Jump to content
AvidC

What role do politics play in a Militia?

Recommended Posts

Hey guys and gals. Let's talk about politics here. I want to start off by saying this can be a volatile subject if we let it. Many people are very passionate about their political affiliation, let's all remember that it's ok if everyone doesn't believe the same as we do and actually the difference in beliefs is a strength. It's ok to speak with emotion, but let's try not to speak out of emotion. Above all, let's respect each other a freedom loving Americans. 

 

All that being said, what are some of your thoughts on the currently political atmosphere? Personally, I dont believe Republicans or Democrats have our freedom and the peoples best interest in mind. What that means to me is, I believe each of those parties have an adjenda that is self serving. I believe the Libertarian party lacks organization and an outline foundation they can base ethics and morals on. 

 

What are your thoughts? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of us have our political beliefs.  I'm a lifelong Republican, and shall probably go to my grave with some of my political buttons pinned to my suit ... buttons like"Nixon Now" and "AuH20".

 

However, to the greatest extent possible, if a militia has to go into action, politics should have little to nothing to do with that decision.  It is the extant situation ... which has to be clear to all ... which decides the decision to take to the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The militia movement should be open to all patriots, regardless of their political beliefs. Obviously some political beliefs -- like AntiFa's -- would preclude their participation in a patriotic militia.

 

But otherwise ... the movement should be open to all.  Of course, most participants, today, will be on the 'Right' -- conservatives of one sort or another, or libertarians.  As a practical matter, most

participants will probably be Republicans, or people who generally vote Republican. But that should not be a condition of membership. Nor should a militia unit endorse a party, although they might well want to endorse (or work for) this or that candidate, if there is a clear choice between, say, a pro-2A and an anti-2A candidate.

 

Could someone who is not a conservative be a good militia member? Well, would anyone want to turn this man down, if he had lived?

 

I believe that as individuals militia people should be as active in politics as they can be ... joining the party of their choice and being active in it, and even running for office if that's appropriate. If a militia unit can bring out enough people (two or three dozen, minimum) to make it worth a candidate's time to speak to them, they should invite candidates to do so -- from all sides.  This will help 'mainstream' the movement, and make politicians more aware of it and its opinions. 


You can get a lot further in life with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that the militia movement should not exclude anyone because of their political beliefs, so long as they are a patriot, does NOT mean that the movement shouldn't talk about, think about, read about 'politics'.  In fact, I would say that having an on-going political education project -- reading things like The Federalist Papers -- is essential to a healthy movement.


You can get a lot further in life with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
6 minutes ago, Doug1943 said:

The militia movement should be open to all patriots, regardless of their political beliefs. Obviously some political beliefs -- like AntiFa's -- would preclude their participation in a patriotic militia.

 

But otherwise ... the movement should be open to all.  Of course, most participants, today, will be on the 'Right' -- conservatives of one sort or another, or libertarians.  As a practical matter, most

participants will probably be Republicans, or people who generally vote Republican. But that should not be a condition of membership. Nor should a militia unit endorse a party, although they might well want to endorse (or work for) this or that candidate, if there is a clear choice between, say, a pro-2A and an anti-2A candidate.

 

Could someone who is not a conservative be a good militia member? Well, would anyone want to turn this man down, if he had lived?

 

I believe that as individuals militia people should be as active in politics as they can be ... joining the party of their choice and being active in it, and even running for office if that's appropriate. If a militia unit can bring out enough people (two or three dozen, minimum) to make it worth a candidate's time to speak to them, they should invite candidates to do so -- from all sides.  This will help 'mainstream' the movement, and make politicians more aware of it and its opinions. 

 

A lot of wisdom and experience in your reply Doug. Thank you for sharing! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AvidC said:

 

A lot of wisdom and experience in your reply Doug. Thank you for sharing! 

