More On The WWII Polish Resistance



From a commenter:

Really appreciate Aesop’s line-chart (and shamelessly snagged it for another effort underway). I have been working for awhile with a brother I served with, and dear friend, as he translates what amounts to a history of the Polish Holy Cross Brigade from a variety of sources, including artifacts from his father who was an officer in that brigade. I have a great job since I get to irritate the hell out of him when he sends me proofs that get the old-fashioned red pencil treatment from the grammar-nazi.

At any rate, I shot him the link for the above patch and we had some interesting discussion over a couple of hours, which he consented to share. Here are some words from him that may instruct folks as to what can happen when tangled & compromised “alliances” occur.

So if our generous host can insert
1) the pic I sent with the collection of patches & crests, followed by
2) the pic of the Holy Cross Brigada placque.

Here are some words from the author I’m working with:

First off, the NSZ had their own patch of the lizard, the Holy Cross Brigade also had its own, lower pic, on left. Note the silver medallion in the top pic shows the organizations (ZJ, NOW (where Dad started, NZW) that merged to become the NSZ. The patch in [this post] is AK (WP is Wojsko Polski, Polish Army), and I believe used to this day. The AK was by far the largest underground organization and was the official military arm of the Government-in-Exile (GIE).

The NSZ (National Armed Forces), political arm / masters of the Brigade and other forest units, was loyal to most of the concepts of the GIE throughout the war, and planned to merge with the Home Army (AK), but was betrayed by the AK leadership, in that the NSZ was to retain independent units and the (military) Commander of the NSZ was to take the role of AK Deputy Commander. After the merger agreement was signed, the AK leadership reneged and started to integrate the NSZ units into their own.

The NSZ then breached the agreement, at which point the upper echelon of the GIE declared the NSZ as ‘illegal’ and refused to support them, and actually undermined them at times. The relationship between the ground AK and NSZ units, however, did not change much, as they realized it was not in anyone’s best interest not to cooperate. The NSZ was one of tens of underground Polish organizations, most were loyal to the Government-in-Exile, but some were independent.

The GIE also ordered the Warsaw Uprising – how could they not have foreseen the outcome? The major disagreement the NSZ had with the GIE was that the GIE ordered the AK to cooperate with the Russkies; even after the battle of Warsaw – bad move.

Soon after the reds started west, AK units that helped them fight the Germans were disarmed, the leaders shot on the spot, and the rest sent to Siberia. So, not a lot of love between the NSZ and AK at the upper levels.

Would I wear an AK patch? Nowadays, sure, it’s current and mostly recognizable, but I’d also sport an NSZ and Brigade patch somewhere…

There is a lesson or three up there. I give primary attention to the age-old adage about “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” I consider that to be unadulterated bullshit; fortunately so did the Holy Cross Brigade because, without them fighting their own way west and out, would Captain Rayski have fathered my buddy. It should be noted that the commies & their quislings continued into the 50’s to attempt to hunt down these members of the Brigada wherever they might have settled; Germany, France. They remember & they don’t quit unless they are disavowed of it in the strongest terms.

See also this related piece from last year: Real-Life Resistance.

Before leaving, take another moment or two and enlarge the graphic below:


Be coldly honest with yourself, and answer to yourself the following questions:

1) Does FREEFOR have any structure similar to that of the Poles? If not, why not?

2) Does FREEFOR have a unifying alternative idea to that of the Red occupiers here in FUSA? If not, why not?

3) At the operational levels, what could be done to build similar functions in my AO?

4) Am I working on same?

5) If not, why not?

79 responses to “More On The WWII Polish Resistance

  1. Publius X MAUL

    The fact that rat faced Jews control ALL government posts in the great state of Pennsylvania is proof the civil war will happen.

    Every. Single. Time.

    The white folks in PA are enslaved.

    • Meatspace, bro.

      You are accomplishing nothing here.

    • does that button at the upper left say “pogrom”?!! In some parts of Poland, the AK was violently anti-Jew. I didn’t know they gave out prizes, though.

      • Says “POGROM’ just as you read it, but sorry to disappoint. It is a commemoration button, after a unit of the national army, largely post-war, that operated anti-commie operations against collaborators & seizing ill-gotten gains (even some Butch & Sundance stuff). Name was taken from the pseudonym of one of its leaders. (Leaders/members, especially during the war and particularly in the forest units, often had pseudonyms or noms de guerre they were addressed by.)

  2. Publius X MAUL

    5. No. Because the Jew owns all wealth and nobody in FREEFOR has the resources to organize anything. Plus if they did they’d be disappeared.

  3. Question 5 is an easy one.

    Most of “freefor” are Socialists, themselves; they just don’t know it.

