101 Comments

The civilised man attempts in the first instance to resolve disputes without violence, but only a fool (or a saint, or a coward) denies himself recourse to it if it proves necessary.

Expand full comment

"12.) A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head."

- The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries, from Schlock .Mercenary webcomic by Howard Tayler

*

"Violence /is/ the answer. You just didn't use enough."

-paraphrase of several other maxims

Expand full comment

“Anyone who clings to the historically untrue -- and thoroughly immoral -- doctrine that 'violence never settles anything' I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.”

- Lt. Col. Jean V. Dubois ~ Starship Troopers (the book, not the suckass movie)

Expand full comment

I kinda liked Starship Troopers.

Expand full comment

Your quoting an imaginary character from a book of fiction... Seriously?

Expand full comment

or i’m quoting the author who wrote the book and conceived the dialogue. 😎

also: you’re = you are. your = possessive. 🤓

Expand full comment

What an epic quote brother. Do you recommend the entire book?

Expand full comment

more so than the movie. definitely. be warned. the book is not long, but it is not an action book. more about character’s rite of passage.

published in 1959. heinlein was a navy academy grad who had flirted around with socialism. it comes through in the book. sort of a look over the shoulder from the future.

Expand full comment

So the movie is notting like the book? The premise is very interesting, rites of passage.

Expand full comment

there are snippets of the book in the movie, but overall, no, not at all alike. the movie is overly and deliberately campy. even ironic allusions to national socialism in the movie by verhoeven.

Expand full comment

It all depends on how you apply the violence. A martial arts master, turning the hand of a common thug is violence applied gracefully. Violence isn't just blood and guts. It is also mentality.

Expand full comment

still ends everything. applied. implied. threatened. believed. anticipated. fin.

Expand full comment

And then what when that is countered and the dagger deployed?

Expand full comment

Another example: the mid-east announced a year ago that it would no longer trade in US fiat currency. The cabal has depended on the military might and dollar of the US. Already, many, if not most third world countries are no longer trading in US dollars. So that’s a resource the cabal cannot depend on. I outline an overview of what resources the cabal seem to have left. They’ve lost control of Russia, who supply a third of the world’s oil. Losing China. January 2025, they lose America and Canada just doesn’t count. So on and so forth. This way, damage is minimised.

Expand full comment

I cover that in my geopolitical shifts. The dagger has already been deployed. Literally. For instance, a Russian warship in Venezuela, there to chase the cartels around. The idea in Shifts is that the White Hats are doing this city by city, country by country. When Trump comes back, he deports 30 million, which means he has to close the border. Military style. Which means the cartel lose their primary market. I cover this. It looks very much like the white hats are forcing the cabal out of each country and into their central homelands, Northern Europe. For instance, right now, the french African colonies who pay tribute to France, are being stripped of their assets. It’s basic - like eliminating an armies supply line one can then fight a starved out army. We are seeing the end stages of this.

Expand full comment

😉 q.e.d.

Expand full comment

Brilliant, Kulak.

Expand full comment

Concur.

Expand full comment

It's ok to be mean to the people trying to kill you.

Most of this 'violence is not the answer' comes from idiots posturing their moral superiority. It's a nice veneer over their cowardice.

Let's not forget the enemy is using violence against us EVERY DAY. Cops are the constant threat of their violence. Laws are excuses for the enemy to get violent. Their militaries are built for them to express their violence.

We have been at war all our days; we just did not want to admit that fact.

Expand full comment

Social engineering. But of course violence is not the answer. Were, say, even a part of the population of Britain to rise up and slaughter all invaders, there would be little that could stop them. So therefore, "violence is not the answer." in hopes that they will just lay down and take it, bend over, etc. However, there is a new element. I argue for the westerners when I say they know that the cabal have superior firepower. They know also that all they do is repeat the cycle of history through violence, and that is what the cabal wants. Sometimes one wins by not fighting the way the enemy wants. There are currently decoy protests, forcing the police and the muslims to go to a location and confront each other. Who will tire of the other first?

