Friday, January 27, 2017
There are other forms of non-violence than standing around holding signs. I contributed to the Standing Rock Legal Defense Fund which is supporting protest with legal action. Including holding individuals responsible for violent orders among other more important issues of sovereignty, Treaty compliance, illegal actions of DAPL individuals and corporate "people."
Supporting journalists charged with felony reporting, including suing those testifying individually with sedition for unconstitutional infringement of the first amendment. Just getting them acquitted on constitutional grounds is nonviolent action but so is suing the bastards individually. Holding individuals personally responsible for their own shit is much more effective as a deterrent.
The Second Amendment explicitly enables a "well regulated Militia" to bear arms as necessary to the security of a free State. It does not define what constitutes security of a free state, Rogue LEOs even CICs may in fact compromise the security of a free State. Violence directed at those infringing on constitutional rights of the citizens of a "free State" is not only legally but morally required of a well regulated militia. The only real question is whether BLM or previously the Black Panthers were a well regulated militia. I was on the jury of the trial of the Young Lords the Hispanic version of the Black Panther trial going on right down the hall to litigate essentially that specific question. In both cases the leaders were acquitted.
The first two clauses of the military oath both for officers and enlisted personnel are "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;" It seems to me unsurprising that the ND violence stopped when the 2000 or so Vets arrived in support of the Water Protectors. It seems that they didn't believe the Vets assertions of peaceful protest only. Frankly, neither did I.
The last and most important is what kind of violence demands a violent response. Does slugging a Nazi justify a violent response by the LEOs. Should they kill the assailant as he surrenders with his hands up? (He appeared to be a minority, but I could be wrong. No matter some LEOs consider themselves to be judge, jury, and executioner on the topic of threat to a LEO.) Should non-violent protesters take him to court for assault? Should the non-violent protesters take the Nazi to court for sedition?
Non-lethal assault by LEOs can be considered to be violence justifying a non-lethal violent response. Must non-violent protesters just stand there or should they take names and badge numbers of LEOs using non-lethal violence to hold the LEOs and their supervisors accountable. Admittedly standing in the face of non-lethal violence may be an effective tactic as it generates public support but it is not the only acceptable tactic. Overwhelming numbers may permit those peacefully assembled to flank a portion of the attackers and use non-lethal violence to take names and badges for pressing charges.
There is always a possibility that an official response to non-violent protest will become lethal. Some overzealous antagonist may shoot into the crowd peacefully assembled. If that occurs violence may be justified and necessary for the welfare of the state. Once again the appropriate response is a tactical decision: do nothing but succor the wounded in the hope of garnering overwhelming popular support; use overwhelming numbers to obtain names and badges of perpetrators forcefully but non-lethally; or if numbers are insufficient use stealth to make an example of the shooter by using lethal force. A classic tactic is a sniper masked by the turmoil; the other is a hand weapon in a crowd behind the shooter.
Thursday, January 26, 2017
Democracy died in America when ALEC took over the GOP with big money and a program. The Democrats had no real response with either money or a program to counter ALEC. In fact for the most part the Neolib Democrats took the practical route of supporting the oligarchy in the futile hope of trying to advance their tepid social programs.
It may be that the Warren/Sanders anti-oligarchy program has a chance on the Left Coast and the Northeast but whether they can rescue the rest of the country is an open question. I am not optimistic. I can see how it can be done one state or metro area at a time, but getting the hinterland to fall in line is a faint hope. Not impossible, single payer medical care and strong social programs have their attractions, but these can be pre-empted with vouchers and hate.
I am following New York politics and for the most part New York is totally ignoring DC to create essentially a self governed state. Cuomo's New York Promise
We passed Marriage Equality, Paid Family Leave, and a $15 Minimum Wage, while implementing new regulations that will help ensure whatever happens on the federal level, women will have cost-free access to reproductive health services.I expect that the same general programs will happen soon in California although Gov. Brown is not leading the way. The Progressives nonetheless won control of the CA Democratic Party and San Francisco is leading the way in progresesive action and explicitly rejecting the POTUS anti-immigration initiatives.
The latest Dem reaction to a replacement for Obamacare suggests that we are in for another few years of totally dysfunctional Federal Government. If the states don't like POTUS executive orders they will just ignore them and do what they will. Also it is clear that Federal funds will be worthless in the near future as no one will buy the debt to fund spending. The rich cities and states will do OK without them but the crash in the states that depend on Federal funds will be catastrophic.
Trumps latest threat to invade Chicago and now Philly if carried out will be an interesting test of what power POTUS has over a large city or state. Just guessing, but it will be the shortest civil war in history. I doubt that any military personnel will risk obeying that patently unlawful order. The Nuremburg precedent is too recent. That is if much of the military remains after the resignations.
Friday, January 20, 2017
The alt-right has done just what they said they were going to do: Make the Federal Government irrelevant to the governance of the USA? Many states are doing their own thing now about infrastructure, education, health care, housing, etc. with varying levels of success.
Musk is running the energy, automotive, and space programs. Zuckerberg is running communications. Google is running IT. China is running defense. The Native Americans are running land management. All the money in the USA isn't going to get much more fossil fuel out of the ground which incidentally is what all the money in the USA is trying to do. When the world recognizes that there will be a financial crash that nobody will notice as the Yuan is now the reserve currency for the world.
POTUS is taking weekends off. The Legislature is passing meaningless laws. The Supreme Court is ignored by everybody. The military is wasting what money it has left. And the voters have no relevance at all outside their own states.
There are a few States that are well governed, a few that might be in the near future, and a lot of failed states. The Federal Government has just abdicated all responsibility for any of them. Welcome to the next gen BSA or as I prefer to call it The Jefferson Republic.