nature of our role in America's path, and find solidarity in the inherent values of liberty that support our core, when it comes to solutions to the dilemma of globalization and elitism, we are sharply divided.

While most activist movements suffer from a complete lack of solutions to the problems they claim to recognize, constitutional conservatives tend to have TOO MANY conceptual solutions to the ailments of the world. Many of these solutions rely upon unrealistic assumptions and methods that avoid certain inevitable outcomes. Such strategies center mostly on the concepts of “non-aggression” or pacifism idealized and romanticized by proponents of Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and the anti-war movements of the 1960's and 1970's. The post-baby boomer generations in particular have grown up with an incessant bombardment of the “higher nature” of non-violence as a cure-all for every conceivable cultural ailment.

We have been taught since childhood that fighting solves nothing, but is this really true?

I can understand the allure of the philosophy. After all, physical confrontation is mentally and emotionally terrifying to anyone who is not used to experiencing it. The average “reasonable” person goes far out of their way on every occasion to avoid it. Most of the activists that I have met personally who deride the use of force against tyrannical government have never actually been in an outright confrontation of any kind in their lives, or if they have, it ended in a failure that scarred them. They have never trained for the eventuality. Many of them have never owned a firearm. The focus of their existence has been to hide from pain, rather than overcome their fears to achieve something greater.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with becoming an “intellectual warrior”, unless that person lives under the fantasy that this alone will be enough to defeat the kind of evil we face today.

Non-aggression methods rely on very specific circumstances in order to be effective. Most of all, they rely on a system of government that is forced to at least PRETEND as if it cares what the masses think of it. Gandhi's Indian Independence Movement, for example, only witnessed noticeable success because the British government at that time was required to present a semblance of dignity and rule of law. But what happens if a particular tyranny reaches a point where the facade of benevolence disappears? What happens when the establishment turns to the use of the purge as a tool for consolidation? What happens when the mask comes completely off?

How many logical arguments or digital stashes of ethereal Bitcoins will it take to save one's life or one's freedom then?

Arguments For And Against Violent Action


The position against the use of “violence” (or self defense) to obstruct corrupt systems depends on three basic debate points:

1) Violence only feeds the system and makes it stronger.

2) We need a “majority” movement in order to be successful.

3) The system is too technologically powerful – to fight it through force of arms is “futile”, and our chances are slim to none.

First, violence does indeed feed the system, if it is driven by mindless retribution rather than strategic self defense. This is why despotic governments often resort to false flag events; the engineering of terrorist actions blamed on scapegoats creates fear within the unaware portions of the population, which generates public support for further erosion of freedoms. However, there is such a thing as diminishing returns when it comes to the “reach, teach, and inspire” method.

The escalation of totalitarianism will eventually overtake the speed at which the movement can awaken the masses, if it has not done so already. There will come a time, probably sooner rather than later, when outreach will no longer be effective, and self defense will have to take precedence, even if that means subsections of the public will be shocked and disturbed by it. The sad fact is, the faster we wake people up, the faster the establishment will degrade social stability and destroy constitutional liberties. A physical fight is inevitable exactly because they MAKE it inevitable. Worrying about staying in the good graces of the general populace or getting honest representatives elected is, at a certain point, meaningless. I find it rather foolish to presume that Americans over the next decade or two or three have the time needed to somehow inoculate the system from within. In fact, I'm starting to doubt that strategy has any merit whatsoever.

Second, the idea that a movement needs a “majority” of public backing to shift the path of a society is an old wives tale. Ultimately, most people throughout history are nothing more than spectators in life, watching from the sidelines while smaller, ideologically dedicated groups battle for superiority. Global developments are decided by true believers; never by ineffectual gawkers. Some of these groups are honorable, and some of them are not so honorable. Almost all of them have been in the minority, yet they wield the power to change the destiny of the whole of the nation because most people do not participate in their own futures. They merely place their heads between their legs and wait for the storm to pass.

All revolutions begin in the minds and hearts of so-called “outsiders”. To expect any different is to deny the past, and to assume that a majority is needed to achieve change is to deny reality.

Third, I'm not sure why non-aggression champions see the argument of statistical chance as relevant. When all is said and done, the “odds” of success in any fight against oligarchy DO NOT MATTER. Either you fight, or you are enslaved. The question of victory is an afterthought.

Technological advantage, superior numbers, advanced training, all of these things pale in comparison to force of will, as the Finnish proved during the Winter War. Some battles during that conflict consisted of less than a hundred Finns versus tens-of-thousands of soviets. Yet, at the end of the war, the Russians lost 3500 tanks, 500 aircraft, and had sustained over 125,000 dead (official numbers). The Finns lost 25,000 men. For every dead Finn, the soviets lost at least five. This is the cold hard reality behind guerrilla and attrition warfare, and such tactics are not to be taken lightly.

Do we go to the Finnish and tell them that standing against a larger, more well armed foe is “futile”? Do we tell them that their knives and bolt action rifles are no match for tanks and fighter planes? And by extension, do we go to East Asia today and tell the Taliban that their 30 year old AK-47's are no match for predator drones and cruise missiles? Obviously, victory in war is not as simple as having the biggest gun and only the uneducated believe otherwise.

