Sultan Knish
There are plenty of ways to cast the divisions between parties and
movements, but the elemental act of voting divides rhetoric from motive.
Obama called voting the best revenge, because for a sizable portion of
his base that's exactly what voting is. Their votes are a violent act, a
spiteful assault on a country that they can never participate in for
economic or cultural reasons. Change for them is not a positive program,
but a negative assault on the national majority. Bankrupting the
country by robbing it for their own benefit is their revenge.
Voting for us isn't revenge, it's resistance. It isn't a choice that
emerges out of reasoned debate between two sets of values, it's an act
of resistance against the revengers, the looters and the destroyers. The
voting booth is a form of sabotage against their regime, their corrupt
interests and their oppressive regulations.
These last four years we have endured an intensified occupation of our
political, religious and personal freedoms. We have been robbed, lied
to, ordered around and in some cases even killed. These crimes have been
carried out by elected officials and the election will allow us to
remove some of them. It will not end the reign of terror, but if
successful, our act of electoral resistance will inflict a severe
setback on the plans of their ideological movement and the unelected
officials who rely on them for funding and political support.
The election will not end the occupation, but it will interrupt the
forward momentum of the occupiers. It will force them to fall back into
their think tanks and formulate new strategies for dismantling the
Constitution, eliminating our civil rights and ending elections as
anything but empty shows with no meaning.
Some of us act as if elections will be here forever so that we can wait
for the next one to come around and the one after that when the right
candidate will lead us to victory. They won't be. The ideology that we
are resisting believes in populism only when it serves its ends. Its
judicial appointees have acted repeatedly to neuter referendums when the
results do not go the right way.
The ultimate goal of the occupation is to shift power away from elected
officials and into the infrastructure of unelected officials, so that
their elected officials can draw on nearly unlimited powers by dictating
to the bureaucratic oligarchy of the state, while elected officials not
aligned with their movement will be narrowly constrained and have very
little influence over the bureaucracy.
The occupation is not here to take power for another four years, but
another forty years and another four-hundred years. It is not playing a
short term game in a system where power shifts back and forth, but
putting in place the infrastructure for the permanent occupation of the
United States of America. But despite all its power and control, the
miles of video screens that spew forth its propaganda, the billions of
dollars that flow from its coffers into the pockets of its supporters
and the cultural control that its proponents wield-- it still has one
vulnerability.
A piece of paper, a push of a button, and the occupiers have to fall
back, gritting their teeth and planning a renewed offensive in the
spring.
The left overreached itself in the last four years. Its occupation was
poorly managed and the native population has been alienated. While its
Chief was sacrificing thousands of American lives to win over the
natives in Afghanistan, his occupation of the United States was
crumbling. The economy is rotten and the people are tired of being lied
to. The resistance is popular and the community organizers are running
scared.
This is our moment and in a single day we can push the occupation out of
the countryside and back into the cities. We can undermine its morale,
strip it of the money with which it bribes collaborators and force it to
rethink whether it really wants to spend the next few decades battling
to control an unruly population. We can make men like George Soros and
Ted Turner decide that their money would be better spent terrorizing
Eastern Europe or Africa, instead of America by making oppressing us
seem like a bad investment.
The tug of war between the occupiers and the resistance comes down to
morale. The occupiers are fighting to impose their will on us. To do
that they have to believe that they can win. Each defeat forces them to
reevaluate their tactics and each act of resistance drives them to
greater acts of ruthlessness which cannot help but make them more
unpopular until a point is reached where even they are forced to
recognize that their plans are unfeasible.
Our goal is not an absolute victory, but like all resistance movements,
it is to remain viable, to be there sabotaging their latest initiative,
undermining them and remaining free of their control. The potency of a
resistance movement derives from its sense of freedom. The occupation
seeks to impose control while the resistance negates it. Our task is
easier than theirs and every election is a chance to remind them that
they have no won and that they will not win, that they must despair of
going the electoral route and must impose their will without regard to
popular sentiment. And once they accept that premise and abandon their
facade of moderation, then we will be on the road to a true victory.
The occupation needs to believe in its own morality and its own
popularity. Every time we take that away from it, we are embittering its
leaders and its activists, we are teaching them to hate the people that
they claim to want to help and distancing them from the people by
making the people into the wedge that denies them power.
Elections must be used to humiliate the occupation, to rub its nose in
its own unpopularity, to show that no matter how much it controls the
means of communication, its agenda will always be rejected over and over
again.
Every form of rejectionism of its agenda further drives home the message
that the left can never wield power over the native population except
by force. Each vote cast against it, even in blue states, even in places
where the left can never lose, is an act of resistance because it
reminds the left of the limits of its power and warns it that even in
its own heartlands, it is not completely in control.
The left derives its power from the human impulse to conformity. No
matter how many people may take issue with its insane and vicious
program, most will not dissent from it in public, especially if they are
barraged with countless media messages that appear to show that the
vast majority of the population is in favor of it.
This national Milgram experiment is aborted every time the left loses a
referendum, every time it is defeated in an election, every time it is
saddled with another Carter or McGovern, every time the American people
wake up and see that the rest of the country is not a hive of
Obamanoids, but free people just waiting to find their voice.
Even if we lose this election, it will have been worthwhile to make it
as close as possible, to bring out massive rallies of people who are
waking up out of the daze and realizing that they don't have to take the
occupation and that there are tens of millions of people out there who
feel as they do. It will have been worthwhile to deliver a message to
the left that its occupation stands on shaky feet and that the next gust
of wind may tip it over. It will have been worthwhile in order to
remind the left that the people are rising and that while this uprising
may not have toppled over their golden throne, the next one might. It
will have been worthwhile to remind the left that it is not on the path
to a thousand-year world-state but to a collision with growing numbers
of people who want their freedom back.
Our vote at its most potent, is not just a protest vote, but a blow
aimed at the political heart of the occupation. But even if the blow
does not land, then the protest vote reminds the occupation that we are
united, not so much behind a man, as against them, and it will remind us
that when we come together, we have the power to terrify the occupiers.
Mitt Romney is a symbol, a convenient shorthand for freedom of
expression, enterprise and faith. Whether or not he embodies these
values is a secondary concern. As Obama became a vehicle for the left to
express its identity, Romney has become a vehicle for traditional
Americans to express theirs. If Romney wins, then he will become a
politician and if he loses, then the symbolic identity, which transcends
him, will go on, because it is an expression, not of one man, but of
the values of a country.
Resistance is grounded in values. It is grounded in the greater identity
of who we are and how we want to live. That refusal to abandon who we
are, to resist the political, cultural and religious assaults on our way
of life is what determines the potency of a resistance. And though
refusal is a negative word, it comes from a positive vision, an inner
fire, the glow and light of the values that make us who we are.
The occupation does not have these values. It is a disruptive force that
can borrow and mimic warped versions of these values, but it cannot put
them forth except as a mockery of the values it has displaced. It urges
its followers to vote for another four years of repression as a form of
revenge against us because it has no inner light, no goodness and no
truth. Inside it is a heart of darkness with no hope, only a ceaseless
turmoil of change for the sake of change and destruction for the sake of
destruction, power for the sake of power, and revenge for the sake of
revenge.
Our resistance is a form of love, love for our country, our communities,
our families and our values. That love has motivated us to spend the
last four years fighting to preserve these things that we love. It will
take us into the voting booth and whatever the outcome, it will keep us
warm even in the coldest winter, as we go on fighting through our own
Valley Forge for the redemption of our nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment