Changing Minds: One @ a Time

To paraphrase Robert McNamara, "If we can’t persuade people with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we better examine our reasoning."


Some people are of the brainwashed variety. They will do everything in their rational and irrational attempts to avoid facts or morality, and conform to their masters. These are sadly a lost cause.

Others have not been successfully brainwashed, and just need access to the right information or opinion to snap them out of their semi-trance state. This description fits, among many other people, myself last year.

So it is the job of any good Infowarrior to spread the message of freedom such that as many people as possible may be awakened to what I believe is a great calling to humanity, the resistance against despotism, the Global War On Tyranny-ism. Tyrants, now there's some people who REALLY "hate us for our freedom".

I feel good today because I lit a metaphorical fire of freedom in the mind of a stranger.

What follows is a series of exchanges between myself and "Mr X" (yes genius, that's not even his real online alias). I hope it may encourage you that there are many of people out there who are receptive to the message of freedom and are eager to wake up (even if they don't know it).

Original text describes Mr X's (American) political outlook.

Mr X: (red from now on)

First of all, an ideal government for me would be a unitary government with a strong, large, and powerful federal government with weak state government. I consider myself socially far left and economic mid- left. I identify with the Democratic Party. Here are my views about the issues of International, Domestic, Economic, and Social concerns.

International:
I support an isolationist view on foreign policy. This means that I do not believe that we should engage in wars that do not pertain to direct self defense of America on US soil. I also believe that the US should take measures ensure that jobs stay in America instead of going to foreign countries. Although I believe in free trade, the government needs to better regulate the international job market. The government must also lift all trade embargoes on countries in order to promote trade. I believe in giving aide to foreign countries in need of help. For the matters of international conflicts, I think the UN should resolve them. We must also completely eliminate from out society, but until then, we must use American petrol. I feel open borders in necessary to a stable economy and the fundamental values of America. Immigrants ate vital to keeping prices of products down. With background checks, anyone has the right to become a US citizen.

Domestic:
I support strong gun control laws. I think the only weapons that should be allowed to be bought are rifles, shotguns, and handguns that are all single-shot. There must be an assault weapons ban and thorough background checks on all who wish to purchase guns. The united stated must regulate the environment strictly by overseeing companies and introducing legislation that would protect the environment. We must have a strong domestic agenda with much government programs to help the needy. We also need to reform our healthcare in a way that motivates doctors to want to work for the government and is better for the patients. I think that is also important to restructure social security in a way that allows more money to be put away. We must also have a strong infrastructure and government research along with a better space program so we can become leaders in the modern era of technology.

Economic:
I think that we should reduce military spending and increase spending money on the national debt until we eventually have a surplus. We must raise taxes so we can fund government programs. We should use a fair tax system instead of our current one. The government must regulate the economy to a degree where it is stable. There also must be strict government regulation of large corporations. I also support the idea of a national bank.

Social:
I believe that there should be no restrictions on abortion at all. There also should be no restrictions on gay marriage at all. There must be liberty, even if this sacrifices national security. There must be a strong separation of church and state. I do not support Affirmative Action. It is unfair to the most extent of the word. The death penalty should be abolished. It is ridiculous and barbaric.

Me: (blue from now on)

rofl @ the gun control fanatic.

Maybe research Lexington Green and the American Revolution...

...and Nazi Germany. In one, the citizens are armed to the teeth. In the other gun bans are in place. Which is which? :D

Don't you agree that there is no use for assault weapons but than to kill people. I support handguns. They are good for self defense. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I feel that every family should have a gun for protection.

Assault weapons is a loaded term used by the gun grabbers, to make one 'type' of gun seem mysteriously deadly. All guns are designed to kill, that's true; as are the skeletal structure of the human fist. But we don't cut everyone's hands off, do we?

I agree with you about everyone owning guns for protection. Why not assault rifles? All that means, in the case of US gun laws, is a semi-auto weapon with over 10 rounds in the magazine. Hardly a WMD, eh?

Governments worldwide killed 200 million of their own people in the last century. I don't see any reason why they should be dictating to us what weapons we can carry. What about them? They actually use their weapons for mass murder, unlike most citizens, and they get away with it. Letting them push us around is a no-no, and in extreme cases that's where the guns come in.