The Virtues Of Violence

The word “violence” comes with numerous negative connotations. I believe this is due to the fact that in most cases violence is used by the worst of men to get what they want from the weak. Meeting violence with violence, though, is often the only way to stop such abuses from continuing.

At Alt-Market, we tend to discuss measures of non-participation (not non-aggression) because all resistance requires self-sustainability. Americans cannot fight the criminal establishment if they rely on the criminal establishment. Independence is more about providing one's own necessities than it is about pulling a trigger. But, we have no illusions about what it will take to keep the independence that we build. This is where many conceptual solutions are severely lacking.

If the system refuses to let you walk away, what do you do? If the tyrants would rather make the public suffer than admit that your social or economic methodology is better for all, how do you remove them? When faced with a cabal of psychopaths with deluded aspirations of godhood, what amount of reason will convince them to step down from their thrones?

I'm sorry to say, but these questions are only answered with violence.

The Liberty Movement doesn't need to agree on the “usefulness” of physical action because it is coming regardless. The only things left to discern are when and how. Make no mistake, one day each and every one of us will be faced with a choice – to fight, or to throw our hands in the air and pray they don't shoot us anyway. I certainly can't speak for the rest of the movement, but in my opinion only those who truly believe in liberty will stand with rifle in hand when that time comes. A freedom fighter is measured by how much of himself he is willing to sacrifice, and how much of his humanity he holds onto in the process. Fear, death, discomfort; none of this matters. There is no conundrum. There is no uncertainty. There are only the chains of self-defeat, or the determination of the gun. The sooner we all embrace this simple fact, the sooner we can move on and deal with the dark problem before us.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ften-necessary
__________________
The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals. Lysander Spooner
Fred O'Malley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 08:25 AM   #2
james von brunn
Dirlewanger Brigade
 
james von brunn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: secret nazi base, Antartica
Posts: 333
Rep Power: 18
james von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud ofjames von brunn has much to be proud of
Lightbulb

violence works...it gets attention, it gets respect and, above all, it gets results;

ultimately, all political issues are decided by violence.....that's how the very concept of the nation state originated!!

the Finnish example is a good one.....
the way i see it, the reasons that they khyboshed the USSR were:

i/they were better led;
(the USSR military was, @ that stage, by and large, controlled by incompetent kike commisars)

ii/they were better trained;
(the officer corps of the USSR military had been gutted by Stalin's purges....and....their senior NCOs and junior officer corps up to the rank of major were too scared to make decisions that conflicted with the kike commisars)

iii/they were better motivated
(....the Finns were fighting for kith, kin and kind.....the USSR, during the so-called "Winter War", was fighting for....wtf exactly?....international communism? ....who TF would "lay down their life" for that stoopid fucking filth?.....similarly....who TF would "lay down their life" for ZOG & its shibboleths of political correctness, eh?.....which, of course, explains how a bunch of stubby brown people armed with 60+ yr old rifles, 40+ yr old rocket launchers and home made bombs triggered by TV remotes, garage-door openers, mobile 'phones and oven timers were able to kick the 'Kwa `s arse in both Iraq and the 'Stan )

the USSR only started getting results on the battle-field well after Operation Barbarossa began.....almost six months later, in fact......

why?......

my understanding of it is that Stalin "seen the light".....he limited the powers of the political commisars (letting the trained military commanders like Zhukov make the actual battle-field decisions....instead of political appointees), he re-openend the churches and he re-directed the whole focus of the war towards a nationalist perspective....."the Great Patriotic War".....(same thing the North Vietnamese done!).....now the Russians were, like the Finns, fighting for "kith, kin and kind".....and defence of the MotherLand.....once that happened....and soldiers were prepared to die for what they believed in....they started getting results......(who TF in their right mind would be prepared to die for ZOG and its politically correct BS?)


JvB
__________________
fortuna favet fortibus


i couldn't give a "XXXX"....have a coldie on me!!

james von brunn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 08:31 AM   #3
Fred O'Malley
Administrator
 
Fred O'Malley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: American Dystopian Utopia
Posts: 61,236
Rep Power: 50
Fred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations God
Default

Violence is only politics carried to its highest level.
__________________
The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals. Lysander Spooner
Fred O'Malley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 02:26 PM   #4
Fire Dog
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,627
Rep Power: 0
Fire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations God
Default

When violence has had enough, the war is returned to the Intellectual and Diplomatic front, where issues are ultimately solved.

Admin edit: Under the banner of the victors on the field of battle.

Fire Dog Edit: Or on under both banners at a mutually acceptable place once both sides have decided they've wasted enough
time, money, damage to their own nations from waging war, and enough blood of their children has been poured out upon the earth.