Asymmetrical warfare. And the Brits have not yet begun to explore that. They are wearing out the enemy. There will be strikes, tax revolts, and all manner of asymmetrical guerrilla warfare. That huge leftist gathering in Brighton? Caused by some people on 4chan. They are forcing the cabal into an untenable war. The cabal want enemies, easily targeted, easily disposed of. They do not want millions to play smarter than them. They do not want to follow endless skirmishes here and there, wearing out and frustrating the invaders.

The Brits are playing an entirely new game. They know from their own history. Do not doubt that if they had to throw down and get serious, they will. Equally, do not doubt that what they are doing is violent. It's Sun Tzu all the way.

And it's brilliant. They are going to win with minimal loss of lives (unfortunately, lives will be lost and have been) and they are going to strike at the very heart of it all, those who think they rule. They've learned the cabal's game, better than you would think. Those riots were to wake the bad guys up. And look at what they managed - what is it, out of thousands who struck back, they managed to jail a dozen or so? Talk about weak.

Expand full comment

Violence isn't being applied properly, at the right targets.

The UK riots mostly were directed at the symbols of the invasion and not at those who are directing and enabling it. Burning down invader centers only causes invaders to be quartered elsewhere; burning down the homes of the leaders of the enforcement thugs, political leaders, and their financial sponsors, and NGO members would increase the costs to those behind the invasion.

Project Mayhem from the book Fight Club provides the proper template. There are many actions which can be taken short of physical violence to motivate those in charge to stop abusing those they allegedly represent, but violence absolutely has to be understood to be a certainty when the demands of the native population continues to be ignored.

Expand full comment

Agreed. Not that the people will stop. Neither side will. Those bringing the invaders only understand force. As for the Irish, it is their land. Where the invaders and their bosses have already lost is the minds of the people. The key is this: the cabal is using resources outside of the Western Nations to achieve their evil goals. Kill that supply line, and they have nothing to pay their mercenaries with. And blackmail in that instance won’t work. I believe that something comes in from outside of Ireland itself in terms of asymmetrical warfare that starts the process where the people win.

Expand full comment

The only way out is through mass bloodshed. It is coming.

Expand full comment

I disagree, and with evidence. There has been an ongoing battle between two factions where there was once one. White hats and black hats. The white hats realised, as described by Burning Bright, that direct confrontation would simply murder most of the planet. As Black Hats retaliate. So they opted for asymmetrical guerilla warfare, removing resources country by country. The very first thing they did was take out the biggest dogs as it’s a pyramidal power structure. It has to be fought this way, because the bad guys have no problems burning it all down. Read my Geopolitical Shifts. Thing is, there’s so much happening out there, difficult to report on it all. I would pay attention to BRICS and what they are doing, which is developing an alternative financial system.

Expand full comment

Are you suggesting the people behind BRICs are "white hats"? I don't believe in "White hats" the way you might, as I think the only "White hats" are pro-White folks and I know that there is no global organization of White men shaping the world. If there was one, they would be mobilizing and recruiting from the mass of pro-White men who have woken up since 2020.

Globalization is evil. Tribalism is the past, present, and future. Globalization is just a parasite we picked up in the Middle East some two thousand years ago. We are finally shaking it off. Violence has always been, and will forever remain, the answer. You are fearful of the globe dying and so you think we need surgical violence, carefully removing this from our body. I think you have read into the global situation to believe that this surgical removal is already underway.

I will read your "shifts" if that is on your substack, if you mean.

Expand full comment

As for Ireland, I have argued elsewhere that the Irish need this. They need to stand and deliver. Because only then will it settle in for a very long time. I don’t condone or like violence, but my youth was spent fighting for myself, if badly. I’ve been punched out, slapped around, lost most because I was a small very nearsighted little freak. And I learned. It shaped my world view. Maybe I’m bragging, but it does tie into this.

When I started reading your material, it took a few moments to figure out at least some of where you’re coming from. I like it. It has a nice concise kind of feel, the points are solid, although sometimes it feels as if you’re more tossing ideas around, which is not a bad thing, it’s what we do, and in most ways, I try to take pointers on style, presentation, clarity and such and then sit all envious and shit.

