Ideological onanism: "Resistance is Futile" Collectivist named Carl Woodward defeats an entire army of "Republican Fascist" strawmen and becomes a legend in his own mind.

War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. — John Stuart Mill

The attack of the "fascist" strawmen.

carlwoodward12@gmail.com

Dear Comrade Carl,

Several of my friends forwarded to me your column "Militant Republicans: Nope, you aren’t going to overthrow the government." They tend to take such "resistance is futile" columns seriously, and thus, they were taking you seriously. You describe yourself as a "freelance political consultant and campaign strategist in Northern Virginia." Ah, but comrade, you are so much more, and less, than that, now aren't you?

For a guy who describes himself elsewhere as a "hard-line leftist eagerly looking forward to the dictatorship of the proletariat" on a radio show that uses for its theme music The Internationale, well, "freelance political consultant" sort of underplays your ideology, doesn't it?

I paid you the compliment of listening to that show, and picked up that your main mission, as you stated it, was "holding the fascists at bay" and that "I'm okay with partisan if you're playing for the right team." You also stated that "ideas of freedom and liberty can be used to advocate whatever they want it to" and that you were impatiently "waiting for capitalism to dig its own grave."

You further stated that "we (Americans) are the parasites who are living off poor slaves in China" and that "the U.S. is a global parasite." Your unabashed socialist advocacy is quaint, if still dangerous. As I explained in a talk in New York state last year, the difference between communists and socialists is that a socialist is a communist who has not yet found his AK-47 or the will to use it, whereas a communist is a socialist who has his AK-47 firmly in hand and murder in his eye -- for the dictatorship of the proletariat, or the "New Soviet Man" or whatever collectivist lie the party, any party, is pushing these days.

Well, okay then. I'm rather in the middle of a lot of things right now, so I was reluctant to waste time on another muddle-headed firearms confiscationist extrapolating from his own cowardice the omnipotence of the federal government. However, since you have in these other venues more honestly outed yourself as a Marxist collectivist, if not a communist, then I AM the right guy to engage you, for I am an ex-communist myself, and I know all the lies -- especially the ones collectivists tell themselves as well as those they tell to others in service to advancing the "dictatorship of the proletariat."

Your first lie is found in the headline to your jeremiad, addressing it to something called "Militant Republicans." Since you capitalized the word, I'm assuming you meant members of the GOP in which case the term is an oxymoron on its face -- in 20 years I cannot recall meeting someone from that nis-named party who carried a GOP card and was by any description "militant" -- they are to a man, spineless, gutless, compromise-addicted Caspar Milquetoasts. Now I am a small "r" republican, in that I believe in the rule of law and the Founders' Republic, in free men and women and free markets, and that the Constitution extends to everyone regardless of race, creed, color or religion. In proof of that assertion, I am proud to present as evidence the certainty that I have been on the enemies lists of the previous three White Houses, regardless of party.

As we both know, the collectivist use of language is the principal way the argument is won, by framing the "reality" within it ahead of time -- intellectual preparation of the battlefield, as it were. This is where the term "assault rifle" came from, applied to semi-automatic rifles by your fellow collectivist Josh Sugarmann in order to advance his firearm confiscationist agenda. Thus your use of terms such as "militant Republican" and "fascist" is designed to create the strawmen you intend to defeat. Perfectly understandable, but not very admirable in someone who styles himself as an "intellectual." Facile and sloppy, really.

Here is the next series of lies, all in one paragraph:

This is the psychology of fascism. Like most psychological disorders, you can’t argue with it. You can only give these people a reality check, and remind them that democracy isn’t here to protect liberals from their rightful right-wing overlords. It’s here to protect the right, too.

Okay, let's take these lies ad seriatim. First, is the application of "fascism" to folks who do not seek to dictate anything but are largely motivated by the desire to be left alone by an oppressive regime. The second is to characterize their beliefs in terms of mental disorder -- another favorite communist tactic. Third, you speak of "reality checks" in the same sentence as "democracy" but then we've already established out of your own mouth that you don't believe in "democracy" but rather in the dictatorship of the proletariat. Your abuse of the term democracy is of a part with "militant" and "fascist" -- just one more lie of false terminology to defeat your strawman opponent army. As far as "reality checks" go, I'll have more on that in a bit -- for you.

Your ignorance of military affairs as applied to what no doubt would be a Fourth Generation Warfare-style civil war in the United States is laughable. You may begin your tutorial with: "Tyrants beware. 4th Generation Warfare: How the next civil war will be fought."

Mind, at least you didn't threaten us with the omnipotence of the federal government and their big, bad invincible army as most of you "resistance is futile" types do. In any case, the military is made up, especially in the tip-of-the-spear outfits, mostly of OUR sons and daughters. We're the ones who raise our kids with the idea of service to the Republic. Issue them orders to go kill grandpa for the temerity of owning something the regime has decided he shouldn't have and see which way the government-issue rifles get pointed.

But then you don't believe there are enough of us who possess the courage of our convictions to resist. Strangely, this defeatism bleeds over to you own side when you said on the radio show: "I really do not see the people with their pitchforks doing anything about the elites."

Yes, but then we don't limit ourselves to pitchforks, do we?

You say in your article: "If the right ever gets around to exercising those 'Second Amendment remedies' . . . there isn’t going to be much of an America left to save." True, if it is fought according to Third Generation Warfare principles, but it won't be. Fourth Generation Warfare has for its strategic target the few inches of grey matter between the ears of the enemy war makers and decision takers. This target can either be influenced by moral suasion, inducement of fear of personal survival, or -- failing that -- directly by a precision-guided MatchKing bullet out of the rifle of a citizen. No collateral damage necessary. As I have written and said many times before:

They will fight to the last ATF agent or to the last oath-breaking soldier. Will they fight to the first senior bureaucrat, the second Congressman, the third newspaper editor, the fourth Senator, the fifth White House aide? Can they stand Bill Clinton's rules of engagement?

Since I am in a bit of hurry to get back to my work, I'll refer you to my essay on 4GW cited above for Bill Clinton's rules of engagement as they apply to you. Just understand that they DO apply to you. So it is not necessary for armed resistors to regime tyranny to kill indiscriminately as governments do. It is only necessary that they kill enough, well, people like you. Intellectual apologists of mass murder. Collectivist liars demonizing their enemies. Supporters, no doubt, of a "democratically elected" benevolent government's untrammeled right to attack its deranged, fascist opponents. Oh, you didn't mean that? Well, you'd better explain that to somebody before it's too late, hadn't you? That is a "reality check" you'd better contemplate.

You see, they don't look at it as "overthrowing the government." As I explained in my speech at the Alamo last October, they view your ilk as the revolutionaries who have been attacking the Founder's Republic quietly for over a century. They are in fact counter-revolutionaries to the collectivists' revolution. They are fighting for a restoration of the Founders' Republic.

My advice to you? If you can't give up Marxism, then at least try not to piss these people off by calling them lying names. There always is that Law of Unintended Consequences, isn't there? And these folks ain't no army of strawmen.

Sincerely,

Mike Vanderboegh

Anti-communist, arms smuggler, and alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters.

PO Box 926

Pinson, AL 35126