I don't think Kiwigrunt is either. What a mind numbing load of drivel that was.Originally Posted by carl
I don't think Kiwigrunt is either. What a mind numbing load of drivel that was.
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
A Marine Colonel On Gun Control And What It Means To Marines
Outstanding article by retired Marine Office Michael D. Wyly on Fourth Generation Warfare, Gun Control, the Constitution , and how it concerns all Marines......actually All Americans. This was the best copy I could get which unfortunately is attached to several blog comments which are NOT part of the article but the main article is still very distinct.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/825219/posts
It's Cause Were Americans And We Are Special!
I am not surprised we are Americans and have an advanced form of Government that requires personal responsability to work properly and it isnot suitable for everyone as the next post by Colonel Wyly points out..... America and Americans are special!
I'm not sure what any of this has to do with guns.
Did you read the article? It has everything to do with guns.
In that it could be equally applied to any article in the Bill of Rights, I suppose it does have slightly more to do with guns than attempting to equate homosexuality with communism(!?). Of course, given that your most recent link directly refutes your previous link, I think I could be forgiven for not know what in tarnation you're on about.
Yes, I forgive you
Civil Disobedience, Marines, Guns and Bill Lind
These are two brief comments on Slap's links.
First looking at Col Michael D. Wyly, USMC (Ret), Fourth Generation Warfare: What Does It Mean to Every Marine? (1995). To me, these points are very material to this thread:
Col. Wyly doesn't address the ultimate question: Will Marines obey orders to shoot down their fellow Americans; or, are there some "tipping points" beyond which they will not go ?What then is fundamental to our Constitutional concept, so fundamental that every Marine must understand it? First, that the laws of the land govern human conduct. We have a new concept grown up since the 1960s called "civil disobedience." It is all right to believe in it, but it is against the law to practice it. Offenders must expect to be prosecuted. It is an issue Marines need to grasp.
...
In a fourth generation situation Marines would need to know that people have a right to assemble and assert themselves against abuses of power. Denying that right to Americans makes them demand it more strongly. Strong resistance by civilians raises the issue of gun control. Gun control is a very touchy subject today. But, since arms are crucial to Marines' profession, we cannot evade the issue. It is a constitutional issue that is likely, someday, to involve us.
Understanding the issue is fundamental to Marines' understanding the Constitution. We live in a country where the people enjoy a unique right to bear arms. Marines should know there is a reason for that. Of course there is the history of Indian wars followed by the threat of armed redcoats. Those threats have disappeared. However, the fourth generation threat includes armed criminals in numbers Americans have not had to reckon with before. Marines, like all Americans, are free to favor some kind of gun control or eschew it altogether up until laws are passed. What is crucially important, however, is that they understand there are serious constitutional ramifications. Taking the right away from Americans, or enforcing such a restriction, could quickly make us the enemy of constitutional freedom. It is this sort of understanding that separates citizens from "all the rest."
Given that Marines have a strong tradition of following orders, I personally wouldn't bet on a "Marine mutiny". Nor, would I bet on an "Army mutiny". Thus, my preference for a Gene Sharp approach in addressing non-compliance.
As to William S. Lind, I've read both his "4th Gen Warfare" stuff (leave that on the shelf, please) and his "utopian" (cultural conservative) stuff. Lind is something of a Luddite, a reactionary (used in the sense that he would like to travel back in time), and occasionally sounds notes that seem strange to me; e.g.,:
I've not the foggiest as to how or why a telegraph line comes into play. I've mentioned Lind in 7 previous posts, starting here, A Lawyer's View (which is part of a conversation with Slap - remember when we at SWC actually had real conversationsIn his On War column of December 15, 2009, Lind announced that he was leaving the staff of the Center unexpectedly and that his series of On War articles was on hiatus for the moment. "Once I am re-established, either with a new institution or in retirement, I intend to re-start the column. When that will be I do not know. It also depends on obtaining connection to a telegraph line, which is not available everywhere.").
