Like I said, I'm examining my own premises now. One note of encouragement in your comments about the American Revolution - Maybe we don't need as many Objectivists as we think to get through this.

" I wrote my piece to suggest a methodology of the former, and do not yet advocate the latter". That's the first methodology I've seen of the former, I really appreciate that. I do worry that the latter will be something that happens TO us before I'm ready though.

Paraphrasing what you replied to another commenter; "Someone's gotta have the balls to start talking about it."

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Unfortunately, the wait for "enough people with the proper philosophy" looks eternal, or at least long after everyone in Galt's Gulch, their children, and their grandchildren are dead and gone. Atlas Shrugged was, as most here agree, seminal philosophy, striking in its logic and clarity, but I think most would agree that the US is less, not more, free than when it was published.

One misconception about the American Revolution that I've seen repeated numerous times is that it was the product of some sort of majoritarian upheaval. It was not. It was led by a small group of patriots who were willing to risk everything they had to overthrow British rule of the American colony. While nobody can say for certain, I would be suprised if a majority of colonists supported revolution when it began. Fortunately, the British had the same problems that always plague occupying powers trying to fight insurrections in far away places, and enough colonists joined the cause, that the British were defeated. However, the impetus for violent revolution, and for the subsequent formation of the government, came from a small group. If that small group had waited for an overwhelming consensus among the colonists as they patiently explained to them the virtues of freedome and limited government, there would have been no revolution, and many of them might have been hanged for treason.

It bears repeating: if you're waiting to get "enough people with the proper philosophy," good luck. I see no way the omelet of liberty and constrained, limited government will be restored in America without breaking the eggs of civil disobedience and more probably, violent revolt. I wrote my piece to suggest a methodology of the former, and do not yet advocate the latter.

I have been thinking about how to reply on this post since khalling pointed me to it the other day in response to another topic I was pondering. I immediately read your article as the idea is familiar but I hadn't spent much time thinking about the how. Then I read all the comments as that is the part I love most about this site, the bandying about of the ideas from different perspectives but flowing from the same philosophy, even at different levels of understanding. Not to "create" my opinion but in part to make sure my opinion is informed. To add to my knowledge of the subject.

After much thought I have to say that I cannot accept the premise of your article, that it is inevitable, that the US government is doomed to fail. However, I also cannot say where I would draw that line and so I have no reasonable argument against that premise and so I am still examining mine.

With all that said, the best I can do is copy a comment I posted in reply to this comment http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/2a... on this post http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/2a...


"My biggest fear is that you may be right. But that would mean that our only option to regain (achieve is probably the better word) our freedom is through bloodshed. That bothers me because I will soon be too old to be worth much in any kind of battle so the sooner it happened the better and that means giving up on any other options sooner, rather than later.
But then what? We lose, history is recorded by the winners. We win, what then? I believe it was Ayn Rand that wrote (though I haven't been able to find it again to verify) that the Constitution of the United States could not have been written at any other time in history. Never prior to nor since then have all the conditions been right to accomplish what the founders did. The opportunity, the geography, but most importantly the philosophy. And that is what doesn't exist now, at least not in great enough numbers. Yet. If we had a war now, and we managed to survive, we would not even be able to rebuild what we have much less the free country that we so desire. There are just not enough people that can agree upon how it should be rebuilt.
But I think we have another option. And we are, in a way, doing it right now. Or we should be. Discussing the ideas, educating ourselves and others in the philosophy that is the root of the freedom that I think most people want (can't say all) but so many don't understand it's cause. This is the movement that must grow in order to save the good ol USA. It's the only way. And if there were enough people with the proper philosophy to rebuild the country after a war then there wouldn't need to be a war in the first place."

Edit; Lost my Permalink virginity. Hope it works.

It was on the "Global Jihad vs. Islam Enlightenment" thread:

Posted by samrigel 4 days, 17 hours ago
Tuco: It doesn't matter, I'll kill them all.

Discretion is not cowardice. Foolhardiness is not courage. Truths are not bromides.

