TL Davis: This Is A Dead Republic


It is coming.


20 responses to “TL Davis: This Is A Dead Republic

  1. TL is wrong.

    The Republic lives and breathes right here in the carcass of one Alan W. Mullenax.

    Anybody else?

  2. Not here. The Republic does not live within me. I am not Borg. I am an individual. I will work with other individuals, but I am still an individual, not a mere part of a whole.

  3. I agree with you, Brass.
    Nearly 2 decades ago, I knocked on the door of “the Republic” only to learn there was no one home. It has been dead for some time.

    Much as I would like to believe we have live in a Republic with a rule of law, I am convinced otherwise.

  4. No biggie. As someone has said, there is going to be a fight, let’s win.

    Quit the fucking weeping. Go out and make yourself a better person in order to win that fight in your own neighborhood.

  5. Is it possible for me to agree with all of the above?


    Tough S**T – because I *DO*!

    Yes, Alan – The Republic lives in me too – and like the others I’ll be DAMNED if I’ll *EVER* be “assimilated”!!


    Our Founders (PBUT) never intended us to be Nationalist zombies – at most they figured we’d identify with our STATE, but even then they made damn sure we could move from one to another without encumbrance, so as to help keep the tyrants in check! The “American Spirit” is nothing more or less than the maximization of Individual Liberty – and this was the foundation of Our Republic!

    That said, I am also DAMN PROUD to be the descendent of AMERICANS! – of pioneers – of men with the fortitude required to build the greatest, freest nation in the history of this planet and our race! Just THINK of all we accomplished before our parents got too complacent!

    I believe we’ll build it again – and hopefully this time we’ll make sure our kids and grandkids stay a bit more vigilant!

    IMHO, so long as any man believes in the principles on which she was founded, our Republic DOES INDEED live in him!

  6. It has been dead for some time.

    Except to Brass, the original republic was just as illegitimate as this one is.

    Will you fight alongside those who wish to see that republic restored, Brass? Or to establish a new republic?

    • Witchwood, the original republic was just as illegitimate as the current tyranny. I prefer the term “dinokracy,” however. “Rule of the powerful.” Simple. To the point. Universally true.

      I will not fight to establish any form of State.

      Nor can a truly just society be created in any way besides individual virtue, which cannot be coerced.

      This article sums up my position.

  7. If only people had bothered to show up at those times and places when their presence would’ve made a difference.

    If only they would’ve protested rather than remained quiet and went along with the mainstream flow.

    If only they would’ve looked 10 years ahead and done something in their present time.

    If only they would’ve stood shoulder to shoulder with their fellow patriots rather than letting the few flap alone in the breeze so many times.

    But so many had something better to do yesterday…

    Well, here’s another day and you’re still alive.

    Try making a difference. Make it a personal responsibility and a priority in your life. You can band together with other patriots or you can let the republic die one rugged *isolated* individual at a time. It IS your choice.

  8. T.L. Davis is correct, read my rather lengthy comment over on his blog, please.

  9. I think it always important to remember that the People failed the Constitution. The Constitution did not fail the People.

    That said, it truly will be a polygonal battle space.

    God forgive me, but I wish for it now.

  10. If it up to people like Brass to save the Republic, then it truly is doomed. Say, Brass, when you were teaching up at Beloit, did a lot of your depressed students commit suicide, or did they just wallow in their pointless existence, like you? I’m glad you consider the Republic as never legitimate. Then, your secret imaginary friend, Anarchy, and you can live your imaginary agrarian lifestyle, not having any contact with the rest of humanity, in your pristine, govt. free enviornment.Don’t worry about that bogeyman, Reality, you’ve been dodging all these years. He never has or will intrude on your mental state. I hear the leaves turning in Wisconsin are lovely this time of year.

