Just One

I don’t want anyone to read something sinister in what follows;  it’s simply a thought exercise.

A couple of days ago I read this article:

Two FBI special agents were fatally shot Tuesday morning while serving a warrant in Sunrise, the agency confirmed, calling it “a very dark day for the FBI.”

The agents, it turns out, were serving said warrant on some scrote who is a child molester and who did the right thing by offing himself after whacking the two feds, thus saving us all the hassle of a trial.  He’s not important to the story, so forget all about him.

The article’s headline is what caught my attention, because what it showed was just how easy it is to ambush law enforcement officers;  and what it reminded me of is a story of a WWII British fighter pilot who, during the dark days of 1940 when the Nazis had overrun Western Europe and were seemingly poised to invade Britain as well, went home for a brief bit of leave/furlough.  Sitting chatting with his father about the state of the world, he was surprised when his father asked him if he could get him a pistol or revolver.  When the pilot asked why, his father simply said:

“So I can get my one.”
“One what?”

The old man, who’d fought in WWI, explained that he was too old to join a military unit, but he was determined to “do his bit” for the war effort, and had decided that if he and thousands of others could all just kill a single German each, the task of occupying Britain would be impossible.  The fact that he would almost certainly be killed in return didn’t bother him at all, because his death would be part of a greater good.  “After all,” he concluded, “if Britain is going to ask its young men like you to sacrifice themselves in this war, why shouldn’t we all be prepared to make the same sacrifice?  We’re all in this together, after all.”

What makes this subject so current is all the threats being oh-so cavalierly thrown our way by the Left, whether by loony Leftist politicians or by their equally-loony acolytes in the Press and academe, with talk of “deprogramming”, “universal gun confiscation” and the like — in other words, compelling those who disagree with their politics (the “seditionists” or “Trumpists”) to change their philosophy and/or behavior and be forced to show support for and comply with their ghastly policies and governance.

There sure is a lot of compulsion being talked about, isn’t there?  But none of that is possible in the face of a mass of people who, like the pilot’s father, are prepared to “get their one”.  That’s what Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was lamenting when he wrote these words:

What would things been like [in Russia] if during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat there, paling with terror at every bang on the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people?

Nowadays, of course, there’s a problem with Solzhenitsyn’s proposition in that the modern State knows so much about people that a concerted effort at resistance — even by half a dozen people — might well be anticipated and probably doomed to failure.  Efforts to create a “militia” or any kind of ur-Maquis French Resistance are going to be compromised by infiltration by law enforcement and subsequent destruction.

But if the above stories from Florida and WWII Britain tell us anything, it’s that properly-motivated individuals acting alone are quite capable of deadly resistance, even when facing the nigh-certain consequence of death for themselves.

It’s an interesting hypothesis, isn’t it?


From Chris Muir, an excerpt:

So, because I’m a law-abiding type, I won’t use the term “China virus” — I’ll just carry on referring to it as the Chink virus, as I always have.

And when they ban that, I’ll ignore them.  My respect for the law only goes so far, i.e. when the law runs afoul of the Constitution.  As it has, here.

Just for the record:  regardless of any executive order, law or regulation which says otherwise, I’ll call the Chinese-originated Covid-19 “Wuhan” virus whatever the fuck I want.


As I’ve often warned:  because our governing elites are in thrall to things that Europeans do — just off the top of my head, socialism, government-run medical systems, Corona cops and Scandinavian-level tax rates — what happens Over There often repeats itself Over Here.

Hence my bile directed at this latest little bit of Nannyism from Britishland:

Supermarket promotions of unhealthy food will be curbed as part of the Government’s war on obesity.
‘Buy one get one free’ deals on fizzy drinks, crisps and fatty foods will be banned in medium and large stores, as well as on websites, from April 2022.
And free refills of sugary soft drinks will be prohibited in restaurants and fast food outlets.

I know that we’ve seen examples of this before — once again off the top of my head, Malignant Dwarf  I mean  Mayor “Mike” Bloomberg’s ban on Big Gulps in NYFC a few years ago — but make no mistake, there is no part of your life that Bug Gummint isn’t interested in sticking its fat, snot-dripping wart-infested nose into.

By the way, I was in the restaurant business many years ago, and the “no free refills” is easily bypassed by asking customers if they think they’ll need refills, then adding a 1-cent surcharge onto the bill, making refills no longer “free”.  The cost of trying to police such practices makes the game not worth the candle, even for Gummint.

And as a one-time supermarket guy, let me assure you that any restriction on BOGO offers (or BOGOF, as they call it elsewhere) is just as easily circumvented in the scanning system — and that’s impossible for Gummint to monitor.

Insufferable, Pt. II

More Big Gummint bullshit, this time from Ozland:

Partygoers heading out to celebrate New Year’s Eve in two of Australia’s most populous states have been told by government officials what’s good for them, being warned against any random acts of affection due to the risks posed by the coronavirus.
In the southern state of Victoria, the government wants no displays of physical contact such as kissing despite the state going 59 consecutive days with no locally acquired coronavirus cases.
The state government has issued guidance for people not to kiss anyone outside their immediate family, to prevent celebrations becoming a super spreading event.
Victorians are also being advised to take hand sanitizer to parties on the night and use it liberally on anyone they come in contact with.

So, you wayward Aussies, your government is telling you there’ll be none of this:

…or this:

…or gawd forbid, this:

…just plenty of this:

No wonder people are becoming home-drunks.

Textbook Steps

Let’s open with a little received wisdom:

“There’s no way to rule innocent men.  The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.  Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them.  One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” — Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

That first sentence says it all.  As long as you keep on the right side of the law, you have nothing to fear from authority.