  4. No. And we’re full of cheaply-hired turncoats. See what happened in the 1990’s to the Patriot Movement (see Elohim City) not to mention all those “informants” and “provacateurs” with the Bundy;s in Oregon.

    That said, maybe those stupid Poles shouldn’t have started WWII. Look it up.

  5. well, i think it presents a good story. in ’42, poland had 25 million people and a 1.5 million man army. and top notch org chart. very thorough. now if we only had 1.5 million people we could press into a unified front, instead of thousands of scattered partisan groups that stay hidden out in the hinterlands, waiting “for the day”. Organizing for Action we are not, nor do we have those deep pockets of funding. will take a very large soapbox to preach from to even begin that process. oh wait… we are. but still squabbling and debating who gets to be the colonels. we are all colonels if we just start acting like one. square one is getting pretty crowded.

    • The key idea I would like everyone to burn into their brains is the need for some kind of systematic approach to what we face.

      There are far too many good folks who feel that because one can’t do everything, the only other option is to do nothing.


      This place has maxed out on the demographic represented here. Who isn’t here?

      Those people are the growth opportunity.

      They are also the path to multigenerational resistance to evil.

      Finally, they actually can move fast enough to be the maneuver element.

      We are beginning to build the messaging element of that effort with 12 Round Productions and the upcoming film.

      The home schoolers have been in the vanguard for years, bless them.

      Everybody can do something.


      But you know that, bro.

    • No desire here to be a colonel of anything; the suck factor will be bad enough for a private. CA brings up home-schooling – one of the paths to Poles retaining their culture, while maintaining their humanity even under dire circumstances so that it would survive beyond their own years. One of the ways they did this was to mentor in all aspects the young people who were with them, even in the forest units. They learned much besides the basics of being a rifleman and were taught mathematics, literature and many of the common academic disciplines. The fact that many had balls the size of blue whales didn’t dissuade them from trying to foster the best human beings they could, steeped in their heritage. Start with one at a time; a child or grand-child or someone in the neighborhood. The two best times to plant a tree are 20 years ago, or right now.

    • tensmiths: Take CA’s advice. The reason we do “B”, is because we don’t, and can’t, for various reasons, do “A”.

      “A” would be ideal, but then everyone would be an “agent provocateur”, if you get my drift. As if the provocateuring hasn’t provocateur-ed these past many years. Besides, most people are idol worshipers and wouldn’t dare do anything to separate themselves from their idols, even if a bunch of cops broke into their homes and flash-banged their baby’s face, or put a bullet through the top of their young sleeping daughters head… accidentally of course. Anyhow, I feel ya.

  6. Thanks for all this info. I’d like to post it on the product page for the patch if it’s ok.

    Still have a handful left to pre order.

  7. Being too early can be nearly as bad as being too late. There is an opportunity cost to engaging in any activity, most certainly in organizing foundations of militia type organizations.
    There are a substantial number of people who will fight tooth and nail once they see that they have choice, that there is no way to maintain the status quo. For the average Joe, the opportunity cost, the risk associated with dedicating time and effort to the sort of organization discussed here, is a losing gamble when most of the average Joe’s are busy fighting tooth and nail simply to maintain their current status quo. Working longer hours cutting back and still paying more in taxes and bringing home less money than before.

    We can espouse all of these great and noble ideals, even the pragmatic ideals, yet the risk of being wrong, of everything struggling along for another 15 or 20 years is simply too great for most people to risk.

    The day that EBT stops working and stays down for more than a week, a natural disaster shuts down infrastructure for an extended period of time in urban areas, or any other event that changes the risk calculation such that a “combat” stance is lower risk than an attempt at status quo, then we will see people taking these measures and looking for leaders.

    For all of the war gaming and proselytizing, for the masses it comes down to the simple risk assessment of “which option, status quo or engagement of force, is more likely to benefit me (and my family) now and in the immediate near term”?

    History tends to show time and again that until the balance of that equation changes the masses will plod along. What the trigger event is that changes the balance of that equation to change is anyones guess.

    • “Freefor stops paying taxes” is a systematic approach, it brings home more money, and it will end EBT.

  8. Uncle Larry

    The Poles didn’t have to go up against modern technology. Our police state, and surveillance state, are already in place. It would take someone highly skilled at counterintelligence to start a group.

  9. This link sheds an accurate account of the poles history with the Germans.

    • Confederate miner

      A lot if people here refuse to know the truth. I believe one of the most important things is getting the truth out about Hitler and what has been done to Germany. Thing is once you figure out 1 truth you keep looking and they all lead to the same place.

      • SemperFi, 0321

        Don’t know that there has ever been a brainwashing of this order in all of history, it defies all logic, and yet the masses eat it up like drugged candy.

