A Gun Nut's Notion of "Subtlety"

[paft.livejournal.com]

Adam Kokesh: We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.

So Adam Kokesh has a GREAT idea! A thousand men marching on Washington DC on July 4th, carrying loaded weapons.

Kokesh says that his intent is "to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated [and] cower in submission to tyranny," which is pretty rich coming from someone whose response to legislation he dislikes is to wave a loaded gun at the legislators. It's especially interesting, if not especially reassuring, to read his comments about the marchers' commitment to non-violence.

There's a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.

All of which, of course, depends on every single marcher's interpretation of being approached "respectfully." This frankly sounds more like a barely veiled... excuse me... "SUBTLE" threat that Kokesh thinks they should start shooting if things don't go the way they want it to.

He elaborated further on that same Facebook page:

(Emphasis Added) Now that it's undeniable that this is going to happen, allow me to make clear how. There will be coordination with DC law enforcement prior to the event. I will recommend that they do the best they can to honor their oaths and escort us on our route. Failing to provide that commitment to safety, we will either be informed that we will only be allowed up to a certain point where we would be arrested. If this is the case, we will approach that point as a group and if necessary, I will procede to volunteer myself to determine what their actual course of action with someone crossing the line will be at which point fellow marchers will have the choice of joining me one at a time in a peaceful, orderly manner, or turning back to the National Cemetery.

Okay, Everybody clear on this?

I am a woman who wrote graduate papers on Henry James. I attend a Bloomsday celebration of Joyce's Ulysses on a regular basis, and listen with pleasure and comprehension to the readings. I've read every word of Mrs. Dalloway, The Sound and the Fury and The Life and Opinions of Tristam Shandy. Mandarin writing holds no terrors for me. But I have to confess Adam Kokesh's "subtlety" here defeats me. As near as I can figure out, he's saying that, as the leader of a thousand individuals marching with loaded weapons into our capital, he will generously instruct the DC police on how to deal with someone "crossing the line," backed up by lots of armed marchers crowding around and helping him in this negotiation.

As Crooks and Liars Crooks and Liars puts it -- What could possibly go wrong?

Especially given what he Tweeted last week:

When the government comes to take your guns, you can shoot government agents, or submit to slavery.

Comments

[vehemencet-t.livejournal.com]

Do explain why, if you were unlucky enough to be born in some kind of fringe racist/religious/whatever community, thinking here according to the principles of complete personal freedom insofar as it respects that of another, why you simply couldn't find a community without such stupidity and more in line with your interests and beliefs?

I agree with you that there is obvious room for abuses in the scenario I very loosely describe and solutions should surely be thought about. It's difficult to predict what would be short of very brief historical examples, as we've never truly had a free society.

However, I think it is true that there is even more room, and incentive, for abuses in the current scenario.

I am asking you to be logical and explain what gives a special minority class--i.e. the heads of state and their agents--the special right to impose their will on people like you and me and everybody else? It is unjustified and illogical.

[paft.livejournal.com]

v: Do explain why, if you were unlucky enough to be born in some kind of fringe racist/religious/whatever community, thinking here according to the principles of complete personal freedom insofar as it respects that of another, why you simply couldn't find a community without such stupidity and more in line with your interests and beliefs?

Because in an America that's been reduced to a patchwork of groups steadily evolving and consolidating into strong-man fiefdoms, neither communication nor movement is going to be free and easy. What, I'm supposed to hop on the internet, do a search of nearby groups to find one that isn't going to enslave or oppress me and then gas up my car and hit the interstate? That presumes:

A: access to both a computer and the internet, hardly guaranteed if I'm already in my groups bad books. And even if I were still able to get to a computer --
B: consistent electrical power, which isn't even likely in a country broken down into different, no doubt frequently hostile and warring communities
C: Open and honest communication from these communities about their philosophies and agenda rather than happyface propaganda.

But let's say word of mouth has reached me (somehow) about some shangri-la of a community where I would be allowed to live my life in relative peace. Now I have to get there. Again -- how? I'd have to:

A: Escape from my group which may not be willing to relinquish either the labor I can provide as a slave, or the entertainment and satisfaction derived from executing me.
B: Once I've escaped, manage to navigate a now fractured and unpredictable landscape of fractured road systems, many of which may involve tolls, damaged structures and bridges, and hostile groups.
C: Hope and pray that this Shangri La actually exists, or still exists and doesn't get taken over by another group before I somehow manage to get there.

This isn't a free society. It's a @#)! cable news sci-fi adventure series, and as appealing as that brand of "freedom" may be to people who fantasize about holding off bands of marauding reds with their Bushmasters, most of the rest of us would prefer the freedom to spend our lives doing something other boning up on our marksmanship, strategy, battlefield medicine and the barter system.

What gives some people the right to make laws? The political system and social contract which we have set up, which includes the right to vote and have some say in the legislation passed. It's imperfect, but the alternative is going to result in freedom only for the strong, the healthy, and the wealthy. Take away the laws and the law enforcers, and the result is going to be a dramatic decrease in freedom for the vast majority of Americans.