When it is new, an invading group must always be humble. It must claim to be assimilating and to have the same values as the majority. It must also pretend to be peaceful. While it does this, it must increase its numbers until it has enough power, and then flip from underdog to repressive regime.
Leftists entered the West through caste revolt. For five hundred years, or maybe more, they waited. Then, they manifested their agenda through peasant revolts, and ultimately a series of individualistic notions in The Renaissance™ and The Enlightenment™ which emphasized “man as the measure of all things.”
This resulted, half a millennium later, in a peasant anarchy Roman holiday of a civilization where the individual can do anything — short of murder, assault, or direct physical theft — and get away with it by arguing from one of the basic rights granted to them by the post-aristocratic government.
Leftism, or political and later socioeconomic egalitarianism, created a State in so doing that is seen as the force that created and maintains civilization, when the actual force that does this is the genetics of our people. If the State dies, we rebuild; if we die, the State carries on in the hands of lesser people.
As a result of its reliance on the State, Leftism accelerated its attempts to take over during the past sixty years. Its goal was to close the deal, or gain permanent control with its adversaries vanquished, no matter what the cost. Leftists are perfectly happy sacrificing civilization for the State, because the state guarantees the peasant anarchy Roman holiday.
However, something strange happened. A group of people — not “The People,” but the upper middle class — fought back, first with the Tea Party and second with the election of Donald J. Trump. Alongside them marched those of other classes who had seen firsthand the utter disaster that Obama had been on the economy, society, prestige, and competence of their country.
This has forced the Left to accelerate its plans to their final stage. This stage will be familiar to anyone who is familiar the concept of tyranny: in the name of saving the people from some scapegoat or another, a leader will rise up and seize control, at which point he or she will remove all obstacles to total control of the society.
How do we know that the Left will do this? They have done it before and in fact, it seems to be how all Leftist societies and liberal democracies end, only a couple centuries after their founding. The archetype of their method can be found in France, which had a revolution in 1789 that deposed its aristocrats.
The French Revolution demonstrates what we call The Napoleonic Arc, which is the half of a cycle that a civilization goes through after Leftism takes over. First, total control occurs; then, dissidents are killed; a command economy arises; repression intensifies; finally, as the system fails, it militarizes to unite its rapidly fraying people.
In the case of revolutionary France, the original complaint was that the peasants were starving, which neglects the fact that under the good leadership of the kings, the peasants had increased greatly in number throughout the country. When the aristocrats were deposed, most of them were murdered.
Whole families went to the guillotine and were executed. Property was seized, and those who were not fully on board could easily find themselves heading to the hanging blade. The economy, now “managed,” crashed, and people were worse off than ever before. After a series of misadventures, the nation ended up under the sway of Napoleon.
Napoleon launched what could have been called a test run for WW1. The democratic countries attacked the aristocratic ones, and France dedicated itself to spreading the ideology that was currently failing it. Eventually, Napoleon over-extended and self-destructed, leaving France a partially occupied nation.
At that point, however, Leftists noticed something important. The people they executed were still dead, and the remaining population was not really able to perform critical analysis. This enabled the Left to build itself back up, take over institutions, saturate people in propaganda, and have nearly permanent rule.
Right now, in the guise of protecting children, the Left is gearing up to remove your ability to shoot back at government when they come for you and your children to take to the guillotine, gulag, or mental hospital. Leftists have used all of those to eliminate dissidents.
Witness the Leftist bid for total control:
That support is a clear sign to lawmakers to enact legislation prohibiting civilian ownership of semiautomatic weapons, increasing the minimum age to buy a gun from 18 to 21 years old, and establishing more comprehensive background checks on all purchasers of firearms. But the demonstrators should seek more effective and more lasting reform. They should demand a repeal of the Second Amendment.
…Overturning that decision via a constitutional amendment to get rid of the Second Amendment would be simple and would do more to weaken the N.R.A.â€™s ability to stymie legislative debate and block constructive gun control legislation than any other available option.
That simple but dramatic action would move Saturdayâ€™s marchers closer to their objective than any other possible reform. It would eliminate the only legal rule that protects sellers of firearms in the United States â€” unlike every other market in the world.
To simplify the Constitutional law issue involved, he has conflated his interpretation of the Constitution with the only one possible, forgetting that the originalists — those who study the language and original intent of the document and its writers — have the more persuasive argument than “we can interpret this to mean…”
Next, consider what he wants. When guns are illegal, only criminals and government will have guns. This means that if they decide to pull another Waco or Ruby Ridge, they can do so with impunity. At that point, you are a captive population unless you want to engage in pacifist protests, which work OK in British India but not the Soviet Union.
With the second amendment gone, there should be no problem removing the first, almost certainly using the same justification. Some language just corrupts youth. After all, they killed Socrates under that accusation, since his teachings did not fit in line with Athenian democracy.
Now keep in mind how this gun control narrative complements the eternal Leftist ideal of a classless, raceless, genderless, and egalitarian society marching toward Utopia under red banners, defeating those who rise above equality. They even style gun-grabbing as a People’s Revolution:
[T]he new revolutionaries have been making the essential argument: that our current approach to firearms undercuts the rights of the unarmed far more than any restriction would ever impinge on the rights of gun owners.
…Finally, this march established the gun safety alliance as multi-racial and intersectional, reaching far beyond its traditional base among suburban white liberals. Few voices echoing from the platform were more powerful than 11-year-old Naomi Wadler’s. She declared that young African-American women who were victims of gun violence would no longer be seen as “simply statistics instead of vibrant, beautiful girls full of potential.”
In 1960, the nation’s attention was captured by young civil rights activists who sat in to integrate lunch counters in Greensboro, North Carolina. It is not romanticizing the young to say that at times in our history, only those not beaten down by the defeats of the past could find the courage and the strategic initiative to win old fights in new ways.
The narrative is portrayed, as always, in visual images of the process itself and not its consequences. You see the brave crowd of those who have not thrived under a presumable unjust system joining together to protect the underdog, those who cannot afford guns. Together they will make a new world, just like the French and Russians did.
History runs in cycles. Things which seem impossible are only that way because they are part of the next stage of the cycle and seem alien to us, but the fact that they exist somewhere else means there are decisions that we could make which will lead to them. We are not immune to failing. We too can collapse and fade from history.
John Paul Stevens, the former Supreme Court justice who wrote this piece who is no relation to your author, is a career Leftist. He says what the crowd wants to hear. He refuses to believe that Leftism can fail because for him, the civilization and nation are means to the end of achieving Leftist Utopia: equality. All else can be sacrificed.
To these crazy Leftists, all that matters is getting a permanent government in control. This is their endgame. Whether any of us survive it, or Western Civilization prevails, is not their concern. If this issue seems trivial to you, consider what the next big issue will be, and what your options will be if you dissent.