The Other (not so) Thin Line

The Other (not so) Thin Line

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
July 5, 2012

There is a very thin line between what we believe to be our rights and what the government believes our rights are.  Unfortunately, that line continues, either by police action or court decisions, to move against us, allowing even greater power and control over our lives by the government.

There is another line that we might want to consider, though this line tends to ‘flow’ in a different direction.  If we look at the Patriot Community as a whole, and then endeavor to define the progression of those who have joined that community, from entry through, well, wherever they might be now, we, perhaps, can understand just what we are dealing with.

Let’s take a line that runs from left to right, with no political affiliation, philosophy, or ideology, in mind.  At the right end of the line are those who have been members of the Patriot Community for quite some time.  Their experience, research, and observations, along with their current mindset, have moved to the point of no return — that “state of Nature” that the Framers understood.  They might easily be referred to as extremists, as were those “Indians” who made tea in Boston Harbor.

On the left end of the line, we have those who have only recently began to see something amiss in government.  To provide a bit more perspective, if we revisit the nineteen-fifties, they John Birch Society had already seen the evil potential of the United Nations.  They, as a group, comprised a majority of those who might first be defined s “Patriots” by our modern understand.

Over the next forty years, those entering the community were few, and most were those how had begin to understand that the “income tax” (3% in the forties) was unconstitutional and basically a theft of personal property.  This activity brought a prolonged surge into the Community, though it extended over many years.  The issues were separate and singular, so there was no adhesive element to the Community.  Basically, there were “Get Us Out of the United Nations” and “Income Taxes Are Unconstitutional”

Then, in 1993, the federal government, primarily the BATF, raided a Church in Waco, Texas, on a Sunday morning.  A siege of epic proportions, under the authority of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, lasted for 51 days — until the occupants remaining in the Church, with few exceptions, died in the fire that consumed the Church in tens of minutes.  Though there had been a militia element in the Patriot Community prior to Waco, there was a new surge, this occurring over a very short period.  The militia community was rather large; however, there was another large segment of people filled with disgust over the events then occurring.  Waco touched hundreds of thousands of people.  National news and alternative media (fax networks) brought a story to millions, unlike previous events.  This resulted in two more elements added to the Patriot Community, “Militia” and a contingent simply disgusted with the misdeeds of government and the broad assumption of authority that accompanied such an activity.  The Patriot Community had become more diverse (that word is not used in the politically correct context).

The next significant contribution to those who consider themselves to be part of the Patriot Community, though as in the past, many may not have come to that realization, yet, came just a few years ago, as it became apparent that our economy was beginning to collapse.  This infusion, the largest, by far, is also the most diverse.  That diversity is both about issues and means of achieving change (again, not the politically correct definition).  In fact, the apparent disparity might incline someone to believe that there is little, or nothing, in common within, let’s call it the “Tea Party Crowd”, let alone, the Patriot Community.

However, as time goes on, there is a tendency for the issues to merge, or, at least, have a degree of commonality with other issues.  Likewise, the means of achievement tend to focus away from the ineffective.

In these observations, I have intentionally omitted the anti-war groups, though they tend to be consistent with the John Birch Society.  Their omission is based upon the fact that, once the war they oppose is over, they either return to the comfort of the couch, or have, by association, joined in with another of the common causes of the Patriot Community.

Now, let’s stand back and look at this line.  Towards the right, we see a rather narrow but constant thickness to the line.  As we move towards the left, there is a very small bubble, very near the center, that reflects the “Waco” infusion.  Then, way over towards the left end is a rather large bubble that represents the Tea Party Crowd.  Of course, each of the bubbles taper of both left and right, the left being those moving along more slowly, the right, those progress more rapidly.

The problem that we face, however, is that the average will always shift to the left when there is a new infusion of members into the Patriot Community.  It is almost like undoing that which was done before, and the median is constantly shifting away from the fortitude that is necessary to affect real change.  The average is constantly shifting back towards “vote them out of office”, “Support the Republican Party”, or an effort to enact new laws (as if we need any new laws).  And, as those near the left move along to toward the right, they will soon find out that they, too, are outnumbered by the constant flow in on the left.

So, let’s leave the current line behind, for now, instead, let’s look at history.  In April 1775, most of the colonists would have been well to the left on the above-described line.  Any thought of violence would only have occurred in parts of Massachusetts and in North Carolina.  Contentment and peaceful change were the mean, and that was how it was, just as it is, today.  For example, in Albany, New York, word of the “Kings Troops” commencing “Hostilities” was received, via a letter from the Committee of Correspondence, on April 26, 1775.  The response to the letter received indicated that any real threat was “entirely Groundless”.  On May 1, a public meeting was held to determine if the citizens wished to take a position on the matter and appoint people to look into forming a District Committee of Safety and to prepare a plan to deal with the King’s “Ministerial Plan”.  Finally, on May 3, they began enrolling a Militia unit.

Had a role call been made of all of the colonists who were otherwise unsympathetic to the British intrusions into the colonist’s rights, the majority, most assuredly, would have voted against such action.  It was only after events were acted out that made continued “Hostilities” inevitable that the shift in thought — the joining of one side, or the other, was an inescapable necessity, regardless of prior reluctance.

To argue, now, to avoid the inescapable reality, that force will ever be necessary, flies in the face of historical fact, and, reality.  Or, to phrase it in the language of those days, “Load, shoot, or get out of the way”, but don’t attempt to hinder those who have been here longer and realize that there is but one means by which we will achieve our goal of restoration of Constitutional Government.

Until our line hardens sufficiently to keep their line from constantly encroaching, we will remain on the downhill side of achievement of our goal.

25 Comments

  1. busboy says:

    To take the history of the Founders being attacked on April 19th (and other dates), and their defensive reaction to these attacks, then try to justify some level of aggressive, first strike is needed on the part of the Patriot Community, to “get the ball rolling” is nonsense.

    Perhaps your line could include those who simply are bored with the natural time line of making positive changes in this country, and who wish to “push things along faster” by trying to force others to choose sides, before they need to or are willing. This sounds a bit like tyranny to me, forcing others to do what they see no need to do, or what puts them in needless harm’s way.

    In fact, the very statement by you that you recognize a growth in the ranks of the Patriot Community defies your notion that the time for violence is now. Even a person who is bent on using violence would be wise enough to wait while their ranks are growing, to make their prospect more favorable.

    By your own assertion, the Patriot Community is growing. They are growing in size and power, and in fact, are able to leverage this size and power in peaceful, Constitutional ways, to restore previous usurpations of power from the government.

    So why the hurry to violence? First, if indeed the Patriot Community is growing, is it not wise to allow it to continue to grow so that any “inevitable” violence has a much greater support and chance of success? And Secondly, perhaps it is possible that with growth, increased strength and increased knowledge, Constitutional means of restoring the Constitutional Republic can be found and used to stave off the need for violence.

    In fact, if one looks about them, they can find many examples of Patriot groups having success in rolling back the abuses of government. Conceal Carry laws, State Nullification, Jury Nullification, Firearms Freedom Acts, Obama Care state bans, and the list can go on. Here is a link with more success by Patriots: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/the-10th-amendment-movement/

  2. D. Wilburn says:

    Gary,

    The information in this email/post is sprinkled with a few known historical events, but heavily laden with opinions concerning the motives of certain groups and individuals, as well as the thoughts of people long dead. As such, it is impossible to confirm the voting intent of colonials as speculated when no such vote was taken. (“Had a role call been made of all of the colonists who were otherwise unsympathetic to the British intrusions into the colonist’s rights, the majority, most assuredly, would have voted against such action.”)

    It is doubtful that you or any other “historian” possess the resources to poll the vast number of groups and individuals involved with political movements in this country in order to obtain a true understanding of their motives and intentions, real or otherwise.

    I leave you wih this two part question: Which do you intend to do? Load, shoot or get out of the way?

    • ghunt Hunt says:

      Darren,
      There is an historical record and with the exceptions mentioned (Massachusetts and North Carolina), and even within those areas, diaries, speeches, newspaper articles, etc., indicated a lack of support until after April 19. What I wrote is based upon my research. If you would like to read my research sources, feel free to visit. I have 22 books published in the 1800s, 81 before 1950 and the modern textbook. There are also numerous on-line records available.
      Historians are able to read, however, they read historical works (not just quote).
      As far as my loading, shooting, or getting out of the way,. you may want to read some of my articles where I was having government guns pointed in my direction. I was younger then, however, I still load and shoot — though with a pen.
      Let me ask you — where do you sit on that line?

      • D. Wilburn says:

        Newspaper articles and written speeches are nothing more than a single person’s (and possibly an editor’s) opinion. Diaries that were recovered from that period were very few and far between. If these were all in agreement with each, it strongly suggests that they were taken from a single source of compilation in support of a particular ideology, therefore it should be eyed with caution. As I am very busy with organizing and training very active militia members and don’t have the time to look up your sources and am not a historian, perhaps you would be so kind as to provide the written material of the news articles, speeches and diaries you refer to so that I might have the opportunity to read what you have read.

        In a follow-up to your answer of my question about “load, shoot or get out of the way” I am forced to ask: If you are a shooter as you claim, then why didn’t you respond to illegal government guns threatening your life by destroying the threat? (In other words, why didn’t you shoot?)

