Making Statists REALLY Uncomfortable in NH

[kola]

are there rats upon the bloody ship, matey?

KOla

[Bald Eagle]

Try not to think in such absolute terms.  The language that you use largely determines the way you think about something.  Peter Christ of LEAP spoke of "failed policies" rather than a "war on drugs."  If you lock yourself into the war analogy, no one wants to lose a war, be a loser, or admit "defeat."  If you acknowledge and accept the fact that we are operating under bad policies, then people can readily get on board with changing those policies.

Get into people's heads and learn how they work.
Observe how you yourself tick.

Sometimes you need to delay your presentation, sometimes you need to use abstract vs concrete examples in your arguments or vice versa, and sometimes you need to "fool" people into discussing Topic A by starting out with Topic B and smoothly changing gears.

People generally go with their first impressions, making it a psychological hurdle to change their mindset, and they also don't want to lose face by admitting that they were wrong - and they really don't want anyone showing them that they were wrong. 

You've got to sit back for a second and evaluate you audience and then craft a presentation for them.  Get them to add things to the conversation that support your position and undermine the authoritarian position.  Then lead your way into discussing Topic A, where the person has already made their own personal comments and has somewhat committed themselves to being in your camp vs in your adversary's camp.  Set them up to be "right".  Create an atmosphere where your audience can feel good about "coming up with the answer themselves" rather that having the answer given to them in a lecture, or worse yet, scolded because their answer was wrong.

Again, this is not absolute.  If you're going to point out someone's error, try to do it in as concrete and irrefutable a manner as possible, but try to get on their good side first and then lightheartedly expose their utterly indefensible position - with dramatic and entertaining flair if possible.

The goal is to get the simply uninformed, the excusably confused, and the fence sitters to listen to what you've got to offer with as little negative predisposition as possible.  Keep in mind that sometimes all you need to do is Let The Topic Go and come back to it some other time.  Repetition is the key. Ignore their attempts to get you into and argument, and just limit yourself to factual statements.  Never ever ever ever ever ever stop.  Either they use their brains and start to agree with you simply because you're RIGHT, or they will get tired of trying to argue with you especially when you are always principled and consistent and they are not.

We've set off some pretty damned big explosions in the Atomic Age, but I have yet to see anything resembling the effects of glacier movement or water (the Grand Canyon) or tectonic plate movement.

There is a time for swift and overwhelming action, but you need to know when that time is.
Premature action can be worse than no action at all, since you tip your hand and reveal your cards.
You've got to set up the Dominoes before you tip the first one over.  Let's get out there and set up OUR Dominoes so that theirs are too few in comparison to matter.  The more Dominoes you have set up, the bigger the Revolution will be when you wake up and say, "Yes, Claire Wolfe, it's time."

[Kat Kanning]

You sound like you're hungering for that time.  Do you have any idea what war is really like?  Why would you ever want it?

[srqrebel]

Thank you, Bald Eagle!!!  Those are all really good points.  Sometimes I think I must have a long ways to go in terms of communication skills, because it sure seems like I'm talking to a wall most of the time

---

If you want to be effective, you must work in harmony with the nature of whatever medium you are working with, not against it -- unless you have discovered how to break the laws of nature  

Since the medium we must work with in order to effect social change is the human organism, it follows that our actions and communications must absolutely be in harmony with human nature in order to be effective.

From that it follows that by carefully observing, understanding, and applying the laws of human nature, one exponentially inceases one's odds of being effective, as well as one's overall degree of effectiveness.  That is pretty absolute.

At least one point you made is well worth repeating: Premature action can be worse than no action at all, since you tip your hand and reveal your cards.  I would add that rushing blindly into action, meaning without careful forethought, usually results in unintentional self-defeat, even without revealing your cards.  That is because your odds of being on target are pretty damn slim when you don't even know the nature of your target

[Bald Eagle]

You sound like you're hungering for that time.  Do you have any idea what war is really like?  Why would you ever want it?

I know what the constant fear of living in a police state (NJ) is, and I know how authoritarian demands to lick their boots poison the soul.  I know the weight of the chains that traitors in our government place upon us with tax upon tax and rule upon regulation. 

I've watched enough war movies, news footage, and internet video of actual killings to have a vague idea of what war might be like. 

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security"

I hold to those Rights and duties.  I plan to free myself from the chains of slavery.
War is between governments. 

