But other than that and a general air of good grooming, this fellow would not be considered at all unusual in my area.
So why all the violent hate?
Bob Owens says it true:
We’ve noted this before, and will no doubt note it again: those who belong to the gun control cult aren’t remotely against violence. They’re very much in favor of violence. What they are very much against is armed resistance.
Maybe we need to take a note from Tam and bring back “Eloi.” Rolls off the tongue ever so much more smoothly than Sheeple.
I never did get the “sheeple” thing. Sheep are totally innocent. Their foolishness and helplessness were bred into them by people over many centuries. Compare them to wild sheep… and you can see it so clearly.
Those who lack intelligence cannot learn a great deal, no matter how hard they try. Stupidity is the refusal to learn, even given sufficient intelligence. There’s a lot of gray there, but stupidity is entirely optional.
“Rolls off the tongue ever so much more smoothly than Sheeple.” Better yet, suppose we shun these mass-market political code words altogether? After all, they have been manufactured so that the masses can be led to parrot mass-consumption talking points (IE: someone else’s ideas, IE: politically “correct” ideas) using few syllables and even less critical thinking.
Why can’t we demonstrate our independent thinking by not allowing others (regardless of their political persuasion) to put words in our mouths? Isn’t our mother tongue sufficient to express our minds?
Gosh I wish I could write like Ben. Thanks and applause. You said it better than I ever could.
My pith helmet is my favorite hat when the temperature and humidity have reached the “this weather is gawdawful’ stage. Don’t diss the pith, bro. 🙂 And don’t try saying that previous sentence after a couple of beers.
Ben, I struggle with that problem as well; there is a real risk of “become what I behold” when I go too far down the path of dehumanizing real people with labels and symbols, and I try earnestly not to do it for just that reason. I used to do so, dutifully, but then, as the saying goes, I ran out of excuses–and now I (try) to resist it with the full disgust of the self-scolded.
(Let me also say that both Joel and Claire have contributed materially, at important points in my life, to my understanding of just how dangerous and limited labels and symbols can be. Hell, that’s one of the reasons I keep coming to places like TUAK and BHM.)
There’s even a delicious irony in the label/symbol problem. In my experience at least (ultimately I can only speak for myself), most people don’t even use labels for the reason they say they do–a convenient and common point of understanding–rather, they use labels and symbols to absolve themselves of having to actually understand the things they say. Recently, as I try to say less and less about politics in general (snickering, among the crowd), I’ve started to experiment with this theory, by insisting that my participation in any conversation is conditional on NOT using the standard set of labels. And daang, what an eye opener that’s been so far. Not that I’m perfect, of course, but mostly, people simply can’t do it at all, and either just exclude me (which is a perfectly acceptable outcome, since at that point it seems clear enough that an actual “conversation” is not what’s on the table) or make full and proper fools of themselves by trying to explain something for which they have no actual knowledge, only a label.
But ultimately, much as I struggle with it, I don’t think it’s possible or even “better” to get away from symbols entirely; used judiciously (that is, with a full understanding of what’s behind the label or symbol you’re using) they can be very powerful and compact expressions of ideas. In the case at hand, I like “Eloi” more than “sheeple” not so much for its lengual satisfaction (although there is indeed that) but because there is a rich and highly-specific extended image that goes with it–and like ML implies, it fits the Forcible Victim Disarmament Now! thinking better.
If I’m brutally honest about it, I also have to acknowledge that there is even a place for dehumanization. Consider Jeff Cooper’s color code. When you make the mental shift from Yellow to Orange, and even moreso from Orange to Red, you are absolutely dehumanizing one or more other people, by thinking of them as targets that you may actually have to destroy to stop, quite possibly right now. And I don’t think you can actually achieve the correct state of mind without doing this.
Which, sadly, brings back the case at hand. The vitriol actually promoting this SWATting shit would seem to produce an interesting Color Code problem. You can’t properly go into Orange on a SWATter, since (s)he’s not going to be the physical threat, but rather is serving the military role of the forward scout and target painter. On the other hand, (s)he absolutely is initiating the attack and is ultimately the reason you would need to shift out of Yellow. Now…hopefully if I’m properly in Yellow I will see this all coming in advance and make an escape beforehand (whether or not I am actually the target), but it still does constitute an interesting conundrum.
I do take some pains to keep my fighting capacity concealed, but none of us is perfect, and I’ve no doubt I’ve probably been “made” at least a time or two over the last 20 years, nor do I doubt that it will likely happen again at some point despite my best efforts. Understanding that, I have a mental list of specific “watch candidates” to keep an extra eye on while going about in Yellow. Historically, that list has been gloriously short: any cop, and anyone I don’t know who I can see is packing as well. (People acting erratically need not be on a special list; if I’m properly in Yellow, they always self-identify.)
It would seem that hardcore victim disarmers are now vying for their own spot on the list.
Mr. Owen’s comment of anti-gunners is spot on. Criminals and / or police killing others – no comment. No anti-gun slogans or calls to disarm them. Citizen self defense shooting – they lose their minds. The anti-gun are for removing your means to defend yourself. They need to be called for it.
Sadly, the term “Eloi” is evasive to non readers. In that it is apropos.