The Role of Gun Control in Dictatorship

The Role of Gun Control in Dictatorship

President Trump is accused on a minute-by-minute basis of being a tyrant, but his accusers remain free.  Nothing has been taken from them, not their property nor their personal liberty.  Their rights remain intact in every respect.  They can speak without fear of retribution.  They can assemble without fear of arrest.  They can say and do the most vile and corrupt things, knowing that because the president is not a tyrant, nothing will be done to them for their crusade to erode and destroy our current social and political systems.

While the president correctly identifies the propagandists in the leftist media as philosophical enemies of the people they work every day to conquer, he doesn’t announce any plans to unilaterally cancel or rescind their rights.  He does not threaten to make their words and intentions illegal.  He doesn’t threaten to trample the Bill of Rights because they hate him and the country he works to preserve and protect, often from them.  He has never once hinted at criminalizing their political opposition, or their open warfare on the Constitution and every civil protection enjoyed by Americans who refuse to subscribe to despotism.

On the left, however, the seeds are being sown to create a police state in which the politically compliant and complicit will be safe, but the holdouts will be brutally punished.  The New York Times, it has been revealed, is about to embark on their latest propaganda project, on the heels of their last foray into pervasive disinformation claiming the president was allied with Russia.  Now, the lie will be rampant racism which, if it did exist, wouldn’t need the New York Times telling us about it.  We would see and be alarmed by it on our own.  Preceding this effort has been the lie that virulent white supremacy is everywhere.  The illusion exacerbates the anger and hatred on the left, and solidifies their resolve to marginalize, demonize and attack anyone branded with this fabricated label.  Anyone who does not believe he should be punished for this lie will be branded a supremacist, as he obviously believes his rights entitle him to racism without consequence.  The accusation is all the evidence needed.

The object, of course, is not addressing actual white supremacy.  That is a lie told to dim-witted people who think that “others” whom they are taught to hate and fear are living in an entirely different version of the country than they live in, one they can’t see but believe is there.  The object is polarization and demonization, though not simply to whip up progressive hatred for normal Americans.  The larger purpose is to facilitate the oppression and eventual eradication of normal Americans who refuse to worship the golden calves of socialism and communism.

For years, the Democrats have smiled and told us that they have no intention of infringing rights, or taking anything away, or incarcerating their enemies, and we have known every time that they were lying.  We have watched them redefine the language to change the foundations which we used to share as a country and have known why they are doing it.  We have seen them progressively attack those who obey the laws, protect their families, pay their taxes, and wish to be left in peace.

Overthrowing a society is dirty work, however, and it has become clear that peace will only come with our surrender or their failure, and even then, failure will be temporary.  Eventually, there will be conflict, which brings us to the Second Amendment.  The fate of everything the Left intends depends in the end on whether normal, non-communist Americans have the power to make the price of dictatorship so high that the Left will be unwilling to force it to completion.  If Americans can be disarmed and neutralized, they can be imprisoned without trials.  If they can be made powerless, they can be shot at without fear that they’ll shoot back.  If they can be conquered, they can be subjugated and made to serve their totalitarian masters.

The Second Amendment was always about exactly this scenario.  The Founders did not insist on the Second Amendment so that they could hunt in perpetuity but because they feared a large, authoritarian government controlled by unethical and immoral politicians and their mobs.

Socialist/communist critics ridicule supporters of the Second Amendment, correctly noting that AR15s are no match for the firepower of the U.S. military, so resistance is futile and should be abandoned.  They are correct as to the first part but misdirecting as to the second.  Although the Second Amendment was intended to enable citizens to fight with equal tools against an army of oppression, there is no modern parity.  The AR15 is not a “weapon of war,” as no military in the world issues a semi-automatic-only rifle to their combat troops.  That description is a lie.  However, the second part of the critique, that we would be confronting the U.S. military so should give up now, is not necessarily what will develop.  That is, the socialists/communists will not control the military until they have overthrown the current form of government and seized all power, including law enforcement.

Should confrontations occur before then, they will not be with the military, and depending on the politics of law enforcement officers, may not be with the police.  Rather, the earliest violent confrontations will be with armed civilian mobs, successors to the ones we see now at the homes of political enemies, calling for their deaths and those of their family members.  This is foreseeable in the growing number of “John Brown Gun Clubs” around the country, which cater to fanatical leftists who learn to shoot, and train to varying degrees to serve as the civilian vigilante arm of the left.  Unlike normal Americans, who are motivated to defend themselves from irrational lunatics, these gun owners are training as an offensive force for the overthrow of capitalism and democratic republicanism.  So, how might this develop?

Democrats will again weaponize information, this time publishing names and addresses of gun owners and urging indoctrinated radicals, backed by complicit politicians, to go to those homes and do whatever they feel is necessary to make the locality “safe.”  This will be intended to cause gun owners to question whether gun ownership, and the assault on them and their families, is worth the terror the fascists will cause.  As the Left stokes the cultivated emotionalism of its unstable followers and urges them to greater acts of unpunished violence against innocents, the threshold will eventually be crossed.  As the propagandists scream then for even more violence, and more “control,” those who own guns will be reminded why they have them, and their resolve will deepen.  The question then will be how far the Left is prepared to go to usher in the next fascist socialist utopia.  They know how much easier this will all be if the guns are taken first.

Authoritarians have always understood that gun control is political control, which is why they don’t practice it against their own supporters.   Gun control is for political enemies, and both precedes and hastens the eventual purge necessary to dictatorship.  It really is that simple.


 Jeffrey T. Brown