Thursday, June 25, 2009

Government Violence

Resorting to Violence
By Larken Rose

Well, I made it back alive from Michigan, and now I have lots more copies of "The Iron Web" (with fewer typos) ready to go. Actually, 300 of the 1,000 that were just printed are already out the door, so I may be ordering another printing fairly soon. If you want a copy, you might want to hurry and order. (See the link at the bottom of this message.)

On a couple of occasions, while driving back and forth to Michigan getting the books, I made myself listen to NPR (which I think stands for "New Pravda Radio"). One of the topics discussed by the collectivist brigade was "extremism" in America, and how sometimes extremists, "right" and "left," resort to violence to push their agenda.

What was most noteworthy about the show was what they did NOT say, and probably have never even considered. While talking about how, out of frustration and desperation, sometimes disenfranchised people resort to violence, they failed to mention that "government," by its very nature, ALWAYS resorts to violence. Everything "government" does is backed by a threat of brute force. Every "law" is a command--not a friendly suggestion, not a helpful tip, but a command backed by the threat of violence. But statists never seem to grasp that obvious truth.

When has any statist, after seeing a video of a SWAT team invading someone's home, referred to it as government "resorting to violence"? In fact, when do they even call it "violence" at all? Never. You see, in their eyes, "legal" violence committed by "authority" is automatically legitimate, and therefore doesn't count as violence at all. When the IRS fascists resorted to violence on May 6, 2003, sending a dozen armed thugs to my home, to force their way into my house so they could steal all of my "Theft By Deception" videos, that didn't count as violence--not in the eyes of statists, anyway. And when the local, state and federal thugs do armed invasions of many people's homes, pointing machine guns at everyone, because they think there might be a non- government-approved plant growing on the premises, that doesn't count as "violence" either. In fact, when they shoot and kill someone in the process, even that doesn't win the label "violent" (though it might qualify as an "unfortunate mistake").

Lots of people pretend to abhor violence, but most of them don't really. They complain about non-"government" violence, but are the first in line to demand that the violence of the state be used to give handouts to the poor, or build a military, or serve some other collectivist agenda. Likewise, lots of people say they hate guns, but they really don't. They don't want the common folk armed, but they want the mercenaries of the state to have all the violence they need at their disposal in order to forcibly execute the agenda of their masters. (Ask a "gun control" proponent if they would mind starting by disarming the government, and you'll find out what their real agenda is.)

The belief in "authority" so drastically distorts how people see the world that even when there's a large-scale para-military assault on a private home, resulting in the deaths of people living there, for no other reason than the allegation that someone there possessed a firearm that is not government-approved (such as happened both at Ruby Ridge and Waco), most Americans will view the residents, NOT the violent invaders, as the "violent" and "dangerous" ones.

Federal and state "tax collectors," under threat of force or by the blatant use of force, take TRILLIONS of dollars every year from those who have earned it. Yet the IRS is not viewed as "violent." Other federal and state agencies forcibly capture and lock up hundreds of thousands of people for possessing substances not approved by the politicians. But the DEA is not seen by most as being violent. Cops across the country, under threat of violence or with the open use of violence, stop, detain, interrogate, and search people by the thousands every day, without a shred of probable cause to think an actual crime has occurred. Yet that is not viewed as violence by the general public.

What IS viewed as despicable violence, and receives the scorn of the majority of Americans, is when, once in a blue moon, some target of the fascist police state decides to meet force with force, by resisting totalitarianism in the only language tyrants understand: violence. And then people wring their hands, as if THAT is some big problem--that every once in a while, someone DOESN'T put up with being treated like a slave, and fights back.

It is true that sometimes the force used by the victims of tyranny is misplaced and unjustified, including any time innocent people are targeted. But the threat which such violence poses to the general public is completely dwarfed by the "legal" violence committed in the name of "government." Anyone who thinks he has more to fear from "militia types" than he does from King Obama and his throngs of thugs needs a reality-check. Just because violence is often done in the name of "fairness," and "helping" people, and providing "benefits" and "programs," doesn't mean it's not violence. And if you still can't recognize that "government" is ALWAYS violence, try disobeying for a while, and see what happens.

Larken Rose