Expand full comment

I agree the Irish need this. They've been sitting on their internal spirit too long.

I think you should condone violence. It shaped you into the man you are, it seems, although I'm certain other things played a role. Men need violence or else we are sub men, soy boys as the kids say. I don't condone illegal acts of violence. However we have much more at our disposal than people realize, purely because they think legal means "protected by the law" when in actuality it just means there is a law you can utilize in your justification for your actions. We have such laws, but men do not use them due fear of the government. In time, this fear will subside as bigger fears materialize.

Expand full comment

In actual fact, I do not view the white hats as some kind of niceness. They are primarily generals. Nor do I view them as exclusively white. What I am basing this on is following a number of people who have been tracking unusual movements military wise, around the globe. Rumours of Russia in SA for a few years now, chasing down cartel members. I actually believe that certain elites were taken out in surgical operations. For instance, my country, there are about three or four Trudeau doubles. Somewhere in 2020, the original was taken out.

What I have been seeing is that there has been a pattern existing for centuries. Certain groups, be they jews, secret societies, Knights Templar etc, cause mayhem on extreme scales, take over countries, and when the citizens get uppity enough to present a challenge, the go and hide. What these general sought was to minimise damage for the reason that a direct confrontation, which they had the power to do, would result in a final confrontation, a total end game scenario.

Yes, violence is the answer. Surgically applied, once and forever. Check out Soleimani. When that happened, I thought about it. He was the boss of terrorist networks throughout the mid east, likely ate people and children and whatever else. The hit on Soleimani was not just to destabilise his terror network, it was a message to the bad guys the world over. “We can do this, with a fucking drone piloted by a zit faced teen. And that’s only one of many options. Now play nice.” Of course, they didn’t…

Expand full comment

I'm unconvinced, but I will check out your stack

Expand full comment

Funny you should write on this or that I should read it. Just this week after viewing events and weighing our recent past 2020->. We have signed our kids up for bulking up, martial arts and a heavier diet of clean meat. :-) DNA is also having it's way. The government has threatened violence and used violence first as it did in Ottawa during the trucker action. They who single handedly stopped this covid nonsense in canada. They brought home more than the bacon! The government has shorn the sheep and and taught them to be passive while they kick them in the nuts. The self flagellating political correctness will always cause so many men and women to wrongly question all responses in light of it's PC's destructive programming that puts stupidity and dogma before common sense. I can't believe society has allowed themselves to be socially hamstrung to the point of putting themselves in harms way. I don't care if they don't believe anymore, I've seen the results filling up cemeteries. To win this fight the media must be put in it's place and people put faith back in common sense and damn it, they have to be willing to fight for it and for the future of their children they've not killed off yet at the point of the grim reaper's needle.

Expand full comment

As a Canadian I would argue that the Freedom Convoy actually broke the entire government. The Uniparty is in panic right now.

Expand full comment

Ditto

Expand full comment

Any law, any negotiation, any threat, any demand in the political domain ultimately rests on the use of violence. Only the credible threat of violence makes for enforceable demands. Its just that in the so called liberal democracies, there have been layers and layers of nebulous institutions and processes installed to hide this fact. But, as we witness, these clouds of sedation are clearing up, revealing this ever true fact

Expand full comment

The hard truth is that you're right. Human nature doesn't change. War, violence, killing, mass murder are the norm. People may not like it, I don't like it. But that doesn't change anything. evil has to be met with violence if that is the only way.

Expand full comment

This goes even beyond human nature, to the underlying game theory itself.

Expand full comment

An interesting comment, even if I really don't understand it.

Expand full comment

Anyone seriously saying "violence is not the answer" is either a coward, a retard or a traitor, and quite possibly all three. How effective would it be to tell a bully violence is not the answer? He'd punch you in the face and take your lunch money and he would do it every single day because you already told him you will never do anything about it. Honestly, its the most retarded thing I've ever heard and it has to come from people who have no relationship with reality. People who initiate violence, like Leftists, only understand violence. They assume your compassion or eagerness to negotiate or willingness to capitulate are signs of weakness. Which simply means that they can freely continue to commit more violence against you without any fear of retaliation. The Left will never stop oppressing you until they are completely and utterly destroyed.

