Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: "Right Wing" (e.g. Faux Right) Revolutionaries - Page 2







Post#26 at 03-26-2016 10:48 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-26-2016, 10:48 PM #26
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
The occupation has already cost upwards of $9 million.
Feces and trash litter the property.
Officials are worried Native American artifacts have been damaged.....

No Boy Scouts would ever leave a campground so trashed:



US Fish and Wildlife Service; thus public domain.
A lot of these folks are in jail, iirc. They should be brought back in chains and required to clean it all up.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#27 at 03-27-2016 01:55 AM by Ragnarök_62 [at Oklahoma joined Nov 2006 #posts 5,511]
---
03-27-2016, 01:55 AM #27
Join Date
Nov 2006
Location
Oklahoma
Posts
5,511

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
A lot of these folks are in jail, iirc. They should be brought back in chains and required to clean it all up.

Did they get fined for littering ?
MBTI step II type : Expressive INTP

There's an annual contest at Bond University, Australia, calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term:
The winning student wrote:

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."







Post#28 at 03-27-2016 06:54 AM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-27-2016, 06:54 AM #28
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62 View Post
This is how things should work.
1. Gather evidence for probable cause.
2. Seek and get the requisite arrest warrants.
3. Apprehend the suspects.
4. If the suspect(s) resist arrest, follow standard operating procedures for detaining resisting suspects.
5. Once detained, set arraignment date.
6. Set trial date.
7. Enforce results of trial.

I think the above are a straight forward way of handing loonies as well. If they do something stupid, then they won't become martyrs because the process is well known and produces the requisite documentation. Even lethal force can be justified if the documented facts are there for all to see.
Yes. Due process of the law is the right way to go. The affronts to public sensibilities are probably less severe than some other deeds, might be difficult to attribute to individuals who can be prosecuted (like the fellow who committed "suicide by cop", or might be offensive but not illegal. It may be contrary to civil-service rules or the established protocols of a government agency to trash one's office or drink on the job, but such is unlikely to be cause for a criminal prosecution.

There may be more egregious photos, but those are likely being left for prosecution of offenders.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 03-27-2016 at 11:14 PM.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#29 at 03-27-2016 08:30 PM by radind [at Alabama joined Sep 2009 #posts 1,595]
---
03-27-2016, 08:30 PM #29
Join Date
Sep 2009
Location
Alabama
Posts
1,595

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
If we allow armed groups to establish enclaves, regardless of the legitimacy of their cause, this establishes a precedent for cults like Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints (Warren Jeff's polygamists) in Hilldale AZ-Colorado City UT. Or for that matter, Muslim Sharia ruled enclaves and "no-go zones" as has been the case in Europe.
We should stop them all.







Post#30 at 03-27-2016 11:25 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
03-27-2016, 11:25 PM #30
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Maybe...

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
If we allow armed groups to establish enclaves, regardless of the legitimacy of their cause, this establishes a precedent for cults like Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints (Warren Jeff's polygamists) in Hilldale AZ-Colorado City UT. Or for that matter, Muslim Sharia ruled enclaves and "no-go zones" as has been the case in Europe.
Where do you draw your lines? It is more or less plausible to suspend the Bill of Rights if there is a clear and present danger. If one has no right to cry fire in a crowded theater, if there really is a fire and the cop starts issuing orders, do as he says rather than preach the Bill of Rights. If a hurricane, flood or riot is fully manifest, and the governor has declared a state of emergency, you'd best start following directions given by the National Guard. There is a saying that the Constitution isn't a suicide pact, and this saying has been used to justify trampling on civil rights, but there are mechanisms and litmus tests that are and ought to be applied before the Bill of Rights is flushed down the toilet.

'Clear and Present Danger' is a decent place to start.

So how large an arsenal is a clear and present danger if the owners of the arsenal have never abused their weapons?

How many attacks by muslims justify discrimination by religion? At what point do you raid a muslim habitation and leave the conservative 'militia' group across the street alone?

How much should one dwell on the lessons of Waco? Provoking the sort of folk who stock arsenals can lead to unfortunate results.

I can ask these questions rhetorically in a forum, but suspect there are judicial precedents that provide solid answers. A local cop or mayor deciding enough is enough isn't enough. If there is a real danger, sure, but massive action against those who have stayed within the law, those who haven't threatened or harmed anyone, would be problematic.