America already has way TOO MANY firearms restrictions in place - registering all your guns, getting permits to concealed carry a handgun, no carry on campus (recipe for mass shootings, as we have seen).

The Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment with absolute clarity - that every citizen is part of the Militia (citizen soldiers, defenders of the Constitution), and that their *right* (not privilege, so no permit should be required) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Infringed upon, not removed, not reduced. These are the peoples' rights and woe betide anyone who steps upon these rights. That was the intention as enshrined in the 2A, and it's the #1 thing I admire about America.

Oh, and btw, I'm British, so I know a thing or two about what happens when these "reasonable gun regulations" are allowed to happen. It doesn't stop until all the guns are gone, believe me.

If assault weapons is a "term", then why was it was in the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994? When would you need to use an assault rife that you can't use a handgun? The only reason someone would need to use one is for military purposes. I agree with you about the ridiculous law about 10 rounds. Although the US government is not entirely responsible (Iraq for instance) they are a hell of allot more responsible than the average US redneck. The fathers purposely wrote the constitution loosely in order to allow a wide range of interpretation. While some interpret it literally (judicial restraint) others, like me, interpret it loosely (judicial activism). The constitution also promises maintenance of public order. This can be provided by gun laws.

What I mean is "assault weapons" is a loaded term used as propaganda, that's all.

When would you need an assault weapon? How about when FEMA comes up your street rounding everyone up to go to camps? (okay, this is the worst of the worst case scenario, but that's exactly why the citizens in my opinion should be as well-armed as is needed to resist their government.)

Hmm I think you overestimate the responsibility of government and underestimate the responsibility of citizens. But...

It's not about responsibility because gun ownership isn't a privilege. You don't earn gun ownership as you don't earn the right to speak your mind, to keep your property, or the right to peaceably assemble. The right to defend yourself proportionately is part of your natural rights, that don't come from government or law, but from nature. Government has no authority to breach these rights, but of course every government does to an extent.

I doubt the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution vaguely. It's pretty clear to me. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Not even a little bit. No infringement or attempts to turn it into a privilege using 'regulations'. Only the modern usurpers of the Constitution claim it is ambiguous, such as the Bush regime suggesting torture could be Constitutional. There's nothing ambiguous about it if you ask me. Not in the name of maintaining public order or for any reason. I say again, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Never.

I've never looked at it from that perspective. I've always trusted my government and expected it to work for me, as John Locke said in his writing of the social contract theory. But do you really think the US govt would turn on us it hasn't happended in a first world country ever i dont think. correct me if im wrong.

First world country: Germany 1933. :)

Not in modern times, but really America today is not entirely unlike America of maybe 1772 or 1773. The final spark of the American Revolution was when British Empire troops marched on a group of Patriots at Lexington Green and demanded they lay down their weapons. They refused, then the British fired the first shots of the Revolutionary War.

All I'm saying is, there's a lot of pissed off gun owners out there. The media mocks them as being paranoid about coming gun bans, but all I know is that many talk of revolution. They're not going to give up their guns. So the ball is in governments' court. Do they send in the black uniforms to come for the guns en masse at a 21st Century Lexington Green?

your right i only looked at things one way before

hey no problem mate. respect to you sir.

I didn't know that people really "always trusted their government" and "expected it to work for me". Really? But that's the key delusion that has to be tackled, especially when dealing with the controlled left. (The key with the controlled right is IMO two pronged: Satanism to make the Christians sit up and take notice, also their chickenhawk militarist delusions need to be attended to.)

The kid had a photo of himself, he's probably about 16 or so, which explains his humility. You wouldn't expect that from most adults. I would hypothesise that is because adults have spent longer in the delusion and so it's harder for them to face everything they'd believed in was a deception. That may sound extreme, but I tell ye, there's nothing like the waking-up process. Nothing like it.

So I hope that kid will go away no longer worshipping the Democratic party and (presumably) Obama, and maybe just maybe educate himself and others and learn of the New World Order.

The revolution will not be televised.