Not meaning to denigrate LS and MA's rapport; just observing the emotional undercurrents driving the unpleasant conflicts hereabouts and in the world at large.

I was not referring to straightlinelogic. I am a fan of his (bought his book). It was in a comment on another thread. I'll try to find and reference it.

You make some great points and the US is a police state already. I personally cannot believe more people have not acted out. It is important to take a stand, like the rancher did in Nevada.

Peter Schiff's dad took a stand on taxes and after a show trial they threw him in jail, which is where he still is. Very sad and it makes me very angry. I personally decided that I was not willing to go to jail or put myself at inordinate risk for that. I also have no military skills, so I would not have been much help in Nevada (it was too bad the guy was so inarticulate). However, the founding fathers had to put their lives on the line eventually to win their freedom.

The only cautionary bromide you left out was "discretion is the better part of valor," spoken by Shakespeare's biggest coward.

Let's not do anything precipitous. There are large numbers of end-times Christians hoping to accelerate doomsday and hasten the Rapture.

And let's not assume all people are corrupt, whether through "original sin" or stupidity, in a malevolent Universe. You would not include yourself among them, would you?

And never sacrifice a greater value for a lesser value--your life for uncertain martyrdom. "Give me liberty or give me death" is a great quote, but it's better to live to fight another day. While there's life, there's hope.

Never underestimate the power of ideas, even though it's harder to push rational ideas up a mountain than to let moribund ideas become a plunging avalanche.

Beware of acting upon unthinking emotions. Feelings are value judgments, responses to internalized values or premises, not primaries. Check your premises honestly. Know the difference between reasoning and rationalization. Recognize that ideas, like living organisms, want to live, and pernicious ones will even kill their host. Don't let those infect you.

There is no afterlife. You don't get a second chance to do it over. Get it right the first time.

Thanks for making my point. That's why I suggested a preemptive, nonviolent, albeit revolutionary, strategy.

3rd party candidates in the debates: Check out Gary Johnson and the Our America Initiative. They are working on breaking the 2-party monopoly by suing the Commission on Presidential Debates: https://www.ouramericainitiative.com/pre...

I'm not sure asserting as an individual one would resist is "plotting violent revolution." Is that what you would have said to Patrick Henry's Common Sense at the time? In order for Liberty to exist, individuals must keep it. we are not a democracy. Plenty of people running around leading positive lives and are excellent role models for success and flourishing while the country has gone to hell in a handbasket. The whole point of the thread was to assert that time is running out, know your enemies, will you comply, speculate about the future and make a plan. straight does not advocate violence. But you seem to not even advocate for self-defense, which I find odd. If you do, then why not address it here?

wait a minute. Within the context of the discussion, I think it's clear to what they are referring to is a bit of relief from the bias in the media, an overbearing administration passing laws that are antithetical to reason, the PC pressures, etc. it is nice to not have to start every discussion with disagreement on the most basic premises. it's not group think just because a handful of individuals find out they have similar opinions on matters. There's plenty of disagreement on this forum. I think you've mis-characterized what LS and MelissaA are enjoying

Thank you khaling. As for revolution, I believe it was clear from my post that it would be as a matter of self-defense, a necessary choice when the only other alternative was tyranny and slavery. I did not use the phrase "kill them all" in either the post or my subsequent comments.

um, who on this thread said "kill them all?" I'm confused. straightlinelinelogic is about as anti-war as you get in this forum

"Not the voice for the gulch"... neither are those in this thread advocating "kill them all"!

Confirmation bias. Matching memes. This dynamic works in all groups, even radical jihadists. Promotes kin survival, encourages genocide of opposing groups, even among some on this thread. Irrational emotions go wild, reason gets shouted down. ewv, thanks for your patient explications; I'm with you.

I'm afraid you are correct.

yes

Thanks for the point up ed. It's just a non-producer person here that doesn't like being disagreed with.

But more to the point, we live in perilous times, and I see more to come this year and next.