    • What a load of crap. First off – the piece was written 35 years ago. 1981 was the beginning of Solidarity, Poland finally seeing the end of Soviet domination didn’t happen for another eight years. So yes, the economy was inefficient and stagnant at the time, in large part because large numbers of Poles considered themselves occupied by the Russians and were resisting.

      The author hates the Catholic Church, obviously. That’s fine, but to blame the economy of Poland in 1981 on the clergy is laughable.

      Yes, I’m sure many Poles in 1981 still hated Germans. Wars of conquest followed by genocide tend to leave bad feelings, especially on the losing side.

      Five Million Polish citizens were murdered in NAZI concentration camps, millions more died fighting the Germans after they invaded in 1939. Funny this true history sort of skips that.

      What is your point in promoting this 35 year old screed?

  10. I realize that I am flagellating an expired equine at this point, but our side has a few writers that are trying to show the way. Moseby’s Forging the Hero, Attaway’s We Defy, Culper and FO Magazine. OK, so they used to be in the Army and have done this for real, why should anybody pay any attention to what they say?

  11. I’ve heard the claim that Poland keeps getting overrun because that piece of land doesn’t have any terrain barriers like mountains. Compare the size/cost of Jefferson and Washington’s homes with the palaces of the British kings. Suppose that size difference is a measure of the disparity in logistics available to the British and proto-American armies. Yet, the Atlantic ocean was a terrain barrier whose cost to cross was even larger than that disparity. America wasn’t created by the plucky proto-Americans attacking on Christmas, it was created by the Atlantic ocean.

    What can you do to erect a virtual mountain range between your house and the multitude of New Offices full of swarms of Officers to harass your people and eat out their substance?

    Why would I want a government-in-exile when I don’t want government at all? Government still doesn’t work, no matter how neatly it fits into the worldview government employees taught you in 4th grade.

    • Good luck hoping for Shangri-La.

      We’ll get a government despite anyone’s wanting it or not, so one can participate in making what they get as minimally bad as possible, or just wait for a heaping helping of septic stew because they thought they could stick their heads in the sand and make it go away.

      And you aren’t going to erect a virtual ocean or imaginary mountain range either.

      So now that we’ve eliminated the magical wishes option, Malone’s Query remains relevant:

      What are you prepared to do?

      • You may have a great argument supporting your conclusions, but if you don’t show it to me, I can’t be convinced by it.

      • Encryption is regulated by your government as a munition because of its high military utility, its ability to raise the cost of gathering intelligence. Encryption is a virtual barrier to enforcement. What if the next Silk Road competed with ebay for the large volume of flea market stuff?

  12. The Usual Suspect

    Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, then how doe’s a 10th century savage fight
    us to the point that all we want to do in Afghanistan is leave ?

  13. Grenadier1

    Lots of quit in FREEFOR.

    Cant fight their tech
    Cant trust other people to not be rats
    Cant meet up with others in my AO
    Cant deal with local gun laws
    Cant deal with imaginary global control by a minuscule number of sand people.
    Cant fight city hall
    Cant work with people who dont carry a .308
    Cant work with people who trust gas impingement
    Cant work with anyone, I am a lone wolf.
    Cant spend money on training, you should give it to me for free
    Cant bother to learn tactics
    Cant carry any kind of pack but a 6
    Cant breathe when I walk from the car to the house
    Cant do anything on Sunday
    Cant serve with people who do not believe exactly how I do
    Cant serve with people who are flawed
    Cant server with people who dont believe in the sacred parchment

    Did I leave any out?

    You can damn sure bet that the Commies can put aside all their differences, get organized and get in the street.
    Can we?

    • Can’t take criticism, even when I know it’s well intentioned or at least painfully accurate

      Can’t accept responsibility for myself and my fucked-up situation

      Can’t take one step today, one step tomorrow, etc. – there is no hope

      • Amen Brothers…If it wasn’t such a serious situation we face I would be laughing at how fucked up Freefor is…I have put my solution many times on here and so few have responded or tried to do something similar leaving me to think that there just isn’t enough pain yet…Sad That…

    • Americants, the new ADA-approved handicapped.
      Placards available at any local office of Just Sit There In Your Wet Diapers and Cry.

  14. Defensive Training Group writes: But let’s say we got rid of the office. The Presidency. All Senators. The Judiciary. What then? How would you suggest the vacuum be filled? I’ll bet everything I have that if you don’t fill the vacuum, someone else will, and it’ll be worse than many can imagine…

    You are claiming the official parasites we select with votes are better than the freelance parasites we would have if we didn’t have official parasites. But you won’t allow the experiment of not having official parasites, and neither has any other ruler in all of human history. You don’t have any experimental evidence from libertarian island to support your fundamental claim of the necessity of rulers. Your justification for government is circular, a religious tenent of faith. Government employees say government is necessary.

