to tyrannical governance, multiple choice question.

If you find yourself at odds with tyrannical overreach, say COVID protocols for example, you should-

1) reason with the offending party, try to persuade them to your way of thinking.

2) talk to their supervisor, if in that type of setting, explaining that as a sovereign citizen your opinion has exactly the same value as the tyrants, and must therefore be given the same consideration with individual liberty being the over-riding criteria in determining a course of action.

3) organize a peaceful protest to win the hearts and minds of the tyrants to your way of thinking

4) quit your job, begin fundraising several million dollars and campaign for a seat in government

5) Canvas your neighborhood door to door handing out tracts regarding Constitutional freedoms, rights, and responsibilities as it relates to tyrannical thought processes and loss of freedoms with government mandates

6) Start your own line of t-shirts with catchy, freedom-based phrases

7) If faced with loss of job or freedoms such as grocery shopping, start your own blog protesting the injustice of it all

8) write a book and go on a speaking tour

9) coordinate violent events directed at individuals or entities perceived to be the problem with other patriotic, like-minded individuals and execute plans to remedy the injustice being foisted on the population by any and all means necessary, at all cost up to and including life and liberty.


Of the 9 potential remedies listed above, which was successfully used (at great cost) to start the United States of America?

Hint: I'm pretty sure screen printing hadn't been invented yet, so t-shirts isn't it.

I'll say, all of them.

what wabigoon says....

Peaceful Protest

Napalm would probably work.

Peacful like Antifa, Maxine Waters, BLM, the Las Vegas shooter, the congressional ball game shooter.

You fuggin people better wake up !

Roy,

Drive your dually off a cliff

Actions speak louder than words.

10. SSS.

This is the only thing that will fix this.

Who gave us a right to a job at a company we don't own, or to shop for groceries at a store we don't own? It seems to me the employers and business owners are the ones with the greivance. Which are you?

When talking to a member of the opposition, keep in mind that he will think that when they have control, he, personally, will be in the ruling group. They never think that they will be in the oppressed group. 95% of them will be wrong.

We don't want to become like those who think they are entitled to a "job" or a check, or that we ought to be able to dictate to people who own property in the form of businesses how they ought to run their business because we're a "stakeholder." That's the Marxist, prole argument.

A lot of businesses and employers want these mandates. They wanted to implement them themselves but were afraid of their workforce quitting. With federal-backing, they can implement and fear less because they suppose the workers will capitulate their opposition as hopeless. If the employers were against the mandates, they would resist them. No doubt some will, but the ones not resisting are the ones that support them and want them. Jabbed workers take less sick time off. They're more obedient. The employers don't care about long-term effects. They care about quarterly results. Worst case long-term is just less pension fund liability. Again, if they don't like the mandate, they will resist. If they don't, it's because they're for it.

So who is the real tyrant? The federal government or the employers that asked for and got a mandate risk-free and now consider the matter settled. Jab or walk. Is that tyranny? When a business does that instead of resisting because they never wanted to resist but wanted to make the mandate? Can companies tyrannize if they don't have the faculty of physical force? I suppose they're tyrannical about a lot of their other policies too then. Maybe stop working for tyrants?

Who says it's business owners that have asked for all of this? Lets see the proof.

The proof is in their acquiescence. I'm not claiming they've all asked for it. If they're not resisting, then it's because it's what they wanted. A lot of the biggest businesses jumped on enforcing the mandates right away because they had wanted it all along. It's the governors and state's attorneys genral that are resisting because they rightly see it as a federal overreach and power grab. Businesses -- which ones are putting up any big resistance? A bunch of them have massive cash piles right now from extreme valuations thanks to insane Fed policies and fiscal stimulus by the trillions and trillions. If there was meaningful resistance, they'd be deploy some of that cash for a legal and political campaign effort. They wouldn't hesitate to do so for a variety of other regulatory challenges like gig worker classification, warehouse worker quota limits, social media censorship bans. Just this week, Lyft, American Airlines, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Uber, Match, and GoDaddy were all voicing their resistance to and activism against the abortion ban and constitutional-carry laws in Texas. Where is Corporate America's activism on these mandates? The logical conclusion is they don't oppose it.