Post#31 at 03-28-2016 12:08 PM by TnT [at joined Feb 2005 #posts 2,005]
---
03-28-2016, 12:08 PM #31
Join Date
Feb 2005
Posts
2,005

Quote Originally Posted by B Butler View Post
Where do you draw your lines? It is more or less plausible to suspend the Bill of Rights if there is a clear and present danger. ...
Once the "movement" has transgressed into "The Commons", or once the movement begins to abuse vulnerable people, then it seems pretty clear.

A thought experiment: Let's say a group assembles a pile of weaponry and ammo and holes up in a house on private property and simply sits there. Does nothing much else. This makes it kind of a Ruby Ridge situation. I would say, stay away from those folks. They're not a threat ... yet. As long as they stay put.

The recent examples include the abuse of 14 year old girls being indoctrinated and then married off or sexually abused by old men, or both. And the Bundy situation where he and his cohorts take over pieces of The Commons which they claim for their own.

These two principles might be a place to start.
" ... a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition."







Post#32 at 03-28-2016 01:53 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
03-28-2016, 01:53 PM #32
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow A Start

Quote Originally Posted by TnT View Post
Once the "movement" has transgressed into "The Commons", or once the movement begins to abuse vulnerable people, then it seems pretty clear.

A thought experiment: Let's say a group assembles a pile of weaponry and ammo and holes up in a house on private property and simply sits there. Does nothing much else. This makes it kind of a Ruby Ridge situation. I would say, stay away from those folks. They're not a threat ... yet. As long as they stay put.

The recent examples include the abuse of 14 year old girls being indoctrinated and then married off or sexually abused by old men, or both. And the Bundy situation where he and his cohorts take over pieces of The Commons which they claim for their own.

These two principles might be a place to start.
It's a start. It seems to me that the sexual abuse and trespassing on The Commons examples involve commission of a crime, while the holing up on private property example doesn't. If you draw your line in that neighborhood, it ought to stand legal scrutiny.







Post#33 at 03-28-2016 02:50 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-28-2016, 02:50 PM #33
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62 View Post
Did they get fined for littering ?
Officer Obie didn't quite get to them, I don't think. I don't think he took their wallets either.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 03-28-2016 at 04:19 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#34 at 03-28-2016 04:15 PM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,115]
---
03-28-2016, 04:15 PM #34
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,115

Cool Pay the fine and clean up the garbage

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Office Obie didn't quite get to them, I don't think. I don't think he took their wallets either.
And considering the judge's seeing eye dog the judge ''ain't gonna look at the 8 x 10 color glossy pictures, each with a paragraph on the back telling how each was to be used as evidence against'' them. lol







Post#35 at 03-28-2016 04:27 PM by MordecaiK [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 1,086]
---
03-28-2016, 04:27 PM #35
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
1,086

Quote Originally Posted by '58 Flat View Post
While The Boy Named Dylann is definitely a terrorist - at least as per my definition of terrorism, which is, in full: "Any violent or destructive act committed for political or pseudo-political reasons (the latter included so as to encompass "hate crimes") against persons not known personally to the actor (thus ruling out any personal revenge motive), and against persons who cannot be reasonably considered to have had anything to do with causing the grievances the actor seeks to redress (thus ruling out assassinations)" - how is he any kind of traitor?

He certainly wasn't "levying war against the United States" - and under no circumstances was he "adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort."
When the Branch Davidians fired on BATF agents demanding David Koresh's surrender were they "levying war against the United States"? The attitude of law enforcement after that attack certainly suggests that law enforcement thought so. After that attack, the FBI basically treated the entire Branch Davidian community as treasonous and treated even the lives of their children as forfeit unless David Koresh surrendered. That's why they flooded the compound with flammable tear gas and then ignited it with flash bangs.
And this isn't an isolated incident. Police in Philadelphia burned out a building in which the Move cult lived--and burned up several adjacent row houses doing it. It goes back to an old definition of treason. Kill or rebel against the King's men and you are guilty of treason against the King. And the only mitigating circumstance for treason is victory.







Post#36 at 03-28-2016 05:02 PM by MordecaiK [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 1,086]
---
03-28-2016, 05:02 PM #36
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
1,086

Quote Originally Posted by B Butler View Post
Where do you draw your lines? It is more or less plausible to suspend the Bill of Rights if there is a clear and present danger. If one has no right to cry fire in a crowded theater, if there really is a fire and the cop starts issuing orders, do as he says rather than preach the Bill of Rights. If a hurricane, flood or riot is fully manifest, and the governor has declared a state of emergency, you'd best start following directions given by the National Guard. There is a saying that the Constitution isn't a suicide pact, and this saying has been used to justify trampling on civil rights, but there are mechanisms and litmus tests that are and ought to be applied before the Bill of Rights is flushed down the toilet.

'Clear and Present Danger' is a decent place to start.

So how large an arsenal is a clear and present danger if the owners of the arsenal have never abused their weapons?

How many attacks by muslims justify discrimination by religion? At what point do you raid a muslim habitation and leave the conservative 'militia' group across the street alone?

How much should one dwell on the lessons of Waco? Provoking the sort of folk who stock arsenals can lead to unfortunate results.

I can ask these questions rhetorically in a forum, but suspect there are judicial precedents that provide solid answers. A local cop or mayor deciding enough is enough isn't enough. If there is a real danger, sure, but massive action against those who have stayed within the law, those who haven't threatened or harmed anyone, would be problematic.
And those answers depend on what part of the saeculum we are in. Civil liberties tend to be restricted in a 4T Crisis situation in which there is consensus of a "clear and present danger". And those strictures are relaxed and questioned in 2T Awakenings and the beginning stages of 3T Unravellings. It's this perspective that makes Generational History so useful.
During the Missionary Unravelling, gays were tacitly tolerated in a corrupt sort of way. The idea of Free Love (Havelock Ellis and Anne Besant) was considered. Margaret Sanger was pushing birth control. Psychoanalysis opened up the human mind (albeit after Freud renounced the too subversive idea of real trauma and real sexual abuse).
Backlashes against all of this gathered steam in the 1910s and especially in the 20s and 30s in the latter stages of Unravelling and beginning of 4T. Censorship became more pervasive. Opiates and cocaine were prohibited and prohibiton of alcohol attempted. Finally, by the 1930s a persecution of gays started that would last for 40 years. Jim Crow was reinforced and was only subverted finally by the manpower needs of WWII.
So I'm not terribly surprised when Donald Trump invokes the Supreme Court's Korematsu v US decision to justify exclusion of Muslims who are seen as enemy along the lines of Japanese during WWII. Or immigration restrictions. The acceptance of new immigrants becomes intolerable during 4T Crises. The Civil War was a major exception and only because immigrants were drafted on arrival into the Union Army. The US did not have immigration to speak of during the Revolutionary War Crisis. Or WWII. Immigration becomes relaxed in 2T Highs and 3T unravellings.
And because immigration is not tolerated during 4T Crises a lot of tragedies occur that people feel very badly about in the next 1T. Genocides occur because there is no place for untolerated minorities and losers to go.
This time around, gays seem to be accepted. And race is much less of a factor than it was in previous 4Ts. But we cannot keep fighting (or attempting to police) Muslims abroad without it finally affecting how Americans feel about Muslims at home. And we probably cannot continue accepting immigrants at the rate we have been doing now that immigrants are seen as an economic threat, not just a social threat by millions of Americans.







Post#37 at 03-28-2016 05:10 PM by XYMOX_4AD_84 [at joined Nov 2012 #posts 3,073]
---
03-28-2016, 05:10 PM #37
Join Date
Nov 2012
Posts
3,073

