Monday, December 31, 2012

Jerrold Nadler, Gun-Grabbing Leninist

A victim of "Legitimate" Federal Violence at Wounded Knee.

When the "heroic" (and much-decorated) Seventh Cavalry slaughtered hundreds of starving, freezing Indians at Wounded Knee Creek in December 1890, the perpetrators of that massacre weren’t committing an atrocity. Instead, they were exercising what New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler calls “legitimate violence.” 

After all, the mass killing was carried out as part of a civilian disarmament exercise – what we would now call a gun “buy-back.”  It simply wouldn’t be acceptable for the Sioux to retain any means to defend what little they had left from the government that had expropriated them and driven them from their homes. 

During the subsequent war to suppress Philippine independence, the U.S. military slaughtered at least 128,000 Filipinos – another expression of what Nadler describes as the defining characteristic of the nation-state. The same trait was displayed in the aerial fire-bombing campaigns against Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, and Yokohama during World War II, the nuclear incineration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of that conflict, the slaughter of tens of thousands of Iraqis on the “Highway of Death” at the end of the first Gulf War, the78-day terror-bombing of Belgrade in 1999, and the murderous siege of Fallujah (which involved the use of chemical weapons and depleted uranium rounds) in 2004. We shouldn’t neglect the vital role played by Delta Force operators in the mass murder of the Branch Davidians at Mt. Carmel in 1993. 
Nadler, pre-gastric bypass surgery.

During a recent Capitol Hill press conference, Rep. Nadler urged his colleagues to support confiscation of high-capacity ammo clips legally obtained by American citizens. When a reporter asked if the military should be allowed to keep its high capacity magazines, Nadler decanted a reply that was pure, unfiltered Leninism: 

“One of the definitions of a nation state is that the state has a monopoly on legitimate violence. And the state ought to have a monopoly on legitimate violence…. If the premise of your question is that people are going to resist a tyrannical government by shooting machine guns at American troops, that’s insane.”

The unexamined premise of Nadler’s reply is that it is perfectly sane and rational for the segment of society most deeply implicated in the violent deaths of innocent people to have a monopoly on “legitimate” violence. Embedded within that premise is the assumption that the same government that monopolizes violence will have the exclusive privilege of defining “legitimacy,” as well. For him, as for totalitarians of all varieties, that which the government does is innately legitimate, and those whom the government decides to kill have an inescapable duty to die.

Nadler’s reply was a more verbose rendition of Lenin’s definition of government: “Power without limit, resting directly on force.” The distinction he drew between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” violence brings to mind comments made by Dear Leader Emeritus Bill Clinton in an interview published by  Foreign Policy magazine, in which he defined terrorism as "killing and robbery and coercion by people who do not have state authority and go beyond national borders." (Emphasis added.)

By invoking the mystical notion of “state authority,” government officials act as necromancers, transmuting such base acts as “killing and robbery and coercion” into noble acts of public policy.
Your (militarized) local Sheriff's Office, circa 2012 A.D.
 While it is tragic and regrettable that the colonial-era American patriots allowed a central government of any kind to be created, it’s worth recalling that the Framers of the United States Constitution did not create a “nation-state.” They created – at least on parchment -- a confederated republic in which the federal government was given certain delegated powers to act on behalf of the states. 

 The American republic was fatally flawed ab ovo, to be sure, but it was not a “nation-state” of the kind brought into existence by murderous centralizers like Bismarck, Lenin, and Lincoln. 

The Second Amendment is actually a much worthier document than the Constitution itself. That Amendment served two indispensable purposes. One was to forbid (in concept, if not in execution) the federal government from disarming the state militias, which would (and did) lead to a deadly concentration of power. The second, and more important, purpose of that amendment was to recognize, unambiguously, the individual right to armed self-defense. 

That right exists independent of government, and cannot be infringed by it.
Most importantly, it establishes a critical threshold at which the government relinquishes any claim to legitimacy (at least among those who are willing to grant it such). Any government that seeks to disarm the people is one that can and must be resisted through force of arms.

Tax-devouring, ambulatory obscenities like Jerrold Nadler serve a useful function by making vivid and tangible the otherwise abstract evil connoted by the word “government.” The reason we have guns is to prevent the likes of Nadler from working their will upon us unopposed. 

Thank you to everyone who donated to Pro Libertate this year! If you can continue to help, please do so -- and thanks, once again. 

Dum spiro, pugno!


non de guerre said...

What a truly repulsive receptacle of slime the corpulent congressman from Manhattan is. Oh, but if we could just expel that wretched island from the union, how much better off the rest of us would be...