    • Sean,

      The reality is that anarchy/voluntaryism (voluntary, mutually-beneficial free-will interactions among human beings) is everywhere you look. Wherever there is not someone with a gun telling a non-aggressor he must surrender his money or liberty, there is voluntaryism. Irrationality is the idea that a bunch of individuals getting together and concentrating ludicrous amounts of artificial coercive power into the hands of a few men, (whose office sanctifies them, and who never become corrupted by this power, of course) is the only thing that allows human beings to behave as such, and prevents them from becoming baying packs of half-naked, rapine savages, rooting around in the rubble, silhouetted by the eerie orange glow of a burning cityscape.

      Reality is that no individual, group of individuals, or corporation would ever have had the incentive or logistical capability to rack up a body count of 200,000,000 in the span of a single century, without the “legitimacy” of taxation (robbery) and conscription (slavery.) The State did have the incentive to slaughter so many. The State did have the logistical capability to slaughter so many. The State did slaughter so many. All made possible by the mental illness that causes men to believe that some men have the right to take money from others at gunpoint, and the idea that some men have the right to coerce others into fighting for them.

      The State. It causes more violence than it prevents. It always has, and always will.

    • Well said, Sean. I, for one, appreciate his honesty; I knew we’d not see any of these so called liberty-lovers in the trenches, and Brass was good enough to confirm it.

      Know the quickest and simplest way to discredit anarchism? Find an honest anarchist. 🙂

      • Witchwood,

        How, in your estimation, have you discredited anarchism?

      • How, in your estimation, have you discredited anarchism?

        Anarchism (or at least your version of it) demands open borders and the permanent sacrifice of the initiative. Since no nation can survive without an enforced border and the willingness to initiate violence should the circumstances demand it, anarchism is shown to be an anti-human philosophy and is discredited. Everything else is simply masturbation.

        J.R.R. Tolkien was most likely an anarchist. Leo Tolstoy was an anarchist.

        Tolkien’s magnum opus was the ultimate illustration of both the Us vs Them mentality and the innate, intractable differences between peoples, which you and the other Anonymous poster insist is fascist. Tolstoy was an eccentric who played with many inane philosophical and spiritual concepts, including the abolition of marriage and private property and the pedestalization of pacifism. He provides a valuable case study in the decadence of the aristocracy in a dying and backward country, but the notion that he is some sort of example to follow is laughable.

  11. Chris, glad you enjoyed it.

  12. I will kill a communist and an anarchist with equal enthusiasm.

    Just sayin’.

    • Outlaw, I don’t think you know what an anarchist is. I’ll give you a hint: they’re not sulky black-clad delinquent teenage punks chucking molotov cocktails at WTO meetings. Those are socialists. Dorothy Day was an anarchist. J.R.R. Tolkien was most likely an anarchist. Leo Tolstoy was an anarchist.

  13. Witchwood, how long did the Roman Empire survive without border walls and barbed wire? A few hundred years. I am quite certain that passports were hardly necessary to travel all over Europe even up until the 19th century, yet cultural identity was extremely secure. People were happy about their cultural identity. That is not the case now, and it is not the result of a lack of 20-foot concrete walls topped with barbed wire.

    As for “surrender of the initiative?” I’d really like you to define the term “initiative” as you understand it, because according to its denotation, your usage of the term is senseless.

    Now, if you are saying that the initiation of aggression is acceptable because it is expedient, we can’t go much further at all, because you have thereby laid claim to the ideological wasteland that is consequentialism.

    Tolkien’s magnum opus was about individuals from extremely different races that shared core values, who worked together against those who initiated aggression, in order to destroy the ring of Power, which corrupted anyone who tried to wield it for good, no matter how good their intentions.

    Tolkien wrote in a 1943 letter to his son,

    “My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning the abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) — or to ‘unconstitutional’ Monarchy. I would arrest anybody who uses the word State (in any sense other than the inanimate realm of England and its inhabitants, a thing that has neither power, rights nor mind); and after a chance of recantation, execute them if they remained obstinate! If we could go back to personal names, it would do a lot of good.

    Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so to refer to people. . . . The most improper job of any man, even saints (who at any rate were at least unwilling to take it on), is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity.”

    Tolstoy was an eccentric who toyed with many idiotic and untenable ideas, as was Plato. That does not mean that the truths they spoke did not create a foundation for future and better articulated thought.