Now’s when it gets tricky, because politicians cannot resist making laws, and as the number of laws grows, so does the chance that you will fall afoul of one of them, no matter how hard you try.  As one FBI agent once put it:  “This is America.  Nobody can go a day without breaking some law or other.”  And that was said in 1998.  The fact that this could be said with pride — or resignation — makes me want to reach for the tar and feathers, but that’s only my reaction to the first step.  There are more.

The next step is to make transgressors into “Enemies Of The People” or (in the case of the Chinkvirus) a “Menace To Society”.  In sociological terms, this is called “scapegoating” or in extreme cases, demonization.  We’ve seen this in the past, of course, such as when the disgusting Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) publishes their various “hate lists” which set out to demonize as “hate groups” first the easy targets such as the KKK, and eventually the most innocuous organizations (e.g. campus-based Republican organizations).  From that. it’s easy to apply the perjorative term du jour  (“racist”, “Nazi”, “fascist” etc.) to whomever doesn’t agree with your position on anything.

Beyond labeling, of course, lies social shaming, “doxxing”, and the “cancel culture.”  After that, the force of law.  (We already have such laws on the books;  murdering someone in cold blood:  bad.  Murdering someone and calling them a dirty nigger at the same time:  somehow worse.)  At some point, it will become an actual crime to say the word niggerniggernigger anywhere, even inside your own home, First Amendment be damned.  And why not? seeing as racism has become punishable by law, any number of asterisks can be attached to the freedom of speech, of course.

“But the Supreme Court will intervene!”  Don’t make me laugh.  As an entity, the fucking Supreme Court has shown itself to be as useful as a paper-towel birdscreen on an airliner’s jet engine when it comes to protecting our rights.

Which leads us to the next Amendment, of course.

Now the Second has some issues for our wannabe-tyrants, of course, because gun owners are, well, armed (always a decent albeit drastic check on government excess).  And disarmament is likely to prove difficult if not impossible, simply because even if only 1% of gun owners turn violent, that’s still a greater number than the number of law enforcement officers who would be tasked with doing the job.

There is another way to disarm gun owners, and it’s quite legal:  pass a law or regulation that requires gun owners to pay a tax on some or all of their firearms, and when they refuse… ta-dah!  Not only can the government use the I.R.S. to harass and prosecute, but because the refuseniks are de facto  lawbreakers (refusal to pay federal taxes is a federal crime), they can be prohibited from owning firearms altogether once convicted of said crime.  (Remember, trying to win a case against the I.R.S. in their own court system is 99.99% impossible, as to win, all they have to do is show that they acted properly in terms of their own regulations.)

Which is why the Socialists’ plan to tax “assault rifles” is such a pernicious act.  If it ever becomes law (or a regulation under an Executive Order), we gun owners are fucked, pure and simple.

We can expect no help from the judiciary, as I noted above.  We can likewise expect no help from local law enforcement refusing to enforce these un-Constitutional acts either, because the Biden Administration will just deploy federal agents (I.R.S., FBI, Fish & Wildlife, Postal inspectors — anyone they can bring to bear) and bypass your friendly sheriff’s deputies altogether.

And don’t think that there will be some kind of passive resistance from local law enforcement, either.  If little Ector County in Texas (!!!) can deploy Meal Team Six just to shut down a fucking bar which stayed open defying a stupid Chinkvirus lockdown order passed by some local asshole mayor, believe me, you’re not going to be safe in your little suburban or rural bunker no matter how angry you are and how many rounds of 5.56mm ammo you have on hand.

I’m not often a doomsayer, but this is one of those occasions.

I’m also not given to issuing threats or warnings, so don’t expect some kind of challenge to come from me either.  Let’s just see what happens, shall we?

Familiar Road

We’ve seen all this before, yea even upon this very website.  From Insty’s link comes this silliness:

Leaving aside the self-contradiction — if Socialists are all about wealth redistribution, they should have no problem with richer states supporting the poorer states, yes? — any partition of North America is more likely to look like this:

And I’ve taken the liberty of renaming the respective nation-states;  denizens of the PSSA will be called “Pissahs” (New England pronunciation) while the Constitutional Republic’s citizens will be known as “Crappies” (after the fish).

I jest, but only a little.  Some comments:

Note that in my map — which is a lot more realistic than the first one — Pennsylvania, Illinois and indeed California / Oregon / Washington will likely divide themselves up, leaving Philadelphia, Chicago and the West Coast respectively to remain the bastions of socialism they’ve become (Austin remains a blueberry in the Texan bowl of tomato soup, and Denver / Boulder would retain their joint title of “Rocky Mountain LA”).  Northern Virginia, like Chicago, can be excised from the rest of its mostly-conservative state.

As for New Mexico:  several people have told me that the “Africa of America” (cf. Doc Russia) is really more conservative than presidential elections would suggest.  I disagree.  Too much of the state is either sucking on the government’s tit (Indians) or wants to (i.e. most of its Mexican immigrants), or else they don’t give a fuck because they’re always high on peyote, so into the PSSA they go.

Finally:  I am assured by almost all my Canucki Readers that non-Vancouver B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and that other prairie state (Manitoba?) would really prefer to be part of the Constitutional Republic as drawn.  As our Socialists / Greens hate oil so much, this would relieve them of the oil sands and fracking fields contained in those erstwhile provinces, not to mention all those icky gun-loving knickledraggers who are more like Middle Americans (whom the Left likewise despise).  Me, I say “Welcome aboard!”  I would most certainly not extend that welcome to people from Ontario (unless they split themselves away from Toronto), and as for the Frog Quebeckers, fuck ’em and their strange un-American language.  I don’t care aboot the hundred or so people who live in Nova Scotia;  they can decide for themselves.

Feel free to disagree with my hypothesis in Comments.