Thank you for the kind compliment.  I've been 'political' for about 60 years, and I've seen lots of movements/organizations split by quarrels over second-rate or third-rate issues. And of course giant inflated egos play their negative role as well.   I recall a cartoon from the 1970s -- two guys are being tied to posts prior to execution by a firing squad, and one is frowning at the other and saying, "I still say you're a revisionist!" ["revisionist" meaning a deviator from orthodox political doctrine in their world].   If it's any comfort, the original American revolutionists had plenty of internal quarrels as well.


You can get a lot further in life with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Militia is a generic term. It is citizens fighting in a military style and tactics. It is NOT people prepping and hiding. It is people PHYSICALLY fighting for their beliefs against a common enemy. 
 

The word Militia has been by people all around the world and it always comes so to citizens fighting a common enemy. The word itself has nothing to do with political leanings. (I am sure someone will now look up a dictionary and dispute common knowledge)
 

In South America you may see militia fighters for and against a government all the time. Same can also be seen at times in Eastern Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
32 minutes ago, Unvbill said:

Militia is a generic term. It is citizens fighting in a military style and tactics. It is NOT people prepping and hiding. It is people PHYSICALLY fighting for their beliefs against a common enemy. 
 

The word Militia has been by people all around the world and it always comes so to citizens fighting a common enemy. The word itself has nothing to do with political leanings. (I am sure someone will now look up a dictionary and dispute common knowledge)
 

In South America you may see militia fighters for and against a government all the time. Same can also be seen at times in Eastern Europe.

Thanks for commenting! 

 

🙂 In my personal opinion the opportunity for the Milita here in North America far supersedes physically fighting using millitary style tactics, the reward is far more important as well. Though an aspect of militia is training to be prepared for any and all circumstances, if training is only reserved for physical combat we will never be able to educate the population on the true constitutional freedoms available and will continue to be viewed in a negative light. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2020 at 7:02 PM, Megatron said:

No muslims is my only rule

Well, then you don't have to worry about this Muslim, Humayan Khan,   or this one, Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, or this man, Abdullah Igram.

But there are several thousand other Muslims serving in the American military that you'll have to be on the lookout for.

 

And ... what about the Japanese?  During the Second World War, a lot of Americans thought that Japanese-Americans, despite their American citizenship, would find the bonds of race and religion too strong to overcome, and would be loyal to the homeland of their ancestors. And that was true for a few.  But not for most, and certainly not for the 442nd Regimental Combat Team --- 

 

Quote

 

The 442nd Regimental Combat Team was an infantry regiment of the United States Army. The regiment is best known for its history as a fighting unit composed almost entirely of second-generation American soldiers of Japanese ancestry (Nisei) who fought in World War II. Beginning in 1944, the regiment fought primarily in the European Theatre,  in particular Italy, southern France, and Germany. Many of the soldiers from the continental U.S. had families in internment camps while they fought abroad.[4] The unit's motto was "Go for Broke".

The 442nd Regiment is the most decorated unit for its size in U.S. military history.  Created as the 442nd Regimental Combat Team when it was activated February 1, 1943, the unit quickly grew to its fighting complement of 4,000 men by April 1943, and an eventual total of about 14,000 men served overall. The unit earned more than 18,000 awards in less than two years, including 9,486 Purple Hearts and 4,000 Bronze Star Medals. The unit was awarded eight Presidential Unit Citations (five earned in one month).  Twenty-one of its members were awarded Medals of Honor.  In 2010, the Congressional Gold Medal was awarded to the 442nd Regimental Combat Team and associated units who served during World War II,  and in 2012, all surviving members were made chevaliers of the French Légion d'Honneur for their actions contributing to the liberation of France and their heroic rescue of the Lost Battalion.

 

 

[SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/442nd_Infantry_Regiment_(United_States)]

 

The point is, America has had the ability to attract the loyalty even of people it treated rather badly.  They saw the potential of this country, which was founded not as a racial project, but on something much more profound, with the potential to bring something new into human history.   [ For a wonderful exploration of this idea, I highly recommend The Killer Angels -- about the Battle of Gettysburg, but also about what America means for the world. The best war novel ever written, in my opinion.]