Anonymous said...

That is one fat sack of shit bureaucrat scum ratface maggot. Are we still #1 comrade? What did we do to get this government we deserve?

Will Blalock said...

Another excellent article from Mr. Grigg packed with apt analog and understanding.

"Necromancer" says it all in describing those who worship and serve the state.
"Necro"= corpse or death. "Mancer"= prophet, diviner.

I laugh when Grigg refers to the cops as "costumed tax feeders" but this latest
term is no laughing matter.

The bottom line is that the state hates you and the 2nd Amendment is the last
iota of legal independence we mere mortals can claim against it. If they
manage to confiscate it, then it's game over.

In the godless world of the state there is only one prophecy:

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever."
George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty Four, (1948)

Thank God we have an advocate at His right hand!

Mark 12:36
For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord,
Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

kirk said...

nom de guerre: don't expel them from the (forced) union. let them have the monster they have created.

let us extricate ourselves from THEIR union where the parasitic classes far outnumber the host class.

this porcine individual can lose all the weight he wants. he will still be a hog...for power.

a corrupt system will never, ever right itself and is not worth taking on. simply leave it, or say 'no' when it is time to pay up for the privilege of being stolen from and enslaved.

MoT said...

As always those who would enslave you reserve unto themselves the "right" to violently suppress you without consequence.

JeffS said...

I mostly agree, though I believe that clinging to your gun is not in an of itself resistance. Until you can get the clingers to oppose government violence, you've accomplished nothing.

Most seem to have little or no concern for anyone but themselves. By the time the government comes for them, their gun will do nothing to save them.

Will Blalock said...


Well said, but at this point it is not about armed resistance.
It's about pushing back against the debasement of our humanity by the state.
Standing for the 2nd amendment is not only about possessing a firearm but
is about asserting our preeminence over a govt which claims our very lives.

Anonymous said...

Donna from ND:

"Oh, but if we could just expel that wretched island from the union, how much better off the rest of us would be..."

I heard that exact sentiment expressed by a 4th generation apple grower in upstate New York a little over 10 years ago. Their lives had been made hell by a water purchasing mandate. Somehow, the government had 'anticipated' drought in the region and had had water hydrants installed every 1/2 mile from which said farmers MUST purchase irrigation water for their crops. As we traveled west eating splendid apples, unmarked military tankers continued spewing particulate from New Hampshire, across the Great Lakes, and on back to our home in North Dakota.
I agree with 'Kirk' above...we must continue refusing to give up our rights when confronted by our local 'insect authority' whilst watching the Behemoth collapse under the weight of its own corruption.

whitebuffalo said...

kirk said: "a corrupt system will never, ever right itself and is not worth taking on."

You are totally correct, kirk. This beast known as amerika cannot be reformed. It is futile to try.

There is only one hope and that is secession. We must push for a peaceful "divorce" out of this abusive government.

Opponents of secession always screech about a bloodbath like the War of Northern Aggression. But if the former Soviet Union could let its states go peacefully then why cannot we?

We must make our case in terms of morality. What is wrong with the principle of live and let live?

If the people of NYC want to live under a fascist dictator - Herr Bloomberg - let them. If the people of kalifornia want to live under the tyranny of a Feinstein let them.

All we lovers of liberty want is to be left alone to live our lives in a scale that promotes peace and freedom. Who then are the aggressors and therefore the initiators of violence? Secessionists or those who want to put a gun to our heads and force us to live our lives as they decide?

There is only one hope left for mankind: the peaceful (hopefully) dissolution of the federal government in all its forms. Federalism failed.

Where is it written in stone that the USA must exist forever?

Loyalty to liberty and people living according to their own peaceful ways is moral. Loyalty to a violent oppressive system such as is the federal government is immoral.

And as usual Will, great writing.

Bob said...

Long live secession. This Congressman is a piece of excrement disguised as a human being.

Excellent post, Will!

Anonymous said...

A nation with such weak and worthless leadership and serf citizens doesn't deserve to exist and won't. Enjoy your freedom fairytales and shining city on a hill crap and enjoy the collapse.

Spook, RN said...

Dear Mr. Grigg,

"Tax-devouring, ambulatory obscenities..."
Your articles and columns are a sheer joy to read, good sir! You even make insults delectable!

Not only is the content thought provoking, but the language and presentation ... ah! There are writers and then there are writers!

Call it a gift. Call it talent. Call it both. I call it pleasure.

Thank you for fighting the good fight. I trust your lovely wife and adorable children are well.