    • Umm…no. I was suggesting that ridding ourselves of the offices created by the Constitution would create a vacuum that would be filled by a worse system.

      Thanks, though, for the discussion.

      • I was suggesting that ridding ourselves of the offices created by the Constitution would create a vacuum that would be filled by a worse system.

        That’s what I understood your claim to be. How would this new band of pirates pay the salaries of their military scout LEO, if the average victims, who outnumber the pirates 100:1, put some resistance into not paying taxes? The same resistance that was successfully used to not register guns in Connecticut in 2013. Just stop submitting your financial data into you enemy’s tracking system.

        The government can’t win without tax collection by printing paper currency. Assume money is held by average guys as copper/silver/gold coins, where it can’t be easily confiscated by inflation. All three metals have large usage in electronics, they won’t become worthless scrap metals anytime soon.

  15. If we ever find ourselves in Eastern Europe in the first half of the 20th Century, that should be very helpful.

  16. I learned about the French Resistance from my grandfather who fought all throughout Europe in the US Army until being wounded at the Battle of the Bulge. He said from everything he saw the French had a “resistance to fighting”.

  17. Malos y buenos, a tu gusto. Bad ones and good ones, according to thy taste. It’s what Pablo tells Robert Jordan, when Jordan asks about the quality of the guerrillas that Pablo rustled up during the night, for attacking outposts and destroying a bridge, that very day. It’s the kind of comment that, along with a thousand others, reinforces the idea you will probably get killed today. From the book, “For Whom the Bell Tolls”. Consider my words. Until, and unless, all the wildcats, super soldiers, sex maniacs, shrinking violets, wannabe operators, fat kids, skinny kids, kids who run a lot, even kids with chicken pox, are willing, and submit to, the discipline of being directed by a Leader, they are NEVER going to amount to anything other than a minor nuisance to TPTB. The Three Step Problem Solving Method. What is the problem? We do not have clearly defined leadership. What are some of the solutions? We come up with leaders, we submit under discipline, to that leadership, building some kind of organization that works. And lastly, we TRY the proposed solutions, see what works, get feedback on what works best, and modify and improve our plan, according to the shifting, changing environment. Not easy, and not impossible. Yes, I know, paid informants, rats, money, time, resources, yada yada, yada. I also am well informed about all the High and Mightys out there, who will never deign to alight from Mt. Olympus, and grace us with their holy presence, because they’re just too well trained, expert, fantastic shots, top physical condition, politically aware, and smart, to ever mix it up with the mongrels on the commons. Thanks for letting us worthless ones know how truly low we are, and pardon us for living. The opponent has all the the organization, leadership, money, plans, and publicity they could ever want. What we have is a lot of angry stray cats who piss on each other, claw at each other, hiss, shit in the hallway, and go around with their tails straight up, as big as a small ball bat. WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

    • “We come up with leaders”

      Lol, you missed your own point! We were writing our two comments at the same time; guess great minds think alike. Somewhat.

    • For myself, I’d never follow a man who requires that I “submit” to his leadership.

      • Grenadier1

        Then you dont know shit about followership. Submitting to leadership is not a “to the gates of hell” proposition. Everything has limits, but you have to be willing to allow others to make decisions or you are just a helicopter.
        A collection of parts flying in tight formation.

        • You’re missing the point wholesale. Having a leader is no form of submission, none whatsoever. Organization and discipline are necessary to any team goal, in any context. Both are the OPPOSITE of submission, which is why submitters who do it because they’re forced, make a team lousier and not better.

          The nagging question for me is why would you suggest otherwise. Even in the extreme context of putting one’s life on the line, even in combat, it’s still just a choice. After all, what else could it be?

          • Following a leader necessarily involves subordination of one’s own desire, Jim. How do you think otherwise?

            • Lol, this’ll be insubordination soon—that’s got to be the craziest sentence you’ve ever written. Any team achieving any goal requires some sort of command structure and the discipline that goes with that. This is not a “subordination of one’s own desire,” but rather exactly how one goes about achieving those desires when that achievement involves more than one person.

              The lineman doesn’t “subordinate his desire” to that of the foreman or the CEO. They all have the same desire in that context, and presumably each is doing the very best he can toward that goal. The foreman can still “boss” the lineman and the CEO the foreman, but there’s no subordination of desires, values or moral stature among the three.

              In battle, one follows orders in order to keep himself and his brothers alive. That’s pretty much the end of it in the fire, but the desires/values that put them there are not in conflict with each other, or with superior officers…at least to the degree they’re legitimately leading men in battle.

              I’m pretty sure your goal over all these years is not to persuade some people to subordinate their desires to those of others. Pretty sure the goal is exactly the opposite. That’s why I wonder what the hell happened. A leader doesn’t take over men’s souls; he gets those souls to focus on the common goal…and then pulls rabbits out the hat to get it done.

