“It seems like you’re insinuating”… (The Insurgency in Dallas)

Friday, July 8, 2016
Posted in category police state

I received a shrieking, cowardly email from someone at “42c84e+1f5b26b2b76eko303xy48y9z34@guerrillamail.com” in response to my post yesterday on the killing of Alton Sterling. People often use these temporary emails for sending hate mail for which they do not have to back up, and instead, they can “hit send” and run the other way. Here’s his letter, in full:

“thus far in 2016 killer cops have taken 505 lives by gunshot, as well as 990 in 2015. There’s only one way to stop this, and voting ain’t it.”

Please elaborate on what the “it” is that will stop the spate of killer cops. I felt like I was left hanging after reading this post of yours.

It seems like you’re insinuating that firing upon police officers is a viable option since you’re so utterly convinced that the method of voting is a waste of time. [Bold mine.]

What did you mean, if not that? If voting “ain’t it”, then what the hell is “it”?

It’d be nice if you could add a clarification post to LRC to explain this more thoroughly. I’m sure I’m not the only one that was left with the impression you’re condoning the murder of police as the only remedy.

Don’t respond to this email. It’s a temporary address and I’m closing the window as soon as I hit send.

If this shrill individual had known of my past writings and principles, he would know that I advocate not voting as withdrawing consent from the current system under which we are all, essentially, slaves of our Masters. I have not voted in 20+ years. But then, he acknowledges, in one sentence, that he is aware I am convinced that voting is a “waste of time.” Where did I call for the “murder of police?” Of course, I didn’t, but somehow he is very good at drawing illogical leaps from something I don’t write, and have never written, to his biased conclusions. Because, in essence, this type of insurgency we see in Dallas is not effective, and it will only serve to further enforce the Police State, step up gun control, inspire martial law, and enrich the centralizing powers of Leviathan. This is not a good war, nor one that can be won on the side of Liberty.

Certainly, LewRockwell.com has been a leading proponent of the anti-voting philosophy throughout the years. In a time when the presidential election is a poster child for the demise of western civilization, understanding the importance of not voting should be front-and-center on our radar maps.

But I’ll let Butler Shaffer make the case for not voting and explain that the only way Leviathan can be stopped is by the serfs withdrawing their willingness to be ruled under the guise of “democratic participation.”

The illusion of a short-term reduction in the rate of increase of state power clouds the longer-term consequences inherent in political participation. Political systems derive their power not from guns and prisons, but from the willingness of those who are to be ruled to expend their energies on their behalf.

…At no period in my lifetime have the opportunities for reversing the dehumanizing nature of politically dominated societies been greater. Leviathan is dying as a consequence of its inner contradictions. Those of us who love liberty should rethink any temptations we might have to rush to the deathbed of statism and attempt to revivify its corpse by giving it a transfusion of our energies. The society upon which statism has fed will doubtless undergo a few headaches,fevers, and upset stomachs in the interim. But like a case of the flu, it may be better to let the sickness run its course rather than continue our habit of suppressing the symptoms.

Be Sociable, Share!
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply