• Home • Downloads • Your Account • Forums • 
Site Info v2.2.2
Last SeenLast Seen
Server TrafficServer Traffic
  • Total: 63,665,308
  • Today: 5,942
Server InfoServer Info
  • Feb 23, 2018
  • 12:19 pm CST
The Truth About Weapons - Authoritarianism vs. Democratic Power

Original Article Here

by Greg Bishop

So, aside from training for the Lincoln Presidential Half-Marathon, I'm also finishing several big projects and trying to read through Carroll Quigley's 1300 page book Tragedy & Hope.

Who is Carol Quigley you may ask? Well, he's only a very influential historian who mentored people like Bill Clinton, that's all.


In his book, which takes the reader through an incredibly complex and multidimensional and interdisciplinary narrative of world and human history, he addresses weapons and the trends of who controls the weapons, controls the power.

I thought that with the conversation of late surrounding firearms in this country and Americans rights to keep and bear arms, it would be important to point out the true understanding of the elite central planners.

In his book, which you can read online here, Quigley says in the section "The Organization of Power:"

    "By the 'organization of power' in a society we mean the ways in which obedience and consent or acquiescence)are obtained. The close relationships between levels can be seen from the fact that there are three basic ways to win obedience: by force, by buying consent with wealth, and by persuasion.

    "When weapons are cheap to get and so easy to use that almost anyone can use them after a short period of training, armies are generally made up of large masses of amateur soldiers. Such weapons we call "amateur weapons," and such armies we might call "mass armies of citizen-soldiers."

So when weapons are readily available the military power lies in the hands of the citizen-soldier. OK.

    "[But when] weapons were expensive and required long training in their use. Such weapons we call 'specialist' weapons. Periods of specialist weapons are generally periods of small armies of professional soldiers (usually mercenaries). In a period of specialist weapons the minority who have such weapons can usually force the majority who lack them to obey; thus a period of specialist weapons tends to give rise to a period of minority rule and authoritarian government."

Right now there is a movement in this country by some people to label semi-automatic rifles "specialist" weapons by using the term "military grade" or even labeling them "assault" weapons.

The guns being targeted by legislators are firearms that takes one trigger-pull per round fired.  They are not high-powered fully automatic machine guns that allow multiple rounds per one trigger pull.  Those types of weapons are already banned.

Also something to note here ... think about the firepower that local police are increasingly being allowed to obtain. They include battering ram truck-tanks and other more sophisticated and truly "specialist" weapons.  Can we say sound weapons like the LRAD?

Say hello to authoritarian government, ladies and gentlemen!

Let's continue, shall we?

    "[A] period of amateur [as compared to the before mentioned 'specialist'] weapons is a period in which all men are roughly equal in military power, a majority can compel a minority to yield, and majority rule or even democratic government tends to rise."

That right there is a kill-shot, sniper-bullet right through the temple of tyranny. Let's read that one more time.

    "a period in which all men are roughly equal in military power, a majority can compel a minority to yield, and majority rule or even democratic government tends to rise."

Now, unfortunately, Quigley finishes up this short section of a massively long book on world history by saying the 20th century is the rise of authoritarian government because of things like the atom bomb and such. 

But for a thought exercise, let's imagine this on a much smaller scale.

Think about the government around you in your everyday life ... are they amassing more "specialist" weapons while trying redefine "amateur" weapons and tell you they should be banned?

The Second Amendment is not about hunting and it's not about skeet-shooting. Limiting and defining what arms the commoner can have versus what the state (government) can amass with the serf's tax dollars to use against the commoner to "enforce" law is tyranny.

Wake up and smell the authoritarianism and educate others about the real reason for gun control. It has nothing to do with saving lives.  It is all about control.

Posted on Friday, February 01, 2013 @ 09:41:28 CST by ShaunKranish
click Related        click Rate This        click Share
The Truth About Weapons - Authoritarianism vs. Democratic Power | Login/Create an Account | 0 comments
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Newsletter Signup

Federal Firearms Laws Fraud Revealed

The Federal Government has no constitutional authority to regulate firearms.  How then have all these federal laws been passed and enforced?  What about all the new laws that are always hanging over the heads of tens of millions of peaceful gun owners?


Sadly, you will only find it here.  Encourage other pro-gun organizations to copy and post this information!!!

Old Articles
Cast Your Vote
Current big Survey...
What do you think is the most effective action?

Votes :607

List of all Surveys
Join Us on Facebook!

Click here to join us on Facebook

Page Generation: 0.15 Seconds
:: fisubsilver shadow phpbb2 style by Daz :: RavenNuke theme by www.nukemods.com ::