              This is why strongest-willed people win the wars, every time. The LAST thing anyone should want anyone else to do, is subordinate their values and goals to others. That’s what this is all about, after all. Having the discipline to follow orders and WIN is achieved by being strong, not weak. That’s why you can’t tell the real heroes by rank.

              • Subordinating the desire to run

                Subordinating the desire to do one’s own thing

                Subordinating the desire to tell the bossman “no”

                et cetera.

                And yes, I recognize that the struggle actually is internal – between the part of you that wants to run and the part of you that wants to act with honor.

                But I don’t know how to improve the phrase I used, save for this tweak: subordinate one’s desire to be less than what one could be, if one can muster the grit.

                • I like that, but could never figure out why anyone would want to be less than they could anyway. So I admit to not knowing what that desire is like.

                  I don’t wanna do semantics so if you’d like to call that urge to defy one’s boss a “desire,” then okay. Natch I’d say, “Context, context.” And let’s not forget that the guy can say no or turn coward anyway—good reason to cooperate with those who genuinely seek the team’s goal.

          • Grenadier1

            Jim you missed the word “willing” in my response. I said nothing about force. If I agree to follow some leader I have done so willingly. In doing so I concisely make the decision to trust in their decisions and do my best to advance the goals of the leader and the team. By following I am submitting to their decision making ability and their plans an goals. You seem to think that everyone who follows is being forced to do so. Maybe you are just hung up on the word submit. I don’t see that as involving force per se.

            • like these guys?

              no thanks.

            • “Maybe you are just hung up on the word submit.”

              Maybe. Okay, I agree with all that. I held wage-paying jobs as a kid, but I never felt like I was submitting. Hell…if anything, the boss was submitting to my desire for money! I still followed orders, duh. I don’t associate the two at all.

              Why is it “submit” rather than “cooperate” or even “work together in an organization with a command structure”?

      • Then you’ll die alone, and probably quickly.
        The most important military discipline is self-discipline, and if you can’t get there, you’re worthless to anyone but yourself.

        Those similarly inclined should regale us with their exploits playing one-man football.

        • You’re selling YOUR version of Collectivism … it’s no different from THEIR version, except it’s you at the helm.

          “Give up your autonomy to the Collective; and be led by this great man, General Aesop (or whomever).” That’s old-school; fit for an army of automatons. And, I’d sooner die alone than in the company of such men. Order-followers.

          I’ve met a couple of guys whom I’d follow; but, I’ve never met one who demanded my submission. Co-operation, in the absence of compulsion, is the only valid structure which I would accept.

          But, hey, it’s all theoretical, since not a single one of us is likely to ever offer any meaningful resistance. I mean, “the best predictor of future behaviour, is past behaviour”, right?

          • “I’ve met a couple of guys whom I’d follow; but, I’ve never met one who demanded my submission”

            No good leader ever would. Who the hell would want a guy like that on his team? Alright, as cannon fodder maybe. That’s why conscription “works,” if you call that working. There’s a subordination of values in that case alright, which is why it’s about the most evil action a government can do…and that’s a mighty high bar.

            It’s funny how people still think physical strength will always beat wits, even after having watched what Donald Trump just did. You’d think he got there with a machete or something.

          • No, I posited no such, at any point or place.
            So you can’t see common sense for your own prejudices and imaginary dog-whistles, and as predicted, are functionally worthless to any common cause, and thus doomed to a short, interesting course of events in the coming unpleasantness.

            But hey, show that everything I wrote is counterfactual.
            Tell us how legions of individual Romans overcame barbarian hordes, or landing craft full of individuals conquered at the Normandy beachhead or on Iwo Jima, from your vast storehouse of historical knowledge.

            Or could it be, perhaps, that you avoid those non-examples, because a mere 7000 or so years of recorded human history demonstrates the nonsense underlying what you advocate.

    • Amen Brother…Trust is a big issue and how do you build trust? By being in contact with that person on a daily basis and seeing how they react to every situation and how they hold up… Freefor doesn’t have that and until they do it will keep on being what we have right now…Sad That…

    • Sean, those who refuse to follow, or lead, will find their roll, in time. I am that guy. And I do question my upcoming contribution. In my life, I’ve seen very few effective leaders. I don’t intend to die as fodder, for some dumb fuck with an agenda.

      My country doesn’t pick my enemy, or my friends. Those privileges are reserved for me.

      Their are many issues worth dying for.

      Fuck, at 60 I don’t even know, what I know anymore.


  18. Funny…as much great stuff that Sean writes here, he gave a huge clue about leadership last week. He spoke of how his men used to say that he always managed to pull a rabbit out of the hat.

    That’s what leadership is. It’s the guy who keeps pulling rabbits out of the hat, when others gave up long ago…if they ever began. It’s an action, not a presentation or a theory.

