A Word To The Wise

H/t to Maggies for this Theodore Dalrymple article on human nature, sans chaser:

…In the late 1970s, people in Britain who received money from social security would say ‘I get my giro on Friday.’ (The giro was in effect a cheque.) Nowadays, however, they almost always say ‘I get paid on Friday.’

This new form of words is very revealing, and signifies (to adapt slightly a Gramscian formulation) the long march of dependence through the mentalities: for to get paid, in normal parlance, is to receive money in return for something that one has done for another person or entity.

What is it, then, that they are paid for having done?

The answer is and can only be: for having continued to exist since the receipt of the last money…




We have the Bad People surrounded.

From the inside.


35 responses to “A Word To The Wise

  1. But thankfully not outgunned.

    • They’re working on that.

      So we have to work on our qualitative edge. Train, plan, and train some more. Don’t forget your PT.

    • Phill Revere

      How many of these do you have?

      • Same old tired strawman argument, “you can’t beat the Feds, they have tanks, drones, nukes, etc.”

        Tanks are easy…just don’t be where they are or if you do attack them, you do it on your terms, e.g., deep-buried IEDs, etc.

        The successful guerrilla avoids the enemy’s strength and attacks his weakness. Go after the police, local politicians, infrastructure, etc., not mechanized infantry and tanks.

        Come on, this is basic stuff. Insurgency 101.

  2. Yes, that and the fact that the Klepto-Regime and the Dependency crowd don’t much like each other…just the bennies. When the bennies go, and go they will, they’ll be at each others’ throats…particularly in the cities. Much of the Left will simply self-liquidate – e.g., blacks vs. browns vs. white cosmics – making our task that much easier.

  3. And I don’t care what all the ass clowns do, Nobody, I mean NOBODY plays fuck around like me. I got some old wild shit stored up they ain’t never seen nor heard of, and I ain’t kiddin’, either.

  4. What would happen to the welfare class if the workers decided to change their withholding to minimize what is withheld from their paychecks to minimize the amount of cash the Gubmint has to give to the loafers? That is my way of calling for a worker’s strike.

  5. We have the advantage of being able to fire in 360 degrees at any angle, while they almost always create “friendly fire”.

  6. If I remember correctly, Easy Company and the 506th had the bad people surrounded from the inside too, while freezing their asses off in the Ardennes…

    • And with all due respect to the Screaming Eagles, they had a full-on supply train extending from North America to Belgium via the Channel ports, plus arty, plus tac air, once the weather lifted.

      Oh, and Patton’s Third Army after it pivoted 90 degrees to the north from the Saar.

      Wake Island or the Philippines is a better analogy, methinks.

      Equally brave men, but more parallel in terms of situation.

      Unless, of course, you’ve got the 4th Armored Division headed towards us in relief.


  7. Pingback: Outnumbered | Deaconmatson's Blog

  8. It is time to gather together in on region and start the process of nullification where we live. We must vote with our feet. The question is to where are we going to gather? The USof A is a lost legend now, if it is to be remembered and the embers carried on, we, the FreeFor must gather. If we are right then slowly most of the nation will follow suit and return to a liberty based system, if we are wrong then we will fail. So be it.


    • For the record, I agree with Highlander’s comment here…word for word, sentence by sentence. Maybe the only benefit of being at the bottom, is that the options are so few.

    • Mutant Swarm

      The Pacific Northwest would work. It’s got coastline, access to the Pacific Ocean, natural resources to be exploited, plus it’s almost as far from Washington D.C. as you can get.

      Besides, it’s beautiful up there. Google images for “Oregon coast,” “Washington rain forest,” and “Stanley, Idaho.”

      • Semper Fi, 0321

        You don’t want to go to Stanley, Idaho. I used to live near there, it’s minus 40′ in the winter, and no real growing season to speak of. Besides that, it’s one of the most beautiful place on earth, sorta like where I live.

      • Mutant Swarm: Not so fast. Southern and Eastern Oregon are still fairly conservative, with the exception of the Cosmic Whites of Ashland. The rest of this state is so Blue it’s almost purple. The FSA in Multnomah and Washington Counties(Portland and environs) pretty much controls who goes to Salem. Anything north of Eugene has the majority of Obots. The state is still fairly 2nd Amendment friendly. But, we’ll see what happens come January in view of the staged shooting at the Clakamas Mall.