"It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
No one said anything about war. 
Claire just has practical ideas about what to do with snakes, weasels, and parasites.

Why would you ever want to go on living like a slave and watching while everyone else is enslaved?
Today's meager amount of freedom was bought with blood.  I don't yearn for more, I just acknowledge the price that was paid and accept the realistic probability of paying the same price.

Unless you want to watch while the jackboot stomps on our human faces forever.
Criminals are criminals.  Self defense is morally justifiable. 
I simply don't recoil from a distasteful task when the two intersect.
Apathy, cowardice, and "pacifism" has resulted in incomprehensible numbers of people being murdered by their own governments.  Not just murdered - shamed, degraded, tortured, mutilated, broken, and discarded like trash.  Why is it wrong to want to make sure that doesn't happen again, here?
Why is it better to wait until the cattle cars are on their way to the crematoria?

I never want it to get to that point, and I'm here trying to make sure that they never push it that far ... BUT WHAT IF THEY DO?!

WHAT IF THEY DO, KAT?  THEN WHAT?  I never see that question get answered.
Ever.  So it's pointless to have this "discussion" again.

I want to live in a world full of fun, loving people like you and Russell and Jim and Lauren and Roger and everyone else.  I give freely of my time and labor and wealth to try and create a society where that can be possible.  I just don't shut my eyes to the fact that predators and outright monsters have to be dealt with to have that kind of world.

[kola]

IMO (and it may not be the opinon of others here), Bald Eagle always presents interesting (logical and simplistic) comments.

Personally I am stuck in the middle of both positions. (violent vs non violent)

I would love to get "change" peacefully but as it becomes fruitless what will be the actually "breaking point" to resort to other means of action?

From my first experiences that brought about my awareness of this "police state/nazi presence" it has only gotten worse. And in the last 2 years it has escalated to the point where it is out of control.

What are the options? Continue to fight peacefully and continue to get the same results? Or maybe change our methods of peace and civil dis? and if so, how can we do it and be more effective? In the meantime IMO, the police state warriors are winning the battles.

Once the commonfolk are backed into a corner, poked, prodded, beaten and killed, their options become reduced to only two choices,..... submit or fight in self defense.

Personally, I choose peace over violence...but there may come a tipping point that will change my position.

If this post in unacceptable for this forum I will respectfully understand if it is deleted.

Kola   

   

[MaineShark]

Personally, I choose peace over violence...but there may come a tipping point that will change my position.

That's an amusing statement from someone who's notion of armed self-defense is to carry a weapon only practically suitable for sneaking up and murdering someone.

In the meanwhile, people like Bald Eagle and I will own and carry effective means of self-defense, and hope not to need them.  I know for a fact that I will not hesitate if the need arises.  Until such time happens (again), I will continue to be as gentle a person as I can be.

Joe

[KBCraig]

The natural, spontaneous response to any perceived attack on one's self, including one's personal honor, is self-defense.  This is true even for individuals who do not understand or respect the equal sovereignty of others, such as cops.  Perhaps an extremely mature individual would consciously override this impulse, and give it some rational thought -- but my experience is that most people are quite reactionary, especially government stooges.

When you condemn a person, he may think "What an asshole" or "What a moron", but never "Gee, maybe he's right -- I am a bad person.  I should change myself".

It's interesting that police are taught to use specific language when approaching people, in order to defuse anger and/or deflect the anger away from the officer.

For example, if you're pulled over for speeding, a cop who sticks to his training will say:
"The reason for this stop today is excessive speed."

He will not say either "I" or "you".

If he says, "I stopped you because..." it leads the driver to automatically blame the cop. If he says, "You were stopped because... " it is an accusation and creates defensiveness. In both cases tension and hostility go up.

The rather odd phrase that they're taught to use doesn't roll naturally off the tongue (which is why too many fall away from using it), and it also doesn't sound quite right to the ear. It requires actual processing by the brain, instead of hitting any number of hot buttons.

Just thought I'd toss in that little bit about the psychology of language.

[srqrebel]

Thank you, KB!

It has long seemed to me that the agents of force (both police and politicians) have a deeper than average understanding of human nature, and apply it liberally to manipulate the public.  This is the first time I have actually received hard evidence of this.

This is not rocket science, however.  Human nature is quite easily understood through careful observation, and the application of its laws is the most powerful tool we have.