Enough of Lind personally, but to his What is Cultural Marxism? As to that, my only comment is to this snip:
I'm ignorant of Horkheimer and Adorno; I've read some Reich, Fromm and Marcuse (mostly Fromm). Perhaps, because I do not rate them very high in my pantheon of political theorists, I can't give them (esp. Marcuse) credit for destroying USAian culture.... the members of the Frankfurt School - - Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Eric Fromm and Herbert Marcuse, to name the most important ...
That being said, there has been a real break in our USAian cultural framework. So, Slap and Carl are on to something there. That framework break also is material to this thread; but I have to write something offline - and think it over and re-write before posting. Wouldn't want Kiwigrunt to call it "drivel".That word reminds me of Wilf (too bad he's too busy elsewhere).
Regards
Mike
Last edited by jmm99; 02-03-2013 at 08:40 PM.
Here is a link to a Naval Postgraduate School thesis done in the mid 1990s.
www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a293790.pdf
It was quite controversial at the time because question 46 asked this of about 300 serving Marines:
"The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizens groups refuse to turn over their firearms.
Consider the following statement: `I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government'."
They were then given 5 choices of response ranging from Strongly agree to no opinion.
On page 79 of the thesis the author states that about 26% of the Marines would fire on fellow citizens but about 66% would refuse. The author concluded that "The response to this scenario suggest that a complete unit breakdown could occur in a unit tasked to execute this mission."
As I keep saying, Charles Murray has a lot to say about that break in the cultural framework in his book Coming Apart, though the book mainly demonstrates the extant and growing gap between the superzips and the rest of us. He doesn't get much into what it might mean for the future. Question 46 might give an inkling about what might happen if things go badly awry. (It also concerns me that cultural and political differences are lining up geographically and regionally.)That being said, there has been a real break in our USAian cultural framework. So, Slap and Carl are on to something there. That framework break also is material to this thread; but I have to write something offline - and think it over and re-write before posting. Wouldn't want Kiwigrunt to call it "drivel".
Last edited by carl; 02-03-2013 at 10:05 PM.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
I dunno. Once, maybe. But even a one-time event would have a drastic effect on the political landscape, to the point of a coup. After that, I think political leadership would be in such flux that it'd be an open question who would be in a position to give further such orders. I can't imagine any of the people I served with obeying such an order, unlikely as it is that the HHT of an Apache squadron would be picked to carry something like that out.
Advanced form of government?
Since when is "dysfunctional" the same as "advanced"?
By the way "personal responsibility" is a code word for "left alone, but still facing bad luck and more powerful people".
The personal responsibility of negotiating a wage alone instead of doing this through a labour union merely serves the purpose of transferring almost all of the economic rent of the agreement to the almost always more powerful employer, for example.
There are organisational / institutional remedies to certain problems, and much of the "deregulation" / "personal responsibility" stuff only serves to reject such a remedy in favour of maintaining the problem (which usually serves someone's interests).
Those "personal responsibility" / "the government is the problem" folks are puppets serving others' interests and they're being fed fear and bogeymen in order to distract them from who incites and controls their outrage.
Same stuff with the outrage about even firearms control legislation. It serves the gun industry, which in turn finances the NRA with a similar amount of money as the NRA's lobbying budget. It also serves the firearms accessories industry which sprang up during the last generation (first with lights, later with lots of "tactical" clothes, upgrades). It serves the firearm instructor industry.
It hardly serves the general population.
Adding a guard to every school is one of the dumbest ideas possible. What's next? For every kindergarten, public place, cafe, bus, train?
There are economic studies about the costs of providing security in the U.S., some of them looking at it from a firearms-related angle, others from a crime-related angle and others from an inequality-related angle.
Now if you add up the extra expenses for security including the jail network, the extra expenses for the military, the extra expenses for the inefficient health care system and the extra expenses for paying the bloated financial industry - what's left?
Less GDP/capita than in France.
There's much broken in the U.S., and the people's readiness to get fooled and turn stupid on reasonable proposals and serious issues is an important reason for this.
Ok, fair enough. But please, tell me you like John Wayne lest the Yank/Kiwi bond be rent asunder.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks