Therefore, three links, all to the same article at different sites:
The original comment at HaloScan
The First Repost that I can find at "Smallest Minority"
The post at Western Rifle Shooters where I read it
And now I, in turn, will repost it here on the off chance that it becomes unavailable at any of the three links above:
A comment by Phil B.
I must disagree with Kevin regarding the ability of anyone to convince the voting public that anything to do with guns is acceptable or normal. I personally do not believe that it is possible to peacefully reverse the restrictions and negative image of firearms in the UK for various reasons. Let me start from first principles to outline why I have come to this conclusion.
You must understand the nature of the Politicians, Quangos (Quasi Autonomous Non Governmental Organisations) and the Civil Service (which is neither civil or a servant but a Master). Ministers come and go and are briefed by the civil servants but it is the Civil Service which effectively runs the country. It is overwhelmingly Marxist/Leninist in its ethos and has been infiltrated so successfully by the left that the average citizen (or even a group of such citizens) does not even understand the rules of the game.
Communism can be simply and easily summarised : “A group of PROFESSIONAL Revolutionaries, taking over the levers of power of a country and running the country for their own benefit”. How will they mange this? By organisation and eliminating opposition by whatever means is necessary. Briefly, the left wing intent is to destroy the existing society and replace it with a society of its own design. Lenin proposed five conditions for successful “Revolution”, namely:
1) The weakening or destruction of the existing State and its institutions
2) The destruction of the existing society so that it can be replaced by the type of society required by the "new" post revolutionary society
3) An inability of the existing institutions to govern or bring about change.
4) The armed forces must be demoralised and rendered ineffective (including the Police).
5) The "proletariat" must be in a mood for change.
He also stated that Freedom and Liberty is precious and therefore must be strictly rationed. All power must be accumulated to the State and freedoms and rights will be permitted ONLY if the State allows. Once you understand that mindset and these principles, then you can use them as a template to see how many of the trends in society fit the pattern and “advance the cause”. The destruction of marriage, the recent posting on this blog about the way all parents are to be treated as paedophiles, the wrecking of the education system, “equality” legislation, gay and minority rights, etc., and so forth, ad infinitum, all assist one or more of the five principles. Try matching the attack to the principle.
Interestingly, Lenin did not prescribe what form the revolution takes or how it is prosecuted. Everyone thinks of the “Revolution” as armed people storming the Winter Palace in St Petersburg (or Leningrad if your atlas is a bit older). However, he also said that ALL aspects of society should be attacked simultaneously and if an opportunity arises to spring the revolution, then it should be taken. If the communists can actually take over the Government of the day and run the country for its own use, then that is also considered as “revolution” and equally valid. The left wing has infiltrated and hollowed out from within just about every organisation - including the Conservative party (“Right” wing or Republican) which is “Blue Labour” – their policies and attitude is a milder version of the Left policies and attitudes. As a “for example” I will quote from Mary Ellen Synon's blog “Eurosceptic” (original here: Dave Pétain)
Tony Blair promised the British people a referendum on the European Constitution. Then, after the text was renamed the Lisbon Treaty, Blair broke that promise because he said it was no longer a constitution, it was a treaty, and he had only promised a referendum on a constitution.
David Cameron promised the British people a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Now, after the text has been signed by President Klaus of the Czech Republic, Cameron has broken that promise -- he has sent out his Tory spokesmen to say there will not be a referendum because Lisbon is not a treaty, it is now European law, and he only promised a referendum on a treaty.
Do you spot the similarities?
In the UK. The brothers Milliband (both professional politicians who have never had a job outside of Politics) and are the sons of Ralph Milliband, an ardent and active communist, are holders of significant power in the UK. David Milliband is Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Edward Samuel Miliband is Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. Ralph Milliband was attacked by David Horowitz in an essay called “The Road to Nowhere” and Kevin blogged this a while back. Examining the political credentials of the rest of the Government Ministers reveals a similar catalogue of “ex” Marxist/Leninists in significant positions of power and influence.