Since the natural state of the human organism is a sovereign individual, it yearns for freedom (at a subconscious level), just as a wild bird in a cage yearns to be set free.  Our captors actually use the powerful knowledge of human nature to keep their captives pacified in the unnatural captive state. 

Imagine how much more powerful the same knowledge is when applied toward setting humans free!

[John Edward Mercier]

The last time I was stopped (october). The officer said 'Do you know why I stopped you?'
So it must not be universally trained.

[David]

Statism is an idea.  You cannot kill an idea. 
It is a fantasy to believe that a very small minority, (libertarian leaning folks) will ever be able to control an armed uprising.  Republican leaning statists or Democrat leaning statists will control any rebellion, and we will still be in the same shit we are in now, except with an overwhelming sense of fear and hostility that comes from war. 
This is the headquarters of the Non violent revolution, I'd like to keep it that way please.  Thank You. 

[Lloyd Danforth]

IMO (and it may not be the opinon of others here), Bald Eagle always presents interesting (logical and simplistic) comments.

Personally I am stuck in the middle of both positions. (violent vs non violent)

I would love to get "change" peacefully but as it becomes fruitless what will be the actually "breaking point" to resort to other means of action?

From my first experiences that brought about my awareness of this "police state/nazi presence" it has only gotten worse. And in the last 2 years it has escalated to the point where it is out of control.

What are the options? Continue to fight peacefully and continue to get the same results? Or maybe change our methods of peace and civil dis? and if so, how can we do it and be more effective? In the meantime IMO, the police state warriors are winning the battles.

Once the commonfolk are backed into a corner, poked, prodded, beaten and killed, their options become reduced to only two choices,..... submit or fight in self defense.

Personally, I choose peace over violence...but there may come a tipping point that will change my position.

If this post in unacceptable for this forum I will respectfully understand if it is deleted.

Kola   

   

Boy!  You're on the bubble with that radical stuff!  Better watch out!  I had my finger on the button! 

[Bald Eagle]

Statism is an idea.  You cannot kill an idea. 

The Vogons did.

And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, a girl sitting on her own in a small café in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything.

Sadly, however, before she could get to a phone to tell anyone about it, a terrible, stupid catastrophe occurred, and the idea was lost forever.

It is a fantasy to believe that a very small minority, (libertarian leaning folks) will ever be able to control an armed uprising.  Republican leaning statists or Democrat leaning statists will control any rebellion, and we will still be in the same shit we are in now, except with an overwhelming sense of fear and hostility that comes from war. 

We weren't discussing control, armed uprisings, rebellions, or war.
We were discussing what happens when THEY come through your door at 3am to initiate violence against you because they (don't) have a (no-knock) warrant for someone, and they don't really care if it's actually you or even if they're at the right address.  They might even beat you for a while with lead-weighted gloves or strike you across the face a few times with the butt of a rifle just for fun before they protect and serve you with some dislocated joints and compound fractures and then end every idea you ever had with something chambered in 10mm Jackboot.

http://www.elitetacticalsources.com/prodimages/Tactical%20Entry%20and%20Rsecue%20Tools/Lbhdegb.jpeg

This is the headquarters of the Non violent revolution, I'd like to keep it that way please.  Thank You. 

Great.  Tell THEM that.  Let me know how it all works out for you.

I'm right there with you on plan A, it's unfortunate that too many folks here don't believe in Plan B, I'll do what I can for you when it comes to Plan C, and I just like to give a thought or two to Plan D before it's a Thoughtcrime to do so.

Planning to be prepared for a disaster is not plotting the disaster itself.

[FTL_Ian]

Planning to be prepared for a disaster is not plotting the disaster itself.

[David]

Quote<We were discussing what happens when THEY come through your door at 3am to initiate violence against you because they (don't) have a (no-knock) warrant for someone, and they don't really care if it's actually you or even if they're at the right address.  They might even beat you for a while with lead-weighted gloves or strike you across the face a few times with the butt of a rifle just for fun before they protect and serve you with some dislocated joints and compound fractures and then end every idea you ever had with something chambered in 10mm Jackboot.>

All true.  But if I defend myself, they will with certainty kill me.  Slowly as they attempted with Cory Maye, or quickly as they did with Kathrine Johnston.
Most statists are not evil.  The legacy I want is on of sustained peace.  I too am tired of begging for my freedom, but killing to get it is not the answer.