    • Respectfully this is wrong.
      On a lot of levels its wrong.
      Its not time to run to a new location. Pick up your family and leave everything behind. Its not time to try and get out of your mortgage and get forclosed on when that does not happen.

      Its time to BURN SHIT.
      I dont know what and I dont know where but its time.
      I am surrounded by tyrants at all levels I dont need to go somewhere else to make a stand.

      • Plus the added advantage of terrain (physical and human) foreknowledge of both friendly and nonfriendly factors.

        Add to it the unintended consequences of concentration (i.e., which is easier to exterminate – each fly as it goes about its business or a barn wall full of them as they loll in the sun?), and G1 gets the win.

        100 bonus points added to your account, comrade.

        You might have enough for a potato in your soup next month.


        • Hell yeah! Of course I will decline such a luxury and demand that it be split among all my fellow cell mates. Thats what Dear Leader would want.

        • “Plus the added advantage of terrain (physical and human) foreknowledge of both friendly and nonfriendly factors.”

          Sensible, but theoretical. The reality is that anyone who’s not outnumbered 95-5 in their AO–at the VERY least–is in an unusual situation. Personally, I’d prefer the odds turned around.

          “Local, local, local.” Local to lose, or local to win?

      • The point’s well taken G, but I’m having strong doubts. Obviously I’ve agreed with you till recently, since that’s what I’ve done. I’ve got two retorts for you…

        How can it be that it “does not happen”? I can’t tell you exactly what’s going to happen, and I hope there’s as little needless bloodletting as possible, but it sure ’nuff is going to happen. Otherwise, you’ve got to conclude that we’ve been talking fables here, instead of Aesop. I see no evidence at all that this is the case. Do you?

        I doubt it’s ever really time to “burn shit.” I know what you mean and I’m highly sympathetic to the sentiment, but I figure destruction is the other guy’s game and production is ours. I know that’s more philosophical/ethical in an environment where everything seems physical, but I still strongly believe it’s right.

        But that’s me and I’m a self-confessed idealist. YMMV.

        • I get it .06, but I find that basically a tactical comment, not so much strategic. Further, I don’t find it realistic at all, on two fronts. Mainly, I’m assuming that there are far more than one community’s worth of souls who wish to live. You make it sound like some village with liberty-oriented folk is the whole shebang, just waiting to be taken out one afternoon. I don’t think that’s right. If it is, then we might as well just walk to the camps now.

          Plus, I view the resources of the State, at least currently and in this context, to be effectively infinite. With the possible exception of various LEOs and military mutinying–of which I have far less confidence than many–I don’t think it’s realistic to view the goal as a plain military-tactical matter. Frankly, I almost wish it were sometimes.

          While I don’t deny the physical nature of the problem–duh–I think it’s obviously more of a philosophical battle, and philosophy takes place within minds. We can yap till the cows come home, but nothing teaches better than example.

          And nothing succeeds like success. Henry Ford didn’t try to persuade the world that it wanted horseless carriages; he went out and drove a horseless carriage…and look at the world now in that respect.

        • Jim
          The ideal that you are expressing (its never time to burn shit) is why we cant get anything going beyond talk. You are right destruction is the other guys game but if we dont learn to play it better than they ever dreamed about then we might as well just lock the chains around our neck ourselves. we will never win if we cannot bring ourselves to see that OUR acts of destruction are defensive. That will be RESPONDING to their acts of destruction. I understand it trust me i do. I am still having the internal debate myself not about what needs to be done but about when I will start doing it.
          This is the problem. We continue to see this as a black and white issue and response,
          “They will push me and I will let them push me until I get to the point that I will shoot one of them. Shooting is a very heavy thing and not to be done lightly so I must endure a shit load before I can justify shooting”

          We have more options than shooting and those options require a much smaller level of justification and carry a much smaller penilty.

          • I’m probably not saying it well, G. The only thing I know really well is business, so yes I very much understand the difference between theory and implementation. Big, big difference and we think alike in that respect.

            I guess what I’m saying is that I see a huge trap–in theory and practice–when a man lets the other side set the playing field. Hell, that’s even part of the Bad Guy strategy…make it be about what they want it to be about, and then knock us off while we scurry around in their territory. It should be obvious that they’ve been very, very successful with that strategy.