A revolution? I believe it certainly is and all the conditions listed above have been very largely been achieved. The Daily Mail newspaper reported that Labour has deliberately encouraged “multiculturism” and unlimited mass immigration to destroy British society and forever change Britain to spite the right wing. As the newspaper concerned has not been sued by the Labour party or the Government or forced to issue a public retraction of the statement that I can only assume that it must be true. (see "Labour Cynically Plotted to Transform Britain" and "Labour Opens Borders, Accuses Tories of Racism" for details)
However, there has been a deafening silence from the rest of the press and as the majority of people rely on the TV for news and the BBC (the state sponsored broadcasting organisation) in particular, very few people are aware of this. This also addresses Point 2 above, for example, examining the relentless attacks on marriage from a myriad of different directions (removing tax breaks for married couples, elevating the “single parent family” by favourable benefits so that it is financially more beneficial for a married couple with children to LIVE APART, the elevation of gay “Marriage” etc.) all add to this.
Constant change and bogging people down in pointless activities contributes to points 2 and 3 – Markadelphia is an expert at this. Consider the amount of time that the readers of this blog have wasted in rebutting in detail his postings – while you are busy researching facts, carefully editing replies and spending your time and effort concentrating on the garbage he writes, you are not concentrating on other, perhaps much more important things. “Make the enemy do useless things” is one of Sun Tzu’s maxims. And while you are doing this, he, like a butterfly, flutters off onto another topic, equally as pointless and you respond, so forth and so ad infinitum.
What you must bear in mind is that for a professional revolutionary, infiltrated into an organisation, IT IS THEIR FULL TIME JOB to work towards the destruction of society. Kevin, all the rest of the bloggers and I must devote our spare time to this – a revolutionary can work 8 hours a day at the office and then go home to carry on in their leisure time.
My point is that, regardless of your arguments, no matter how detailed your research, no matter how much you can demonstrate that your point of view is reasonable, it will be ignored, dismissed and trivialised. Critical Theory, so well developed by the Frankfurt School of Communism, will be brought fully to bear to render your arguments invalid (“You are wrong”).
The existing State holds the levers of power and they certainly are not going to give it up – remember, rights will be allowed if the State is convinced that it will not be harmed by the relaxation and can be withdrawn at any time. You might as well try to persuade by sweet reason a hungry grizzly bear to turn vegetarian and not eat you. It is not interested, its mind is made up and you are wasting your time.
Now, having outlined the methodology of the Left and given some examples to illustrate the way that the left operates, let us examine how they have used Critical Theory in particular to shape the way firearms are viewed in the UK. Since 1920, the propaganda output by all the British media, both State controlled and privately owned, has been that Guns are evil. Gun “Nuts/Fanatics/Crazy” people have been (and still are) the target of all the insidious destruction of their reputation and character which the left practices so well.
Using Critical Theory, firearms and owners are attacked and trivialised at every opportunity. Rich, upper class people shooting grouse and pheasants (I am neither rich or upper class but have shot both pheasants and grouse on a very modest budget) can be dismissed using the “Class Enemy” approach and vilified as brainless, moronic bloodthirsty destroyers of the environment (when not clearing the peasants from their land so that a privileged minority can lord it over the country for their own sadistic pleasure, of course).
So inculcated are the populace and so selective are the reports presented by the media (“look what happens in America”) that anyone would think that an intelligent, sober, sensible, law abiding person merely touching a gun would instantaneously be transmogrified into a drooling, crazed murdering chimpanzee on acid and not to be trusted with a gun. The press and media are so left wing leaning and biased against firearms that getting the message out will be virtually impossible.
The Police have actively campaigned for the restriction on firearms since the beginning in 1920. Their mantra is “We wish to reduce the number of firearms in the hands of the population to the absolute minimum” – and if you believe any number north of zero is “the minimum”, then you are as gullible as Markadelphia.
Thanks to the Police, taking anyone to a range to introduce them to the sport is lengthy, tedious, bureaucratic and intended to put people off. Journalists have stated that they want to infiltrate a gun club and “prove” how easy it is to steal a gun. (A few years back, a journalist smuggled a gun into the UK to “prove” how easy it was … and was not prosecuted for breaking the law).