 

So I would ask you to please think again!   Let's not turn away any sincere American patriot. 

 

 

 


You can get a lot further in life with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Doug1943 said:

Well, then you don't have to worry about this Muslim, Humayan Khan,   or this one, Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, or this man, Abdullah Igram.

But there are several thousand other Muslims serving in the American military that you'll have to be on the lookout for.

 

And ... what about the Japanese?  During the Second World War, a lot of Americans thought that Japanese-Americans, despite their American citizenship, would find the bonds of race and religion too strong to overcome, and would be loyal to the homeland of their ancestors. And that was true for a few.  But not for most, and certainly not for the 442nd Regimental Combat Team --- 

 

 

[SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/442nd_Infantry_Regiment_(United_States)]

 

The point is, America has had the ability to attract the loyalty even of people it treated rather badly.  They saw the potential of this country, which was founded not as a racial project, but on something much more profound, with the potential to bring something new into human history.   [ For a wonderful exploration of this idea, I highly recommend The Killer Angels -- about the Battle of Gettysburg, but also about what America means for the world. The best war novel ever written, in my opinion.]

 

So I would ask you to please think again!   Let's not turn away any sincere American patriot. 

 

 

 

You're comparing the Japanese to the Islamic people?   I suppose you have no idea about the false religion that islam is.   How its designed to conquer and take over the world.  I couldn't give two woots for those that practice evil and served our country. 


“If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” – General George S. Patton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... a religion that is designed to take over the world?  Sounds like what the anti-Semites say about Judaism. 

 

Quote

 

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Jump to navigation Jump to search
"Protocols of Zion" redirects here. For the film, see Protocols of Zion (film).
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
1905 2fnl Velikoe v malom i antikhrist.jpg
Cover of first book edition, The Great within the Minuscule and Antichrist
Author Unknown. Plagiarised from various authors
Original title Програма завоевания мира евреями (Programa zavoevaniya mira evreyami, "The Jewish Programme to Conquer the World")
Country Russian Empire
Language Russian[a]
Subject Antisemitic conspiracy theory
Genre Propaganda
Publisher Znamya
Publication date
August–September 1903
Published in English
1919
Pages 417 (1905 edition)

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Russian: Протоколы сионских мудрецов) or The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion is a fabricated antisemitic text purporting to describe a Jewish plan for global domination. The hoax, which was shown to be plagiarized from several earlier sources, some not antisemitic in nature,  was first published in Russia in 1903, translated into multiple languages, and disseminated internationally in the early part of the 20th century. According to the claims made by some of its publishers, the Protocols are the minutes of a late 19th-century meeting where Jewish leaders discussed their goal of global Jewish hegemony by subverting the morals of Gentiles, and by controlling the press and the world's economies.

Henry Ford funded printing of 500,000 copies that were distributed throughout the United States in the 1920s. The Nazis, including its leader Adolf Hitler, believed the document as true and up-to-date,[2] that used the Protocols as justification of annihilation of Jews in Europe and propaganda against Jews; it was assigned by some German teachers, as if factual, to be read by German schoolchildren after the Nazis came to power in 1933 despite having been exposed as fraudulent by the British newspaper The Times in 1921 and the German Frankfurter Zeitung in 1924. It is still widely available today in numerous languages, in print and on the Internet, and continues to be presented by some proponents as a genuine document.

 

 

Or what many Protestants said about Catholicism for a several hundred years, and even  until very recently. Here's a book that was popular on the Left within my lifetime:

 

Quote

 

American Freedom and Catholic Power

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
American Freedom and Catholic Power
American Freedom and Catholic Power.jpg
Author Paul Blanshard
Country United States
Language English
Subject Catholic Church in the United States
Published 1949
Media type Print

American Freedom and Catholic Power is an anti-Catholic  book by American writer Paul Blanshard, published in 1949 by Beacon Press. Blanshard asserted that America had a "Catholic problem" in that the Church was an "undemocratic system of alien control". The book has been described as propaganda  and as "the most unusual bestseller of 1949–1950".  Some reviewers thought that the book incorporated nativist sentiments into its anti-Catholicism, including that the Church was a foreign power in America determined to dominate the world.[4][5] In the prologue, Blanshard said that he was not opposed to the Catholic religion or to Catholic Americans, but that the church's hierarchy had an undue influence on legislation, education and medical practice.