Last edited by Fire Dog; 01-04-2014 at 03:54 PM.
Fire Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 03:37 PM   #5
KennewickMan
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 418
Rep Power: 0
KennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud ofKennewickMan has much to be proud of
Default On the issue of advocating violence in America today

It is clear to me that we reached our sorry state in America as a result of lack of proper political activism from at least 1913 but more likely since the 1840s already. The last healthy stage of this nation was the literal uprising against Masonic takeover and the subsequent activity of the Anti-Masonic Party of America after 1828. As we know the events were triggered by the murder of William Morgan a writer of anti-Masonic persuasion. (1) It makes an awful lot of sense to study the above events for those with a deeper interest of today’s politics as the present political structure is the direct result of the fact that Americans allowed their Masons to take full control of their society and this control mushroomed into a full scale destruction of America while becoming an instrument in the destruction of the White Race as well. We all know that at the top levels this Masonic activity was heavily overlapping with the Jewish banking elite and the Federal Reserve both in England and the U.S. The latest reminder being the sweet but ugly looking daughter of the Clintons, Chelsea marrying the naughty but ugly looking Jewish investment banker Marc Mezvinsky in 2010 in a multimillion dollar well publicized hysteria. The Clinton’s were tied to the upper levels of the Jewish banking elite by marriage like so many English and American Masonic political families of the last hundred years.

Summarized: Any violence within a population group where the enemies of the nation are not clearly defined is totally useless and will most likely result in further self-destruction, therefore it should be avoided.

I also would like to state that I fully stand by my statements of last night on these two threads;

http://whitenations.com/showthread.php?t=3718

and

http://whitenations.com/showthread.p...7724#post27724

1, http://www.dailypaul.com/62031/the-anti-masonic-party
KennewickMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 05:48 PM   #6
dakotalady
Senior Member
 
dakotalady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: ND
Posts: 1,027
Rep Power: 20
dakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant future
Default

The problem I have with wars is that it seems like they always set up circumstances for another war. It seems like the key to me is just who can control the sheeple. Who can pick up on what will move the sheeple to rebel, what will make them mad enough, what will cause them enough outrage in their personal lives that brings them to the point of being willing to get involved? Propaganda and real consequences to peoples lives. It just seems like the key to me is just pushing the buttons of the people.

I think it's easier to pay people to fight or draft them, making war a popular choice, but I think there's also proof that nonviolence works if it's deliberate engagement and someone who is able to push the right buttons of the masses if you're talking revolution.

I want to finish Gene Sharp's "Waging nonviolent struggle." I find it convincing from what I've read so far.
__________________
"If you want to know who your friends are, get yourself a jail sentence." - Charles Bukowski
dakotalady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 05:57 PM   #7
Fred O'Malley
Administrator
 
Fred O'Malley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: American Dystopian Utopia
Posts: 61,236
Rep Power: 50
Fred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations GodFred O'Malley is a White Nations God
Default

We, the whites who want to live free, have no platform unless we take it from the kikes by force.
__________________
The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals. Lysander Spooner
Fred O'Malley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 06:07 PM   #8
dakotalady
Senior Member
 
dakotalady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: ND
Posts: 1,027
Rep Power: 20
dakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant futuredakotalady has a brilliant future
Default

Quote: Originally Posted by Fred O'Malley View Post

We, the whites who want to live free, have no platform unless we take it from the kikes by force.

I think the internet is helpful because it seems like Jews have less control over that at least. It seems like the cable news is becoming increasingly irrelevant (which was hard for me to previously imagine it could get worse but by gosh it's gotten worse). The less people watch the "televitz" the less power they will have with propaganda. The less money people have, the more likely the televitz bill is going to go, and the more likely they are to choose to use the internet over the TV. I just think there might be hope for change that doesn't benefit the Jews.

ESPECIALLY because young people do not trust or like the big banks. I think any powerful message in a future major economic crisis would probably not benefit the Jews because I think it would pretty much have to be against the big banks. Right now it seems like the only defense they have is laughing at people who are against big banks, and that isn't going to work forever.
__________________
"If you want to know who your friends are, get yourself a jail sentence." - Charles Bukowski
dakotalady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 06:43 PM   #9
Fire Dog
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,627
Rep Power: 0
Fire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations GodFire Dog is a White Nations God
Default

There are many kinds of force to be used.

A wise general uses them wisely.
Fire Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2014, 08:18 PM   #10
Aldolphus Mueller
Proud Neo-Amish!
 
Aldolphus Mueller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,496
Rep Power: 68
Aldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations GodAldolphus Mueller is a White Nations God
Default

Quote: Originally Posted by Fire Dog View Post

There are many kinds of force to be used.

A wise general uses them wisely.

Removing one's consent to be governed sounds pretty sound to me. No violence involved.
__________________
Consider Linux as your OS of choice and save a little privacy. Save money too.
Do not assume I agree with the opinions made by other posters in these forums. They own their opinions, I own mine.
My Right of Free Speech is secured, NOT GRANTED, by the First Amendment and state and federal constitutions.

I do not provide legal advice. If you need legal advice see a lawyer
.
Aldolphus Mueller is offline   Reply With Quote
Post New Thread Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
america, masons zionism, violence


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:28 PM.
© White Nations™ . All rights reserved.
No part of White Nations Forum may be reproduced without consent.
Design by Creative IT World
Creator Web Team: Creative IT World

Blue Eyed Devils - Beating & Kicking (MP3 Audio)
WN Forum Comment, Video & Lyrics