    So keep yapping about what everyone else should do, and everyone else should believe, and everyone else should value. About how your life will be okay once enough peeps go along and you can have a big enough gang to join. Then, you can keep looking forward to losing and yapping about what could’ve been, if only the others would’ve done.

    Trumpism is the recognition of how much one person can do, every which way. That doesn’t mean alone. Sean pulled those rabbits out the hat with everyone, for everyone. Wanting to do for others isn’t a bad motivation…it’s how you make friends and allies and trades.

    In your life, only one person can do it. Failure to recognize that, pretending that it’s everyone else who has you in chains, is just the same ol’, same ol’—-anything not to recognize one’s own responsibility AND that responsibility is a glorious thing. The underlying problem has always been ethical—your life and your values ARE worth it, and assholes have been teaching for 5,000 years that this fact must never be acknowledged.

    It will stop when folk find the courage–THEMSELVES–to say, “No, I AM the good and I will live like it.”

    The moral being the practical, that’s also how you get the very biggest gang, the unstoppable one. Free individuals have no limits.

    • kay_de_leon


    • Here’s the thing about old timers…
      They live in the past world, under past rules.

      Here’s a clue.
      It didn’t work then and it won’t work now.
      The young folks are sure as hell not following a failed example.

      Here’s another clue.
      The young people can’t stand you old fuckers.
      What young man wants to listen to some gray haired fool?

  19. Free individuals got stomped into squirrel shit by teams of disciplined legions working together.
    Ask the Carthaginians how that worked out for them.

    There’s also a reason the current iteration’s boot camps spends the opening weeks beating the words “I”, “me”, “my”, and “mine” out of everyone’s vocabulary and thought process, painfully, and implants “We”, “our” and “us” with tender loving crotchkicks and throatpunches, until it becomes a habit.

    Be as choosy as you want before you join.
    But if you’re going to hold back after that point, or think that’s an option, better to just stay home, because your head isn’t in the right place to begin with.

    • kay_de_leon

      I think that in some worldviews, namely the one I THINK Jim is talking about, the collective and the individual aren’t mutually exclusive.

      I cant think of any good argument though, that would support the notion that time spent bitching about a lack of preparedness in others (and counting internet personalities, even??) wouldn’t be better spent building on your own shit alongside people you trust. Seeing a little bit of that on this thread…

    • Oh, I didn’t know you were trying to live an ancient life. Not sure what you’re doing on the Internet then. Seems like an odd goal to me, but your goals are yours. I guess the handle was a clue.

      • Having the benefits of what not so distantly was considered a basic education, I forget how uncommon that is nowadays.
        So we’ve determined that you can’t draw a line between points, nor calculate where it intersects with modern life when extrapolated.
        Shocking: you lack the abilities to do basic mathematics.
        No wonder illogic proceeds from that basis.
        But thanks for serving to illustrate the problem.

      • nobody visits his overly dramatic and dusty site, so he comes here to stir up some sympathy hits… hey everybody! let’s follow the tale teller – NOT.