The book began as a controversial series of articles in The Nation that set the Archbishop of New York against Eleanor Roosevelt. Despite some resistance, it became a bestseller, winning praise from well-known intellectuals. Catholic writers denounced it as bigoted and based on longstanding Protestant bias.

 

 

[SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Freedom_and_Catholic_Power]

 

Is Islam a 'false religion'?  Well, of course it is, if you're a Protestant Christian.  You have to believe that your religion is the only true one. (Or do you believe Roman Catholicism is also a true religion? Judaism?  Buddhism?  Hinduism? )

 

In all of these religions, if you look at their Holy Books, or the writings of their leaders in the past interpreting them, you can find some pretty illiberal things.  I think you believe that the Bible is the word of God, and that you should follow God's word.  Well, here is some of God's word:

Quote

And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Sam 15:1‑3)

 

 However, I know that followers of the Bible  will not follow that particular injunction from God when they wage war -- or, when they do kill women and children, as at My Lai, it's not because they're following the Bible.    In fact, the reality is, people pretty much ignore what's in their Holy Books, or what the Pope says, etc. when it gets in the way of what they want to do.

 

So, yes, for sure ...we ought to vet any Muslim right now pretty closely ... given that at this point in history, the Muslims are fired up against the West ... after centuries of passivity. But one of the reasons they're fired up, is that modernity is eating away at their religion, just like it's eating away at all religions -- or rather, at fundamentalist, literal interpretations of those religions, and the relgious arrangements that made people be obedient to religious leaders instead of thinking for themselves.

 

Right now, America has thousands and thousands of Muslims -- Iranians who have fled the regime of the mullahs -- who absolutely hate that government and would gladly see it overthrown. Some of our strongest, best allies against ISIS have been the Kurds ... who are Muslims.  

 

So ... just because someone is a Muslim, does not mean he is an enemy of liberty.  He may be, that has to be determined, but just being a Muslim doesn't automatically make him one.

And ... just because someone is a Christian, does not mean he is a friend of liberty. He may be, that has to be determined, but just being a Christian doesn't automatically make him one.

 


You can get a lot further in life with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Doug1943 said:

Hmmm... a religion that is designed to take over the world?  Sounds like what the anti-Semites say about Judaism. 

 

 

Or what many Protestants said about Catholicism for a several hundred years, and even  until very recently. Here's a book that was popular on the Left within my lifetime:

 

 

[SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Freedom_and_Catholic_Power]

 

Is Islam a 'false religion'?  Well, of course it is, if you're a Protestant Christian.  You have to believe that your religion is the only true one. (Or do you believe Roman Catholicism is also a true religion? Judaism?  Buddhism?  Hinduism? )

 

In all of these religions, if you look at their Holy Books, or the writings of their leaders in the past interpreting them, you can find some pretty illiberal things.  I think you believe that the Bible is the word of God, and that you should follow God's word.  Well, here is some of God's word:

 

 However, I know that followers of the Bible  will not follow that particular injunction from God when they wage war -- or, when they do kill women and children, as at My Lai, it's not because they're following the Bible.    In fact, the reality is, people pretty much ignore what's in their Holy Books, or what the Pope says, etc. when it gets in the way of what they want to do.

 

So, yes, for sure ...we ought to vet any Muslim right now pretty closely ... given that at this point in history, the Muslims are fired up against the West ... after centuries of passivity. But one of the reasons they're fired up, is that modernity is eating away at their religion, just like it's eating away at all religions -- or rather, at fundamentalist, literal interpretations of those religions, and the relgious arrangements that made people be obedient to religious leaders instead of thinking for themselves.

