Maybe I play too much World in Conflict or Fallout 3: Operation Anchorage, or have seen “Red Dawn” too many times, but…

THAT’s one thing I worry about from time to time…that we’ll become so weak that some enemy will take advantage of the situation. One day in 2077, we wake up to Chinese warships shelling our coastal cities, millions of their troops making amphibious landings and pouring into the heart of the North American landmass.

Irony of ironies. After spending centuries funding our military which in turn has valiantly defended freedom around the globe…

…our citizens are reduced to the role of partisans, hiding in the mountains and using hunting rifles to launch ambushes on occupying foreign troops. What a nightmare scenario. To become in US what the mujahadeen were in Afghanistan when the Soviets invaded, only without military aid pouring in from some third party.

All thanks to our President Obama in our own time, mollycoddling communist and communist-lite dictators and slashing defense spending.

It’s a good thing I’ve spent the last year buying sealed tins of military surplus ammunition. If I’m not firing those rounds at some occupier, my children or grandchildren might be.

only the paranoid survive.

But Progressivism may be an historical first as a movement toward totalitarianism that is not invested so much in a single strong person but as a truly hydra-headed system of repression.

In order to refute the above sentence you would have to provide an historical example of a “movement toward totalitarianism” that was NOT much invested “in a single strong person.”

In regards to your challenge, which I thought at the time seemed to have little to do with my comment: My comment, even in toto, did not address any sequence regarding the destruction of “foundations” or whether such destruction has occurred before or after totalitarian leaders may have assumed power.

I will agree with the assumption within your challenge that the absence of “classical liberal values” in a nation would no doubt give a potential totalitarian-minded despot a much easier task.

Such new homebuyers always airily say that the place is great and the people friendly and they love the slower pace of life, even though the pictures they show of the local downtown often show what I would call the usual impoverished third world dump.

I wonder how those happy new homeowners in Honduras are doing right about now?

“Thomass, I’m going to have to nit-pick myself and ask you to give examples. We are on the same side so realize I do not mean to be antagonistic but if my reading of history is wrong, as well it could be, I need to know where.”

Sure but that’s the way I see it. Germany and Italy come to mind. They had parliaments but anti [classical] liberal ideologies flourished on both the left and right. Even the parlimartiarns made it worse by adopting welfare statism to try to keep their enemies at bay. This weakening of the memes regarding the proper role of the state (night watchman / liberal ideal) simply paved the way for the anti liberal movements. Later Hitler had messy purges [of his own people] while Mussolini only killed a few political opponents. Russia and those communist countries that had actual internal revolutions tended to not have liberal foundations to begin with (while others had socialism imposed from outside)… so they don’t tend to make great examples.. but they did experience the later internal purges and were inclined to strong leaders even though philosophically they didn’t claim to promote one. There was supposed to be a vanguard party, not one person.. but that doesn’t work. So, skipping one step, the end result is the same for the same reason (lack of liberal notions about the state eventually equals dictator).

In the US, we will have a dictator if most people buy the race, class, gender narrative (which at its base argues politics is just about power anyway). The irony being, the people in question may not want a dictator but they’ll have no means (including philosophical, moral, or intellectual) to fight one who rises… in their name… promoting their collectivist program.

This doesn’t make the tinfoil hatter wrong, necessarily, but it also doesn’t make him any more right than the WHARRGARBL about Obama being the “One and Only True Father of Our Country, George Washington is Just a Dead White Slaveholder.”

Learn how to prove things, instead of just shrieking blind assertations from the pulpit, and you might get actual engineers capable of creating real-world solutions on your side (“I’ll shoot them feds if they step on my property!” isn’t a real-world solution, unless you’re trying to solve the fact that you continue to draw breath). I recommend reading Bill Whittle’s Seeing the Unseen essays. He gives the difference between conspiracy theories and scientific theories a far better treatment than I ever could.

The only way that you can reasonably explain what The 0bamanation has and is doing is that he is acting to damage the Republic. THE ONLY WAY! There is no other reasonable explanation. Not that he is really well intentioned, not that he is just not experienced enough, blah, blah. The frakkin’ jug-eared freak wants you made into slaves with him as one of the masters.

Just wait and watch. Now you know why us bitter clingers have been stockpiling ammo.

Think of how many of Obama’s staff’s best laid plans have now gone awry? Recent example of resistance to a tyrannical takeover do not bode well for such acitons in the US. It’s back to the drawing board.

Obama says coup in Honduras is illegal
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE55S5J220090629?sp=true