The penalties for having a gun stolen are severe and you can bet your bottom dollar that you will never own a gun again. Any Gun Club where the firearm is stolen will be shut down. More ammunition will be provided to “prove” that firearms owners are a danger. As you must vouch for anyone you take to the club, very, very few people will risk things and even fewer clubs will encourage visitors.
Gun ownership is being attacked and strangled from many directions and few people will be willing to risk introducing anyone to a club, or even discuss that they are firearms owners in case loose talk leads to a break in and theft of a firearm. Samizdata has a blog entry describing the evolution of the “no right to self-defense" (link here: Samizdata: The Way We Were) and it summarizes how and why it is impossible to use a legally held firearm in self-defense (besides the conditions on the firearms certificate will state “Only to be used on Approved ranges”, or a named piece of land for shooting rabbits, etc., so you will be breaking the law by doing so).
So to conclude, the decline in firearms ownership in Britain will only continue, and indeed accelerate as people are forced out
of the sport and no new people come into the clubs, etc., and those in charge of the system will be quite content to allow this BECAUSE it is what they want. Chairman Mao stated that “Power comes from the barrel of a gun” and there is no way in the world that these people will allow power to be given to the population.
So will there ever be a change in this status? I believe so but as I said at the start of this essay, it will not be PEACEFUL. There is an interesting book about revolutionary guerrilla warfare by Robert Taber called the "War of the Flea". It was published a while ago in the 1960s and the CIA bought up the entire first printing – not because it was so dangerous that the public couldn’t be allowed access to it but it was so good it was issued as a standard text to their operatives. I often used to see it in second hand bookshops in the UK. One of the questions Taber asked was, “Why do people, when the risks and dangers are so great, both to themselves and their families, resort to armed revolution?”
His answer was quite simple – they cannot get any redress to their grievances either through the ballot box or through the Courts. In the UK such topics as the Lisbon treaty, law and order, taxation, the deliberate encouragement of immigration to destroy the nature of the country, loss of liberties, ID cards, etc. etc. are occurring at an accelerating rate and the average citizen is bewildered by this. The torrent of legislation and the pettiness and disproportionate penalties for trivial transgressions of the law is proceeding unabated. The labour government, through “Enabling Acts” (i.e. under existing legislation a Minister can introduce a law without it being scrutinised or voted on by parliament) has introduced one new criminal offence for EVERY DAY they have been in power since May 1997. Such legislation has given the state unprecedented power to snoop and spy on the population and now it is more expensive to obey the law than to be a criminal.
The citizens do not understand the rules of the game being played by the left. They try to understand and reason their way to a solution – and while they are trying to address and counter the arguments and problems in detail and try to lobby their “representatives”, they are overwhelmed by the new legislation coming down the pipeline. The representatives will ignore or trivialize the citizens letter or enquiry – they are driving the process – and will divide and conquer using Critical Theory, accusations of Racism, Homophobia, Islamophobia etc. No matter, it helps destroy and fragment society and isolate people, engender suspicion and any “problems” can be sorted later (such as declaring sections of the population as counter revolutionaries, class enemies, etc.). The solution involves firing squads or Gulags but it must be kept firmly in mind that the purpose of it all is for a SMALL group of PROFESSIONAL revolutionaries to run the country for THEIR benefit. See any communist country and the way the leaders behave.
Is there any redress through the ballot box? All political parties are singing from the same hymn sheet and Europe is gaining greater and greater (unelected and unaccountable) powers – see the quote by Mary Ellen Synon above. Is there any chance of the Law Courts siding with the people of the country and reversing the Governments policies? Again, no. Rather they uphold stupid and malicious legislation. And any situation where it costs you more to obey the law than to disregard it is a dangerous situation. Some of the judgements are frankly bizarre and perverse to say the least and discriminate in favour of “minorities” and against the law abiding (as a “for example” search for “Travellers” on the Daily mail website for dozens of examples of this).
The mood of the people when I left in late January 2009 was becoming increasingly frustrated and angry. Society is so fragmented now that there is no longer a sense of national identity and people now have nothing to lose. If you accept that Taber was correct (regarding ballot boxes and the law courts) then you must conclude that revolution in the UK is inevitable. I learned that to avoid trouble it's best not be there when it kicks off, and I believe that Britain is heading for a revolution of one form or another because the pressures and change in society are so great that it is at a breaking point. What will replace that particular version of society is anyone’s guess but I can guarantee it will be a less benign, harsher and more impoverished existence. Revolutions destroy wealth and stability and I’m getting too old to start from scratch again. That is why I am writing this in New Zealand.
HOW the revolution starts (without guns in the hands of the people it will be difficult, but not impossible) and what direction it takes I would not like to predict. It will be bloody, long and protracted - but sweeping away of the old regime and the replacement with a new form of governance will be something to observe from afar. You can bet that those people who have put their life on the line to get rid of the corrupt, non-representative and self-serving system will not meekly hand in their weapons to those in the new authority. Instead, they will be as brutal as the Communists and quite a few of the existing politicians, civil servants and others will meet an untimely end in one form or another.
So is there hope? That’s a strange way of looking at it but perhaps there is.
As usual, you will want to know where the information comes from. For a concise and easily read summary of the aims and principles of communism, Geoffrey Fairbairn’s “Revolutionary Guerrilla Warfare, The Countryside Version” is as good as you will get. One chapter on Leninism sums it up completely in 19 pages of a paperback. Chairman Mao's quotes are found in my copy of “Mao Tse Tung – Selected Writings” which is surprisingly readable and well written. Not that I would be persuaded to subscribe to his philosophy.
Lenin’s works are too numerous to list in all their gory detail but the following are worthwhile to understand the way communist organisations are set up, organised and run. Note that Lenin had experience of the Army and organisation so if his writings seem to be written as a military textbook, referring to “This Army”, now you know why. His acceptance and insistence on the use of overwhelming violence stems from his Military Training and may give an insight into the tactics of the left wing political parties. Try these two as a primer:
Incidentally, if Lenin DID write this stuff, he was an excellent technical author.
Sun Tsu – The Art of War. I prefer the translation by Samuel B. Griffiths (an ex-US Marine) but there are plenty more out there.
The Daily Mail is a large circulation newspaper with over 3 million readers per day (see the Audited Bureau of Circulation Website for exact figures. Make sure you enter the full title as there are thousands of newspapers with Mail as part of the title) and covers some of the stupidities of the various laws passed over the last 13 years. Try entering BNP as a search string in the website and read some of the comments under the articles. Or “Travellers” for the way the law abiding are second class citizens in their own homes.
Samizdata is, I find, patchy and does not cover a single topic (as Kevin's Blog does) but in the right hand sidebar, you can search under TOPICS for self-defense, etc. Plenty of British points of view.
And there you have it. The entire case laid out in a degree of detail I could only manage with a solid investment of six months or longer. This is not paranoia. There is an active culture of narcissistic self-indulgence among the economic and political elite in both Britain and the United States. These people desire nothing more than to be the new nobility. If they have their way, they will command all the resources our modern society produces and the rest of us will be reduced to either factory drones or peasant farmers. If you think factory work is robotic and monotonous now, just wait until these people get hold of things. Watch carefully what happens to General Motors and Chrysler now that the federal government is in charge. Be mindful of anyone in congress who tries to put forth a measure removing term limits on the Presidency. It is especially important now, more than ever, to remove from office any and every elected official who has made a career of politics. These people are not interested in anything except solidifying their own power and passing it on to their children.
I have said it before and I will continue to say it until the course is reversed. We stand at a dangerous crisis point in American history. Progressive liberalism, global environmentalism, even your local board of education have been taken over by people who have become convinced that the future of humanity is a Marxist utopia and they will destroy anyone who stands in their way. If we cannot remove them from office through the ballot box, then there will be armed rebellion. It is not a question of "if". It is strictly a matter of "when".