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
And those answers depend on what part of the saeculum we are in. Civil liberties tend to be restricted in a 4T Crisis situation in which there is consensus of a "clear and present danger". And those strictures are relaxed and questioned in 2T Awakenings and the beginning stages of 3T Unravellings. It's this perspective that makes Generational History so useful.
During the Missionary Unravelling, gays were tacitly tolerated in a corrupt sort of way. The idea of Free Love (Havelock Ellis and Anne Besant) was considered. Margaret Sanger was pushing birth control. Psychoanalysis opened up the human mind (albeit after Freud renounced the too subversive idea of real trauma and real sexual abuse).
Backlashes against all of this gathered steam in the 1910s and especially in the 20s and 30s in the latter stages of Unravelling and beginning of 4T. Censorship became more pervasive. Opiates and cocaine were prohibited and prohibiton of alcohol attempted. Finally, by the 1930s a persecution of gays started that would last for 40 years. Jim Crow was reinforced and was only subverted finally by the manpower needs of WWII.
So I'm not terribly surprised when Donald Trump invokes the Supreme Court's Korematsu v US decision to justify exclusion of Muslims who are seen as enemy along the lines of Japanese during WWII. Or immigration restrictions. The acceptance of new immigrants becomes intolerable during 4T Crises. The Civil War was a major exception and only because immigrants were drafted on arrival into the Union Army. The US did not have immigration to speak of during the Revolutionary War Crisis. Or WWII. Immigration becomes relaxed in 2T Highs and 3T unravellings.
And because immigration is not tolerated during 4T Crises a lot of tragedies occur that people feel very badly about in the next 1T. Genocides occur because there is no place for untolerated minorities and losers to go.
This time around, gays seem to be accepted. And race is much less of a factor than it was in previous 4Ts. But we cannot keep fighting (or attempting to police) Muslims abroad without it finally affecting how Americans feel about Muslims at home. And we probably cannot continue accepting immigrants at the rate we have been doing now that immigrants are seen as an economic threat, not just a social threat by millions of Americans.
Well it's mutual. Immigrants increasingly are not interested in coming here. We see more and more expats as opposed to immigrants. The US is not attractive like it was during the 19th and 20th Centuries. Who knows, maybe I'll immigrate out of it. Maybe Argentina.
==========================================

#nevertrump







Post#38 at 03-28-2016 07:19 PM by radind [at Alabama joined Sep 2009 #posts 1,595]
---
03-28-2016, 07:19 PM #38
Join Date
Sep 2009
Location
Alabama
Posts
1,595

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
And those answers depend on what part of the saeculum we are in. Civil liberties tend to be restricted in a 4T Crisis situation in which there is consensus of a "clear and present danger". And those strictures are relaxed and questioned in 2T Awakenings and the beginning stages of 3T Unravellings. It's this perspective that makes Generational History so useful.
During the Missionary Unravelling, gays were tacitly tolerated in a corrupt sort of way. The idea of Free Love (Havelock Ellis and Anne Besant) was considered. Margaret Sanger was pushing birth control. Psychoanalysis opened up the human mind (albeit after Freud renounced the too subversive idea of real trauma and real sexual abuse).
Backlashes against all of this gathered steam in the 1910s and especially in the 20s and 30s in the latter stages of Unravelling and beginning of 4T. Censorship became more pervasive. Opiates and cocaine were prohibited and prohibiton of alcohol attempted. Finally, by the 1930s a persecution of gays started that would last for 40 years. Jim Crow was reinforced and was only subverted finally by the manpower needs of WWII.
So I'm not terribly surprised when Donald Trump invokes the Supreme Court's Korematsu v US decision to justify exclusion of Muslims who are seen as enemy along the lines of Japanese during WWII. Or immigration restrictions. The acceptance of new immigrants becomes intolerable during 4T Crises. The Civil War was a major exception and only because immigrants were drafted on arrival into the Union Army. The US did not have immigration to speak of during the Revolutionary War Crisis. Or WWII. Immigration becomes relaxed in 2T Highs and 3T unravellings.
And because immigration is not tolerated during 4T Crises a lot of tragedies occur that people feel very badly about in the next 1T. Genocides occur because there is no place for untolerated minorities and losers to go.
This time around, gays seem to be accepted. And race is much less of a factor than it was in previous 4Ts. But we cannot keep fighting (or attempting to police) Muslims abroad without it finally affecting how Americans feel about Muslims at home. And we probably cannot continue accepting immigrants at the rate we have been doing now that immigrants are seen as an economic threat, not just a social threat by millions of Americans.
I would like the US to focus on preventing radical Islamic terrorist attacks and cease any general police work abroad.







Post#39 at 03-29-2016 01:06 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
03-29-2016, 01:06 PM #39
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by radind View Post
I would like the US to focus on preventing radical Islamic terrorist attacks and cease any general police work abroad.
Offshore police work is one very powerful tool for accomplishing the goal you cited. It would be ideal for the world to cooperate fully and openly, but our goals and theirs are never exactly the same.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
-----------------------------------------