  20. Hope the following gives you an idea of how local tens can branch
    out into hundreds and thousands:

    “The Hundreds”of England and America
    It is from “the Hundreds” of ancient England that the title of this book is derived. It is only the title andthis Preface that directs its attention to the Hundreds for the purpose of demonstrating the fact that when ourFather’s “old paths” are abandoned, all of His children (as it was with the children of Israel) fall into captivityunder the lordship and despotism of merchandising men.Long ago in England, while that remote island, at large, was under the rule of the Anglo-Saxon kings ofthe earth, small groups of Godly men and their families gathered together within their shire (later, the king’scounty) to deal with that which they knew is upon our Lord’s shoulder — government. Within these shires,groups of families called tithings (ten families) further united into ten tithings under the Lordship of the Christ toform what we know today as “the Hundred.” In this, they were aware of our Father’s Proverb, “Many wait on thefavor of rulers, but justice comes to a man from the Lord” Proverbs 29:26 (LXX). Therefore, the members ofeach Hundred, as a whole, took responsibility for the crimes and defaults of each and every one of its members,and were therefore diligent as to who remained within their Hundred and who did not belong. With each andevery member involved, they formed their own hundred and shire courts, chose their own constable of thehundred and reeve of the shire (later, the king’s constable and sheriff), etc., all independent of the so-called”king’s prerogative,” and dispensed justice as The Word directed. That was the way it was for several centuries, until the subsequent generations composing the Hundredbegan “to look to the favor of rulers.” Though there is little known concerning the specifics of the change thatcame about, we must recognize that those subsequent generations must have forgotten, as their forefathers neverforgot, that their lives were not their own but belonged to the King of Kings, and not to the merchant kings ofthe earth and their swarms of officers. Hereafter within this Preface is a short history of what is known today of the transition from agovernment that was upon the Christ’s shoulder (the light yoke), to a government that joined itself to the kingsand merchants of the earth (the heavy yoke), and took on the burdens that men put upon other men’s backs. In itstransition, we see how and why we are left with still another history of the un-Godly governments of mencontained in the next 92 pages of this book. In Truth, we but only need to look to The Word to know thesethings, and thereby avoid them before they come about:”If thou sit to sup at the table of a prince, [*Satan is the prince of this world] consider attentively thethings set before thee: and apply thine hand, knowing that it behooves thee to prepare such: but if thou art veryinsatiable, desire not his provisions; for these belong to a false life.” Proverbs 23:1-3 (LXX)The following condensed history of the transition from a Godly government within the Hundreds, to afalse life under the rulership of earthly kings, and their merchant churches, governors, presidents, etc., is from abook titled “The Hundred and The Hundred Rolls” (1930) 296 pp., by Helen Cam: “Superceded by the Poor Law Union and the Urban and Rural District, the Hundred hasreceded so rapidly into the mists of the past that the first associations to be called up by its nameare likely to be those of remote antiquity–of the Germany of Tacitus, the Gaul of Clovis or theEngland of Edgar the Peaceable. Both the hundred and the shire courts were held at stated intervals (once a month) during thetime of the Anglo-Saxons. Before the Norman conquest of 1066 judicial activities, both secularand spiritual, had been concentrated in these local assemblies, at which the local custom wasdeclared and enforced, titles to property were established, and violence condemned, if not
    punished. Justice was administered and law declared by those who attended the court. The shire-moot (shire court) and hundred-moot (hundred court) met in the open air. By declaring custom and determining procedure in doubtful cases these courts were in effectmaking law, though law of only local application; in the Middle Ages no clear dividing linecould be drawn between jurisdiction and legislation. The shire-moots of the tenth and eleventhcenturies are sometimes referred to as the witan of such or such a shire; they were indeed asorgans of self-government of far more practical importance than the central witan–thatindeterminate collection of nobles and clergy whose powers varied inversely with those of theAnglo-Saxon kings. Out of the early hundreds came the office of constable who was responsiblefor keeping the peace, the maintenance of watches, and, for the mustering of the armed men ofthe hundred. And, while the shire itself did not escape its share of public duties, the men of thehundred had personal status that was outside the purview of the king’s law. Then after 1066, William the Conqueror called on the shire-moot for co-operation. For a kingwho had from the first steadily maintained that he was the lawful heir of the Confessor, and whostood for the principles of justice in accordance with the laws of God and of man, the shire-mootwas bound to be the tribunal for settling controversies as to the claims of Norman bishops andearls who had been granted all the lands and the rights of English predecessors. Not only theArchbishop of Canterbury but many other men between 1066 and 1087 made good their claimsin a shire court by the witness of the good men, or, more particularly, the old men, of the shire, aspecially appointed royal delegate presiding to see that justice was done and to record thejudgment. By 1086 the shires must have been used to the sight of the king’s justice sitting intheir court, and to the new procedure of the sworn inquest as a means of getting definite answersto definite questions. William’s successors continued to use the hundred-moot and shire-mootfor their own purposes. With the advent of Henry I, it was decided by royal proclamation that it was necessary toforbid sheriffs to summon extraordinary shire-moots and hundred-moots without royal warrant.Under Henry I, as visits of royal justices became more regular, the transformation of shire-mootinto king’s court must have become a stereotyped process. At a special joint assembly of thecounties of Norfolk and Suffolk before a royal steward in 1148, or thereabouts, the old knightwhose testimony settles the matter observes incidentally that for fifty years he has beenattending shire courts and hundred courts, since before the days of King Henry, when peace andjustice flourished in the land. But Henry II did more than return to his grandfather’s tradition: he took the decisive stepwhich drew the courts of the shire into the main stream of constitutional development. It was notmerely to use its old procedure on the king’s behalf; it was to be taught a new procedure: thesuitors of the court were to become not only judges but jurors. The king’s justice’s, now sitting inthe shire court, were to call upon the knights of the shire and the men of the hundred to giveanswer, in sworn dozens, to questions put to them–not only to specific questions as to royaldues, but to sweeping questions such as: ‘Is there anybody in your hundred whom you suspect tobe a thief or a receiver of thieves?’ Gradually there opened up by means of these juries ofpresentment a way for the complaints and wishes of the country-side to reach the king. Thedemand for information was in effect transformable into an invitation to complain; andcomplaints came to the king’s court of a fullness that would have been embarrassing if they hadbeen seriously taken as a programme for action. The contact was established, not merely apersonal but an official contact, between the courts of the shire and the king’s court. By 1258, the king was far off; the earls and barons were usually absentees, represented in thecounty by their stewards; it was the knights who ran the local government, both as holders inturn of the post of sheriff as coroners, and as suitors and controllers of the county court, wheretheir duties were steadily increasing as the century advanced. Here they were required to discusstaxation, to hear the king’s letters and ordinances, to elect the county coroners, to serve onspecial juries and inquests, and to appoint plenipotentiaries to speak for the whole county in the
    king’s court, both on fiscal and on political matters. Alongside the sheriff and his clerk,concerned with the batch of writs to be dealt with, of legal business to be got through, ofcriminal inquiries to be made, of debts to be collected, if possible before the court broke up, andof royal proclamations to be published, we can see the body of knights, jealous for the custom ofthe county and their own rights as suitors, not above bribing the sheriff to favour their individualcauses, but ready in a moment to sink their differences in defense of the vested interests of theirbody, and to draft common petitions or representations to the king if any magnate or official hadattacked those interests. Thus we find the gentlemen of Devon drawing up the list of chargesstill preserved at Oxford against their sheriff, Roga of Pridias, in 1272, accusing him ofoppression of both rich and poor and of invasion of the liberties of the shire, winding up with thecomplaint that he is not a native of the county and a demand for his dismissal. The shire courts,in becoming an agent of the central government, had not ceased to be the articulate embodimentof local esprit de corps. As for the hundreds, royal proclamations became the recognized law, and it was the sheriff’sbusiness to summon twice a year each hundred to the great court, or tourn, where a much largerattendance was exacted; and it was an event of some importance to the central government, for itproduced a good deal of revenue. But the outstanding significance of the tourn is that it linkedup the hundred to the royal system of police and criminal law, just as the local inquests in landcases linked it to the new royal justice in civil matters.” The Hundred and Hundred Rolls,excerpts from pages 1-19.