            Basically, good men are thinking in the terms of the Bad Guys, and are in extreme danger (IMO) of responding in kind…that is, of accepting the founding principles. Once that’s done, it’s all over anyway and everything else is moot detail.

            They’re many rotten things, those Bad Guys, but they’re not stupid and they’re downright experts on how people behave. To me, that’s the ace in the hole—if they ever see what Good Guys are actually about, they won’t know what hit ’em and won’t have a clue what to do about it.

            The thing is, for that to happen, the Goods Guys gotta know it first!

          • “You are right destruction is the other guys game but if we dont learn to play it better than they ever dreamed about then we might as well just lock the chains around our neck ourselves.”

            What I’m saying is that this IS locking the chain around our necks ourselves. Unlike this, which isn’t…

            “we will never win if we cannot bring ourselves to see that OUR acts of destruction are defensive. That will be RESPONDING to their acts of destruction.”

            Right, and THAT’S what matters. The problem is that an act of destruction doesn’t become self-defense because we can theorize it as so, but rather because it is.

            I may be sounding like I fundamentally disagree with you, but I don’t. I know what you’re saying and why you’re saying it. Basically I agree because I understand it. OTOH there are lots of readers reading those words, who aren’t you.

            • I got ya.
              So lets noodle this out a bit more. Are you familiar with the OODA loop concept?
              If so then you know the way to victory is to dictate the terms of the engagement so that the other guy is always resetting his loop and never in a position to decide on a course of action and act on it.
              I see us constantly resetting our loop. We are constantly letting the OpFor dictate the battlespace. OpFor depends on our passive response.
              Yes letting the bad guy set the playing field is a trap. For the last 100 years we have been doing this and they continue to expect us to do this. They may absolutly be wanting to push us to the point of breaking so that they can get heavy handed. My point is that we take up their tactic of breaking things so that we can dictate the preasure. They use breaking things as a way to build the preasure and create an atmosphere of crisis so as to generate the call for a response. They want to control that entire process and wag the dog. If we step out of that chain of action and do something they do not expect they will be forced to react and we begin to control the OODA loop.
              I say breaking things and thats not always a physical thing. Look at what they have done to the ideal of “family” over the last 40 years. Anyone think thats still an unbroken thing?

              • Well, I’m definitely in favor of creative tactics…in all areas of life really, and especially this one. And there’s no question that OpFor lives for crises; I think it was Rahm Emanuel who explicitly admitted this. Let’s face it, the whole scheme is built of fear. Unfortunately for most people just trying to raise their family, there’s a ton more of it today than there was yesterday. Worse, you just know the answer is going to be more collectivism and statism.

                I don’t know that it’s the OODA loop that keeps getting screwed up for the Good Guys. I’m more inclined to think that it’s lack of a super-clear objective, that some of the basic principles are missing. A strategic problem as opposed to a tactical problem, if you will. That’s why I’m touchy about the other guy setting the playing field; I find that an important philosophical issue and I constantly see it everywhere. Of course, I tend to be sensitive to philosophical matters.

                Probably, that’ll be more or less resolved when everything turns to pure survival, but then that brings in a whole set of problems of its own. OTOH it might also tend to shine the light on the most basic principle of all, which is to live. Philosophically it seems that we’re nothing but screwed, but then I remember that creative minds have an uncanny knack for coming up with solutions.

      • Lastly, for both of you, don’t overlook McElroy’s piece. Who knows, maybe it’s for real.

        • Concentrate all (most) of freefor in one area?

          Greatest gift we could give to leviathan. Ever heard of an EMP? Or a low yield nuke? Or the Alamo?

          If we have to play 4th genwar, and we must, isn’t that whole paradigm based on being everywhere and nowhere? We have to have them spread thin because we lack the means to concentrate overwhelming fire on a large force. And they have no need to concentrate their forces unless we give them the opportunity! by gathering in one place. Tactically and strategically stupid.

          They will have to concentrate on holding what they value- cities, other large concentrations. Now, they’re in the Alamo and we can choke them in a modern version of siege tactics which is nothing more than cutting the umbilical.

          When they are too weak to object, we can form up and deliver the ultimatum: Liberty or Death. They, too, can have either one.

          • Sorry, I believe I replied out of thread order. Interestingly, considering the nature of the topic, I think you’re overthinking it.

    • Wyoming. Fewest people to.start with. Google Free State Wyoming.

  9. Outnumbered.

    But not out-gunned.