Expand full comment

Ditto

Expand full comment

ANY and EVERY initiation of coercive force against the sovereign freedom of any individual human person may morally be met with the deployment of protective force. And all of the stuff that is going on is an initiation of coercive force—both that which is done by governments and that which is abetted by them. All of it is morally impermissible, and thus technically actionable.

The first question is one of practicality. Flinging oneself in mad opposition to a brick wall does nothing to hurt the brick wall.

The second is one of proportion. Though all actions of governments are violations, some are worse than others. The problem of a city bus driver's salary being extracted by force from innocent people is a problem we must solve, but violence is not the best choice for that. By contrast, there are things that have been done by governments recently that ought to have people in the streets by the millions. But, as you note, they sit and cower instead…or worse, the really pathetic ones actually like the tyranny.

The third is the objective. If the goal is to use violence to impose a new way of life on everyone in a given area, that is not going to work for long. It never does. If, by contrast, a cohort get together and peacefully secede, and then they are subjected to violence from without, they have every right to defend themselves with extreme prejudice. (BTW: Read "Freehold" by Michael Williamson. I think you would love it.)

You are right—just saying "violence is not the answer" is a pathetic, whimpering trope. Lots of things technically deserve to be responded to with protective force (violence). The question in my mind, though, is what will actually bring about the best results.

Expand full comment

I read FREEHOLD years ago.

I am old, but am hopeful that my children can survive and thrive

Expand full comment

I loved "Freehold!"

"I am old, but am hopeful that my children can survive and thrive."

I am, I guess one would call it middle-aged, and I will do all I can!

Expand full comment

The simplest expression of justice is "give what you get".

It's catchy, its effectiveness demonstrable, and it should make for awesome slogan memes.

Expand full comment

I am partway through the first in the F. Paul Wilson sci-fi book "An Enemy of the State" and I must admit, KYFHO is pretty catchy too…

Have you read it?

Expand full comment

No, Christopher, I’ve not read that book, but yours is a good recommendation. Thank you. I like KYFHO, it covers all kinds of encroachment and trespass. We should all follow the Golden Rule, and GWYG challenges us to act consistently and symmetrically across the entire spectrum of human interaction, from unconditional love to the most gruesome violence. It is a pragmatic depiction of a moral obligation to replace the “social contract” and similar criminal constructs with personal agreements binding on each representative of power. We all know JustDoingMyJob is immoral, GWYG obliges us to treat that shit personally.

Expand full comment

GWYG. Interesting. Very interesting.

So can we wargame/stress-test it a little bit? Are there any circumstances in which it would not be appropriate, or in which it would violate the NAP (or KYFHO)?

Expand full comment

We can inflict pain and suffering on the enemy without violence.

We emulate the Roman plebians, or more recently, the Polish Solidarity.

Strategic industrial and professional verticals stop working for two weeks and they'll beg to give us what we want.

Expand full comment

Just two moar weeks

Expand full comment

Keep dreamin.

Expand full comment

I have nothing to add but glum agreeance.

Expand full comment

Don't be glum. Be excited.

Expand full comment

The definition of a modern nation state is that it holds a monopoly on violence. This tells you all you need to know .

Expand full comment

If you believe violence is never the answer, then you believe there is nothing worth fighting for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiEAz1TDm1c

Expand full comment

What stopped and irrevocably changed fbi and atf hostage etc policy was the oklahoma bombing, committed by a man who watched them firebomb children at waco. They got the message and their policy changed a few months after

Expand full comment

Hard to beat the Saint Crispin's Day speech from Henry V. It's about the hope of living and the privilege of dying. Of course it was written with the benefit of hindsight, knowing who survived the Battle of Agincourt, and thanks in no small part to the English longbow.

"We few. We happy few. We band of brothers."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvFHRNGYfuo

Expand full comment