 

Right now, America has thousands and thousands of Muslims -- Iranians who have fled the regime of the mullahs -- who absolutely hate that government and would gladly see it overthrown. Some of our strongest, best allies against ISIS have been the Kurds ... who are Muslims.  

 

So ... just because someone is a Muslim, does not mean he is an enemy of liberty.  He may be, that has to be determined, but just being a Muslim doesn't automatically make him one.

And ... just because someone is a Christian, does not mean he is a friend of liberty. He may be, that has to be determined, but just being a Christian doesn't automatically make him one.

 

Catholics just worship the false anti christ and muslims cant coexist with western values. 


“If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” – General George S. Patton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Megatron said:

Catholics just worship the false anti christ and muslims cant coexist with western values. 

Yikes!

 

It's too bad you can't meet some Muslim friends of mine, a married couple. She's from India, he's from Pakistan. They're both very cultured, very well-educated people. He's retired now, but had his own software company ... in retirement, he got a science degree from the Open University.  They absolutely hate fundamentalist Islam, radical Islam. I can't see either of them low-crawling under barbed wire, but anything that would stop the spread of radical Islam, they would support.   The same goes for various Muslim students I've had ... in fact, I blame some of them for talking me into supporting the invasion of Iraq -- they were very keen to overthrow Saddam Hussein and bring democracy to that country ... and I had Iranian students who wanted us to go on to Iran.  They were absolutely in favor of what we might call 'Western' values, but which are actually just democratic, modern, tolerant values. 

 

You ought to look up the Ahmadis.  They think of themselves as Muslims, but are persecuted by the radical Islamists and fundamentalists. The whole article I've linked to is interesting, but here is an especially relevant section:

Quote

 

According to Ahmadi Muslim belief, Jihad can be divided into three categories: Jihad al-Akbar (Greater Jihad) is that against the self and refers to striving against one's low desires such as anger, lust and hatred; Jihad al-Kabīr (Great Jihad) refers to the peaceful propagation of Islam, with special emphasis on spreading the true message of Islam by the pen; Jihad al-Asghar (Smaller Jihad) is an armed struggle only to be resorted to in self-defence under situations of extreme religious persecution whilst not being able to follow one's fundamental religious beliefs, and even then only under the direct instruction of the Caliph.[95] Ahmadi Muslims point out that as per Islamic prophecy, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad rendered Jihad in its military form as inapplicable in the present age as Islam, as a religion, is not being attacked militarily but through literature and other media, and therefore the response should be likewise.[96] They believe that the answer of hate should be given by love.[97]

Concerning terrorism, the fourth Caliph of the Community wrote in 1989:

As far as Islam is concerned, it categorically rejects and condemns every form of terrorism. It does not provide any cover or justification for any act of violence, be it committed by an individual, a group or a government.

 

 

Or look here, at the Qulliam Foundation: https://www.quilliaminternational.com/ 

It's not religious, but has a lot of Muslims involved in it, fighting Islamic extremism.  The vile Southern Poverty Law Center labelled them as  a "hate group", and got successfully sued by them ... and had to retract that particular lie.  Again, I can't see the folks at Qulliam learning how to walk their rounds up into the target, but they'd certainly be on the side of anyone fighting the jihadis.

 


You can get a lot further in life with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You understand that the first part of a muslims goal is to lie to you and make you believe islam means peace and not submission.    Sorry islam has been the root of most evil things done in the last 1000 years.

 

Yes the Pope is a false anti Christ


“If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” – General George S. Patton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
On 5/16/2020 at 1:45 PM, Unvbill said:

Militia is a generic term. It is citizens fighting in a military style and tactics. It is NOT people prepping and hiding. It is people PHYSICALLY fighting for their beliefs against a common enemy. 
 

The word Militia has been by people all around the world and it always comes so to citizens fighting a common enemy. The word itself has nothing to do with political leanings. (I am sure someone will now look up a dictionary and dispute common knowledge)
 

In South America you may see militia fighters for and against a government all the time. Same can also be seen at times in Eastern Europe.

Thanks for commenting! 

 

🙂 In my personal opinion the opportunity for the Milita here in North America far supersedes physically fighting using millitary style tactics, the reward is far more important as well. Though an aspect of militia is training to be prepared for any and all circumstances, if training is only reserved for physical combat we will never be able to educate the population on the true constitutional freedoms available and will continue to be viewed in a negative light. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted

This post was meant to be directed at the role politics inadvertently play in our daily lives and an example how different view points can be a strength. Sadly it looks like we have confused church and state and have been discussing religious beliefs of others. This is a great example of how closely the two subjects are intertwined and how different perspectives of other cultures dictate individual views. Maybe someone else would like to start a discussion on religion? I dont perfer to, as my interest in the Militia and my brothers in the Militia doesnt depend on their personal religious preference, I will say, lifestyle is very important, what a person does is very important, what a person believes is their own business. In my opinion of course. Moving forward, let's stick to the post topic and discussions on other topics can be had in PM. Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AvidC said:

This post was meant to be directed at the role politics inadvertently play in our daily lives and an example how different view points can be a strength. Sadly it looks like we have confused church and state and have been discussing religious beliefs of others. This is a great example of how closely the two subjects are intertwined and how different perspectives of other cultures dictate individual views. Maybe someone else would like to start a discussion on religion? I dont perfer to, as my interest in the Militia and my brothers in the Militia doesnt depend on their personal religious preference, I will say, lifestyle is very important, what a person does is very important, what a person believes is their own business. In my opinion of course. Moving forward, let's stick to the post topic and discussions on other topics can be had in PM. Thanks. 

The separation of church and state isnt to not allow church in state but not a central religion like the catholic church is.     Islam only wants you to submit die or pay a tax and be second class citizens.

 

The role we play in politics is simple.    You're supposed to be fighting tyrannical people and government or defending the country from invaders.    However most miltias members have a public school education and dont have a firm understanding of the history of this country. 


“If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” – General George S. Patton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
50 minutes ago, Megatron said:

The separation of church and state isnt to not allow church in state but not a central religion like the catholic church is.     Islam only wants you to submit die or pay a tax and be second class citizens.

 

The role we play in politics is simple.    You're supposed to be fighting tyrannical people and government or defending the country from invaders.    However most miltias members have a public school education and dont have a firm understanding of the history of this country. 

Thanks for commenting! 

 

It seems like the history books have changed every decade. My opinion is that it's been propaganda from the start. What type of action is the Militia currently taking to combat this difference of education? 

 

I dont much mind what role individuals choose to play in politics, but I am attentive to the role we (individual people, including myself) allow politics to play in the Militia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(If this post bores you or is too long to be of interest, maybe the last paragraph or two will suffice. There are times when I don't have the time for something unusually long myself)

Boy, what a deep well we've opened here. Eh?

The world "politics had ONE corporate meaning in 1878. Since then, it has literally split 4 or 5 ways to mean 4 to 5 DIFFERENT things. In this day and time, it's almost impossible to talk with people on the fly about "politics" not knowing which definition they reference, and most people will use all the different definitions in 6 different sentences of the same discussion.

So for ME, we would have to 1st define WHICH definition everyone is using, THEN try to remember who will be using what definition, lol. See how confusing it is? HAHAHA. 

Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about and ya'll tell me if you want to hear more before we open the library to the public:
~~~
In 1828, Noah Webster put out what will always be the best English dictionary in circulation. All of the modern day dictionaries include the many rabbit trails and falsehoods blazed by hired liberal wordsmiths designed to lead us as a society in certain directions. And man-howdy! It works! Just change the words now day and you can turn bullets into water balloons of people that are homosexuals into very happy (gay) people. 

According to Noah, the word "politics" means:

POL'ITICS, noun The science of government; that part of ethics which consists in the regulation and government of a nation or state, for the preservation of its safety, peace and prosperity; comprehending the defense of its existence and rights against foreign control or conquest, the augmentation of its strength and resources, and the protection of its citizens in their rights, with the preservation and improvement of their morals. Politics as a science or an art, is a subject of vast extent and importance.

That's quite a mouthful, isn't it? Powerful. Educated. Responsible. Incredibly intuitive even in a complicated world of "civilized" (and uncivilized) nations. Eh? If you'll notice, THIS definition is SPECIFIC to America. "America's particular brand of politics" is born from a very special group of men that had studied the governments of all the world, analysed their strong points, their weaknesses, identified things within certain ones that could be used for benefit in our own government, and those that should forever be guarded against... as well as provide Constitutional bounds for both. Quite the accomplishment and I would make the argument that somehow, it took more than just the "minds of men" to create what we call today our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Religion was not to be controlled by our government. A lack of religion should not be persecuted, but protected. Our Founders made a way for that. Neither was religion to be ignored. Our Founders did not ignore it, but instead included what they believed that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. They believed government's role in our lives was to protect our rights, life, liberty and the environment we have to pursue happiness.

In this sense... sticking to the original definition of "politics" before the various wordsmiths hack it to shreds and scattered it in the winds of globalisation, "politics" could be said to mean, "A WAY OF LIFE". I mean, if anyone can tell me of something within the lives of Americans that doesn't fall under the concept above, I'd like to hear it. Everything about being American... these founding ideas are the ONLY things that "DEFINE" what it is to be American.
~~~
So here is what the wordsmiths have done to the word politics and in the process, dumbed down our understanding just because we stay so confused we don't even know we are veering off:

Here's what I scraped from the internet as a definition of politics:

 

politics (*beware)
[ˈpäləˌtiks]
 
NOUN
  1. the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.
    "the president's relationship with Congress is vital to American politics" · 
    synonyms:
    government · local government · affairs of state · public affairs · diplomacy · party politics
    • **the activities of governments concerning the political relations between countries.
      "in the conduct of global politics, economic status must be backed by military capacity"
    • **the academic study of government and the state.
      "a politics lecturer"
      synonyms:
    • **activities within an organization that are aimed at improving someone's status or position and are typically considered to be devious or divisive.
      "yet another discussion of office politics and personalities"
    • **a particular set of political beliefs or principles.
      "people do not buy this newspaper purely for its politics"
      synonyms:
      political views/beliefs/leanings/sympathies · party politics · political alliance
    • **(the politics of)
      the assumptions or principles relating to or inherent in a sphere, theory, or thing, especially when concerned with power and status in a society.
      "the politics of gender"
      synonyms:
      power struggle · manipulation · machination(s) · manoeuvring · jockeying for position · wheeler-dealing · machiavellianism · opportunism · realpolitik
       
      THESE are today's "globalist" definitions of politics. As you can see, not even leaving the subject of definition, we are talking about one encompassing idea originally intended for America, to the same word having FIVE DIFFERENT MEANINGS, ALL OF THEM pointing to globalism.
       
      Globalist authoritarian (Deep State) politicians of today do not want Americans to remember our origins properly, given any subject. Our fundamental foundation being only one of them, but one that supports everything else American. So it's kind of vital we get this right... but we're not. As you can see, I could spend probably a week in the classroom with students just unpacking what I've listed here.

      As we can all see from the responses thus far, many of us are on different pages when it comes to the definition of the word politics, and some are straying to subjects outside the question... which is completely normal, but distracting from the given subject. That's all just my brain firing on the two brain cells I have left of course, and that only after a half pot of coffee in retirement on a rainy day.

      ~~~
      On 5/16/2020 at 11:17 AM, AvidC said:

      What are some of your thoughts on the currently political atmosphere?


      First? I would have to clarify my definition of "politics" is the original as stated by Noah Webster in 1828. To fight for any specific cause, you have to be on the CORRECT battlefield... not just "a" battlefield. The original definition defines the word in American fashion.

      Now for the atmosphere? I have a hashtag I use frequently on appropriate news articles: #DeepStateVsAmerica ... That pretty much sums it up for me though the details are many. The Deep State was born over 80 years ago when The New Deal was enacted from 1933 to 1939 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It has been quietly and in many cases secretly, growing and creating law (regulations) for Americans to live by even though they are unelected officials. They are corrupt to the core and their roots and tentacles are literally everywhere, from domestic education to foreign policy. They have become quite accustomed to preparing college students and grooming them to become President's that they can control while in office so that they can literally govern this nation in every aspect from the shadows behind the government created veils that cloak them from the public. They have been internally bolstering the defenses by changing laws until now, there's hardly anything that is illegal for the upper echelon... Commoners, or people outside their control are prosecuted and dealt harsh penalties... all IN HOUSE. The powers our Founders said that should be separated such as legislative (power to make law), executive (power to enforce law), and judicial (power to judge), all are found conveniently within the SAME office of the "Administrative State", such as the Justice Department for example. The number of differing offices of the Deep State are literally now too numerous to count, and they literally CONTROL us with their law.

      The "atmosphere" right now in Washington is a battle for survival. It is going on between the Deep State and ANYONE that stands in their way or is threatening to them, including and most especially, this President. The Deep State might not have chosen this specific time to make their hail mary for full control of America, but President Trump has FORCED them into a battle of survival. Either the Deep State is going down, or America will. President Trump is doing more than I thought even humanly possible. But it shouldn't be entirely on him. I've let this happen all my life. Though I must say, I wasn't able to prove a damned thing concerning the Deep State ALL MY LIFE until President Trump. And THAT shit is just really starting to hit the fan.

      I'm going to be in for doing all I can to help. For me it's not about Democrat, Republican oir any other name. It's about America or anti-America. Democrats are COMPLETELY siold out to wealthy globalists and have no qualms selling whatever they can of America to the highest bidder.

      Republicans have our RINO's and if we were paying attention, we could tar and feather those people. But even with them, voting straight red would give a a 2/3 majority in the Senate AND the House of Reps, which is WHAT WE NEED TO SUPPORt THIS PRESIDENT. THIS President would know how to provide focus to Republicans at this time. He would know how to lead them to changing all the Deep State laws that exist now to help prevent this from ever happening again. We are NOT going to get this done with the Deep State Capital Employees and the national Deep State activist media distracting everyone.

      Democrats need to be put down and NO ONE can do that but US.


Join The Mercer County 1st Citizen Task Force-WV HERE at MyMilitia.com for proper networking and communication.
The Facebook Page for The MC1stCTF is HERE.


If you live anywhere within the area code 304 in West Virginia, join the WV-THREE04 here at MYMilitia.com to recieve help and guidance in bolstering your existing unit or starting a new unit! WV has much catching up to do to revitalize our community militias. YOU can be a part of something NEW in West Virginia, no matter your location!

1392374933_Screenshot2020-04-10at7_15_23PM.png.a6376a6eabd0ddf71fb5634c0182d3f2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you but you seem hung up on only Democrats as the problem.    The Republicans are just to blame and equally useless. 


“If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” – General George S. Patton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
On 5/18/2020 at 10:57 AM, Liberty Prime said:

How much should the Patriot Militia be

Influenced or involved in politics?  Very little.

 

The patriot Militia should be apolitical to an extent. 

 

The part of Us being Patriots is what gives our message strength. A militia is nothing more than a group of armed non state actors. 

Patriots should be dedicated to defending the values of Liberty. Which is a philosophical view point.

 

 

How much does politics influence the Patriot Militia? A solid amount. 

 

Today politics and identity are nearly indistinguishable sometimes. This is why the movement is littered with individuals using the movement as a shield to push their political agenda. 

This probably also why we struggle breaking our beyond crowds that already agree with Us politically.

 

 

Principles are largely objective and apolitical. 

 

 

In my opinion this is a pretty solid view point. 

 

Thanks for the comment! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...