        • ghunt Hunt says:

          Darren,
          Well, if I didn’t want to take the time to research and then write, I could simply list the books that I didn’t read. Then, you could read the list, then, not read the books, and still jump to the conclusion that you have. However, I didn’t write the article for you, as your reaction to it clearly indicates. It is for people that wish to expand their understanding, not to attack someone, with ulterior motives in mind.

          So, you will have to take my word for it, or not. If you really want to take the time to read them, then I will be happy to provide that list. However, if you just want me to do “busy work” to make the list so that you can ignore it, then I believe that I have better uses for my time. However, if you request, via email, I will be happy to send you the list.

          I will provide a source that is the most comprehensive. “American Archives”, edited by Peter Force, especially Series III and IV.
          I’m not sure that you understood what I said in my previous comment. I said that I load and shoot a pen (really, a computer, etc.). I reread what I wrote and I am surprised that you did not catch that. Or, let me suppose that you are trying to bait me. Surely, to be a private investigator, you cannot be that unable to comprehend.

          Now, returning to your early (first paragraph) comment about what you do. Why do you train for violence? Do you anticipate some? If so, why not take the initiative. If you are training militia, you need to teach that the best defense is a good offense. After all, you advocate training for violence and I advocate training for the mind.

        • ghunt Hunt says:

          For those who may be interested, here is what Wikipedia says about Peter Force and American Archives, what Darren “A single compilation” in a separate communications:

          “His greatest achievement came as a collector and editor of historical documents. He published Tracts and Other Papers, Relating Principally to the Origin, Settlement, and Progress of the Colonies in North America (4 vol Washington, 1836–1846), which comprised rare pamphlets. His American Archives was a collection of the most important documents of the American Revolution, 1774–1776. Twenty large folio volumes were planned but only the first 9 volumes were published between 1837 and 1853. Force’s lifelong desire to establish an American national library finally came to fruition in 1867 when Congress purchased his own collection of original documents for $100,000 to found the Library of Congress.”

          Though I don’t have all of the collection (by a very long shot), I do have a paper copy of Series 4, Volume IV. It is 1742 pages and has an average of about 5 documents per page. That is approaching 10,000 copies of original documents of that period, from all of the colonies and England. Series 4 has 9 volumes. Series 3, I don’t know how many volumes are contained in it and haven’t found digital versions.

        • Kimo says:

          D Wilburn, there is time and place for all things. And, sometimes, from direct experience I speak, a time to live, to fight another day.
          When facing overwelming odds, wisedom dictactes ones actions. There is a difference between cowardess, and bravery, one more dead hero, wont help any of us. Mr. Hunt, is a long respected patriot , beyond reproach. Who has spent mny years caring, and researching not only the laws, but people. Some, have no idea what some men have sacrificed of themselves, to bring light to others. Hunt, Is trusted with my life, and has the trust of literally 10s of thousands. Your effort is also noble. The point, is WE ALL want justice and freedom. The articles in this series, adreeses why patriot communities are split up, and how. Sir, I respect your opinion, and we all disagree on certain things, just as we all agree on certain things, my humble opinion, is we consentrate on what we agree on. Mr. Hunt, has written MASSIVE amounts of truth, and historical facts.
          Not one scolar, can find mistakes. If it is humanly possible, Mr. Hunt, I feel, {remembering he has decades of hands on experience, and spoken to men we can only hope to ever meet} Is trying, and is succeeding, in reaching out to heal a patriot community, shattered by informants, and some times sabataged, because of petty issues.
          To ask why, or any question concerning violence, is baiting, to imply cowardess, is insulting. Mr. Hunt, has NEVER wavered, in decades. Im sure you also are a patriot, i sit on many sites {conservative} The biggest problem I have seen, is not a lack of patriots, but a severe lack of trust.
          Ill answer the question of “why didnt you shoot”
          Im glad he didnt, we need him. He is, exactally what he said, a warrior whos weapon is the pen. I dont douth his manhood, I dont dout yours. Mr. Hunt, has been harrases by the most powerfull men in the system, his life threatened many times, but, he STILL tells the truth, that, in itself, to stand for so long, is brave, strong, and shoews great character.
          I dnt think, that question is needed, Mr. Hunt, cannot be manipulated to commit an act of violence, he has prooved himself many times over. No lies are found in his work, his work is respected worldwide, by many we will never hear speak on the web. We need you young men, for many of us are older now. Please remember, we are all on the same side, when it comes to our base belifes, our sacred law, the Constitution.
          Wise men, pick the place, and time, they understand, never play another mans game on his terms. One fights to win,
          Mr Wilburn, know I also respect you as a human being, And I mean no disrespect. I hope your people, are strong, and good. What the patriot community has had to endure through the years, ONLY men of iron will could weather. Gary, to thousands, is above reproach. Notice he will engage you? politally…he fears not intellectual debate. In fact, he is one of the fathers of the original movement, meaning, hes been there, done it ALL. Seen it all. dam near. Experience, is the best teacher.
          I wish I could count the times groups have been infiltraded, and destroyed by hate and distrust, purposly initiated. Mr. Hunt, has earned trust and respect. Been through things that would have destroyed lessor men.
          Good luck with your endevor Mr. Wilburn.

