TexasCHLforum.com

From Dictatorship to Democracy by Gene Sharp

It suggest effective non-violent means of protest.

"Whatever the merits of the violent option, however, one point is clear. By placing confidence in violent means, one has chosen the very type of struggle with which the oppressors nearly always have superiority. The dictators are equipped to apply violence overwhelmingly."

Check out the link to FREE pdf of booklet below.  This may be our only way out if he who's name must not be mentioned is re-elected again.

http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, check out the main site. http://www.aeinstein.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LSUTiger wrote:From Dictatorship to Democracy by Gene Sharp

It suggest effective non-violent means of protest.

"Whatever the merits of the violent option, however, one point is clear. By placing confidence in violent means, one has chosen the very type of struggle with which the oppressors nearly always have superiority. The dictators are equipped to apply violence overwhelmingly."

Check out the link to FREE pdf of booklet below.  This may be our only way out if he who's name must not be mentioned is re-elected again.

http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, check out the main site. http://www.aeinstein.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I confess I am a 3%er & not ashambed standing at the bridge.
The big thing that has always concerned me about "effective non-violent means of protest" is historically the non-violence is only on one side & the violence is on the other.
Kent State
Selma & the police dogs
I have never tried out for the punching bag position
aaaaaaahhh prolly not gonna
OK Jerry go to your room now.
LT

Colonel Jeff Cooper wrote:“It is interesting to hear certain kinds of people insist that the citizen cannot fight the government. This would have been news to the men of Lexington and Concord, as well as the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan. The citizen most certainly can fight the government, and usually wins when he tries. Organized national armies are useful primarily for fighting against other organized national armies. When they try to fight against the people, they find themselves at a very serious disadvantage. If you will just look around at the state of the world today, you will see that the guerillero has the upper hand. Irregulars usually defeat regulars, providing they have the will. Such fighting is horrible to contemplate, but will continue to dominate brute strength.”

Colonel Jeff Cooper wrote:“One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that ‘violence begets violence.’ I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure—and in some cases I have—that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy.”

I like me some Jeff Cooper.

I'm not saying disarm and throw all your guns and ammo in the trash. I am just your average Joe, but I am also prepared to what is necessary to uphold our constitution should things devolve into an unbearable situation.

I have spent 10's of thousands of dollars on preparing for what I consider is an eventuality at the expense of my family's financial well being, the scorn and disaproval of my wife and ridicule from family and friends . I preach the word and most people make excuses for not being prepared. They are willing to be subjugated by our government. Only a small handful of friends, family and co- workers share the same ideas, vision and commitment to our freedom and survival and being prepared mentaly and physically to make things the way they are supposed to be, by non violent political means or otherwise.

While I agree with Mr. TAM and Mr. Longtooth, from my own interpretation of what they are saying,(sic) " Violence may not be the answer, but it's effective". I think these materials have some insights to offer no matter which method of resistance you choose. Of course there is a line that if crossed warrants only one kind of response.

My intention, perhaps not clearly stated or stated at all is that this is only one tool in the tool box that we can use to fight the power. These are things we can do now to effect change with out waiting for total subjegation/ violent conflict to happen. Before you post any reply I would challenge you to actually read some of the documentation and judge it on it's merit and think how you can apply it now or later, but preferably before things get to having to resort to the last resort. I think they have something to offer. Simply responding to the title of my post is not sufficient for a meaningful reply. If you have reviewed some of the materials and still disagree or think its useless info then I respect your opinion.

In my opinion, we will fail as freedom fighters unless we have the organization & mobilization, but first, enough of us have to will and preparation to successfully counter oppression. ( also in the book) There are many lessons learned that could be applied to both methods of resistance.

I almost forgot, pray for peace, prepare for war!

Maybe nonviolence worked for India against England but it didn't work too good for France against Germany.

Non violence works when you're dealing with civilized people. That's why it worked in India. The British were civilized people. That's why it worked for MLK. The bulk of Americans were civilized people.

Progressives are not civilized people. Tienamen Square is just one proof of that. Progressives don't care about your non-violent protest because they think (wrongly) that you are the oppressor. To them, anyone who is not a progressive is an oppressor. So your non-violent protest won't change them. What works for progressives is pain. Make their policies and the political fallout from those policies painful to them, and they will try to change their stripes while you look the other way. If that doesn't work for them, then you may have to whup that butt. Also, progressives have no problem using violence to get what they want (Occupy Wall Street). They just think it is wrong for you to use violence against them.

That is why, when progressives carry their obnoxious social engineering far enough that they trample on your rights and mine, violence may be a positive and necessary response. Eschewing violence for negotiation with progressives doesn't work. Their idea of negotiation is that a good compromise would be halfway between halfway and your position. They are a cancer.

The Annoyed Man wrote:That is why, when progressives carry their obnoxious social engineering far enough that they trample on your rights and mine, violence may be a positive and necessary response. Eschewing violence for negotiation with progressives doesn't work. Their idea of negotiation is that a good compromise would be halfway between halfway and your position. They are a cancer.

Everything I know about negotiation I learned from the 5th Element.


Ok, not really, but I am reminded of that movie whenever someone mentions "negotiations".

Dave2 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:That is why, when progressives carry their obnoxious social engineering far enough that they trample on your rights and mine, violence may be a positive and necessary response. Eschewing violence for negotiation with progressives doesn't work. Their idea of negotiation is that a good compromise would be halfway between halfway and your position. They are a cancer.

Everything I know about negotiation I learned from the 5th Element.


Ok, not really, but I am reminded of that movie whenever someone mentions "negotiations".

For anyone who hasn't seen the movie (You should check it out, great film)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oKwg6W05MU

The Islamic Extremists and Progressive understand one thing. Strength. Give them an inch they will take 10 miles. Turning the other cheek is so that you find out whether or not the person is your enemy or a friend that is irritated at you. When you and your family are threatened it is perfectly acceptable to fight fight fight to the last man. If we can, fight at the ballot box and pray that is sufficient. Right now it likely will be. Let the progressives feel the pain of the loss of power and keep them far from it. If we don't do that then we may be fighting for real some day soon.

Soap box, ballot box, bullet box. In that order.

Jumping Frog wrote:Soap box, ballot box, bullet box. In that order.

We tried the first two and the result is congress passing unconstitutional laws, the president signing them, and the supreme court upholding them. Not to mention the fast and furious mass murders.

emcee rib wrote:

Jumping Frog wrote:Soap box, ballot box, bullet box. In that order.

We tried the first two and the result is congress passing unconstitutional laws, the president signing them, and the supreme court upholding them. Not to mention the fast and furious mass murders.