  21. As Churchill said – ‘the Poles are a noble people , but there is not a single historical error they failed to make’. If your plan is building underground groups it means you have failed at war and diplomacy.
    For the last year some of us have said there is a war between Globalism and Nationalism. Pick a side. The individualists are merely observers from here on. Stopping the New World disorder is job one, everything else must wait especially if all you have to offer is nothing.
    BTW what did those Polish heroes fight for? To be Gladio fodder? To be sold at Yalta? To be Russia bait? To see their youth exported? Sad.
    It’s 50 states or bust.

    • You will never get 50 states to agree to anything remotely pro-freedom.




      Are you kidding me?

      And what’s your platform?

      • They didn’t agree and they are still ruled by Trump. Every-one loves freedumb , just different kinds. Some want to smoke dope, be fags or buy guns. Real freedom is a different animal. To start a business or have national sovereignty requires ‘freedom’ to operate. Thats why there are states , so you have competition in cultural, economic and every other sphere. I don’t have a ‘platform’.
        I play the cards I’m dealt. We are not going from Proto-World Govt back to red-neck yeoman-ship (much as that appeals to me personally). That path has to be hacked back through centuries of mind-rot , banksterism and dependency. The only entity strong enough ( but notice I don’t say good) to stand against the satanic beast is the powerful nation state. See Russia 2000 to present. Anything smaller will be rolled up. This is merely my view not my preference.

  22. No argument on your last point , but giving up territory to be future Ho-Chi-Minh trails is a no-go . Just the pedo thing alone requires the brute force attention of central power,and they are actually arresting these fucks. — .State power is not to be extolled but at least acknowledged as temporarily useful when crushing the uber – enemies of all humanity.

    • Can freedom-oriented people hold their front lawn?

      Remains to be seen…

      • No-one can hold their front lawn without help and cooperation. Right back to the individual versus the collective stuff again.

        • “No-one can hold their front lawn without help and cooperation.”

          Okay. Therefore…what, exactly? Looks like a great reason for cooperation to me, but everyone’s talking about how leadership is about submission. Ha, I wonder on which side of that they intend to be!

          • i’m thinking bs21 should focus on holding a damn job other than his current drive-up window gig before he tries to tackle holding 50 states together.
            just saying.

  23. “The key idea I would like everyone to burn into their brains is the need for some kind of systematic approach to what we face.”

    That’s backwards. The goals come first, then individuals with common goals get together and then the systems are designed to accommodate those people trying to accomplish those goals.

    “Pragmatism is the biggest enemy, by far.”

  24. Some of you guys will be pleased to learn that the Swedes are re-instituting military conscription. Beginning next year, I think.

    It’s well-known that Pressed Men make the best soldiers … right? … being compelled to submit to “military authority” and all that.

    Good news is that those Swedish girlies will have to take their part, too. Oh, and it’s because they fear the Russians, not the Mohammedans.