  3. SleepySalsa says:

    Fantastic explanation as to the dynamics concerning the diversity of the Patriot Community.

    While I think that some will confuse the left and right relative to the line in the sand with The Left-Right Paradigm, the concept itself is sound. Semantics aside, the point here is that with every new influx of political dissidents the overall willingness to collectively resist via direct action is reduced with the newer guys naively bleating that what needs to be done is to engage in the mainline political process, despite its historical ineffectiveness.

    I’ve been contemplating how best to encourage our personnel to cross over that line. Perhaps by empirically demonstrating that certain methods simply do not work (i.e. voting, petitioning, writing congressmen letters, etc.) we can cut the learning curve a hell of a lot shorter and much more easily bring about the ends that we intend to manifest.

    • D. Wilburn says:

      “Cross that line”…always pushed by those that have no intention of going into harms way.

      • SleepySalsa says:

        Darren,

        Like you, I anticipate some day along the line that inevitably the body politic is going to be backed up against a wall, but what then? As Mr. Hunt’s article says, when the time comes I hope there are others who are well beyond us in their recognition of the severity of the problems we all face.

        Last time I checked,”organizing and training very active militia members” means you are learning to deal with violence. Why do you train for violence? Do you anticipate some? If so, why not take the initiative? If you are training militia units, you need to teach that the best defense is a good offense. While you may advocate training for violence, I think it better to focus on who you’d trust first.

        For the sake of security, I am not going to disclose on the Internet what I do offline or who I associate with. As a militia leader, I’m sure you can appreciate more than most what can be said publicly and what should be kept private.

  4. […] Until such time this happens, dissident activity will be about as effective as pissing in the wind, for each new influx of eager activists has demonstratively slid any sort of real advancement for the…, typically by advocating for methods that necessarily entail working within the system (such as by […]

  5. […] an ineffective method to work, is quite beyond frustrating. What needs to happen is for people to cross that line where they understand that there is no way to work within the system; you cannot negotiate with […]

  6. […] realistic reaction I thought the author captured was the reluctance of the colonists to move along the line towards the proverbial state of nature. Right after the inhabitants of Lexington got word of the redcoat’s mission, they then bickered […]

  7. […] I trust the Ron Paul Refuges, like the Tea Party Refugees, now have the courage, and the brains, to move more along the line towards that “state of nature” that the Founders talked […]

  8. […] So, should you indeed resist the next US Census? Quite honestly, I just don’t see the effectiveness of doing so in terms of securing our Liberties. In light of other methods that have already worked historically (such as with the formation of local Committees of Safety), I really don’t see how playing an amateur game of cat and mouse with the US Census Bureau moves you that much closer towards a state of nature. […]

  9. […] conversations I’ve had with those entering the Patriot Community on the far left side of the other (not so) line. This “r-love-ution” as it soon became known, highlighted three areas of policy reform: civil […]

  10. […] where is the harm, you may ask? Well, if you look at the other (not so) thin line, every time there’s a massive infusion of newer dissidents, a huge bubble enters at the far […]

  11. […] sincere, focused only where they stand on the “progression of involvement” (See The Other (not so) Thin Line) within their own community. Quite simply, many have still maintained that the election process is […]

  12. […] you a lot of grief, because they are efficient for the purpose of encouraging you to move along the other (not so) thin line more quickly by taking up the economic means of making money, as Albert Jay Nock put […]

  13. […] you a lot of grief, because they are efficient for the purpose of encouraging you to move along the other (not so) thin line more quickly by taking up the economic means of making money,as Albert Jay Nock put […]

  14. […] you a lot of grief, because they are efficient for the purpose of encouraging you to move along the other (not so) thin line more quickly by taking up the economic means of making money, as Albert Jay Nock put […]

  15. […] that might be a bit more serious, with regard to acting in opposition to government activities (See The Other (not so) Thin Line). One of these was the XXX Minuteman Militia, based in Georgia, with supporters in other […]

  16. Thankyou Gary, for posting this article. Over the years I’ve noticed as you’ve described, the antiwar groups who return to their couches or move over to another issue, after the particular event that they are protesting is over. At various times over the years, on my periphery, I would notice sudden yet subtle drop-off of interest or subtle shifts by groups, towards other causes.
    I look forward to reading your articles and your dialogue with others here.
    Thanks again, Gary. Dave

Leave a Reply