A few months back a "liberty" movement kind of person friended me on Facebook and it wasn't long before they added me to their group, some sort of "Oathkeepers" thing, either associated or leeching off the national group of the same name. Generally I'm not a Facebook person, too many idiots with way too much time on their hands and an inflated opinion of themselves and their own views but what the hell, I didn't remove myself from the unwanted group and watched and listened.
Lots of people talking smack mostly, gonna do this when the feds come for their guns, gonna do that when society collapse, typical whacked out antisocial paranoid types mostly, with a handful of promising members that might just be convinced into doing something productive with their time and efforts. Mainly though the group appeared to be focused on … well there isn't a better way to put it and as crude as it is… they were focused on a circle jerk. You know, each one validating and pumping up the others till it was their turn to reap the "praise" for their precious words. Sickening to watch actually as I would imagine the real thing might be, no offense to the good Senators out there.
Still it was interesting watching the dynamics and after a few weeks I started replying to some of the dozens of email notifications as they ranted and raved about everything under the sun. Really weird bunch, liberal Muslim lovers mixed in with more of the hard right, one apparent deserter or some sort of military reprobate that nearly got his butt executed for something in the Vietnam War era, greenies, plenty of anti corporation whack jobs, several women just full of piss and vinegar yammering about taking on the feds. Out of seven or eight hundred "members" only a handful contributed and usually to argue fine points like how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.
A delicate balance to be sure but it was sickening to read after a while mainly because the posts were so far fetched, incoherent, or contradictory and I begin wondering if anyone had ever cared enough to actually read what they wrote and had anyone ever challenged them to defend their views. So I started challenging some of the worst offenders to see if they were truly that ignorant and unseeing and if some of the better ones could be enticed into actual action.
Wasn't long before the owner of the site and I crossed swords over some outright lies being told on SQ 777. She would post that 777 removed all existing legislation and controls over farming and pollution, pretty much everything including goat rape becoming legal (again, no offense to the good Senators). She seemed like a reasonable person and surely must have put me in the group for something so I gently corrected her using the actual language of the state question and boy, did she get angry.
Wasn't long before a long manifesto was posted, then as quickly removed, leaving of course the email notifications along with the manifesto covering new rules for the forum. I shared some of the more interesting parts below mainly to give a window into how these minds work and the dichotomy involved in their thinking:
"Moderators of this forum have decided to take on the challenge of moderating this group better in the future; as our previous plans were to remain hands off unless it was blatant. We now want to make sure that the right messages are forming this liberty minded group, and that the focus doesn't get co-opted by people who like to agitate for the sake of agitation. • Intro: The purpose of this group is promoting Liberty and Justice for ALL! "
Ah, you know when they type in capital letters that things are going downhill fast. And the "right messages"? Funny how those who claim tolerance, inclusion, and liberty are always the first to open the Gulags and concentration camps. And co-opted… right out of the Party Manual on counter revolutionaries and reactionaries I guess."The phrase "for all" is inclusive, not discriminatory. "For all" means we aim to provide and protect liberty and justice for all individuals regardless of gender, race, economic status, political ideology or background. To merely preserve liberty and justice for the privileged few is indicative of a shallow ideology and an uninformed patriotism. It is also dangerous and will in the end prevent all of us from being truly free."
Isn't that right out of the liberal playbook? Attempting to form a coalition and proclaiming the "wrong" thoughts as dangerous and enslaving? Somehow they fail to understand that including a Muslim enabler or even Muslims themselves into a liberty group would require the Muslims to disavow the radical Muslim beliefs including pedophilia, murder of gays, lesbians, Jews, and other non believers, and terrorism. At the very least you couldn't have a discussion of Muslim atrocities without starting a fight. The Muslims of course are all over this as it creates cover for their agenda, until they are strong enough to burst out upon society and proclaim their true nature.
"America has seen different political groups or tribes of the same race attack each other often. America has been described as divided and torn. The entertainment news media has made billions of dollars promoting these conflicts and holding forth the idea that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow less valuable a person than you."
Race, never saw a black and white problem in the group but many consider Muslims as being of a different race when in fact it is ideology and to a small part religion that sets them apart. But that last sentence is telling; the owner of the group obviously got upset when someone disagreed with her and that made her feel less valuable as a person.
"As you know a priority mission of an oath keepers and CSPOA is educating and understanding the oath so you can in turn help educate and hold our oath keepers / oath breakers accountable to their oaths to its citizens."
Okay… if the "oath keepers" are keeping their oaths, why is it necessary to hold them accountable? That reeks of the desire to control what others think and believe. Concentration camp and reeducation coming up folks!
Part 1: Rules of Engagement
The rules on this group are fairly simple common sense:
……"5: Discussion of admin moderators in a negative light or blocking Admin's is prohibited."
"6: If an admin / moderators has to get involved and asks you to calm any aggressive behavior or to stop antagonizing members with personal attacks and you continue this will lead to removal."
Oh dear, some animals are indeed more equal than others it seems. Beyond questioning and beyond reproach and questions are considered antagonistic and personal attacks. Remember this is a "liberty" group…
"Is moderation in forums violating American's right to free speech?
The first amendment only protects you from government interference. You have a reasonable, non-absolute right not to have your speech suppressed by the government. That right in no way extends to your fellow citizens. "
Yow…Can you believe that a "liberty" person put that in writing?
"1: The purpose of this association is engaging the national discourse and debate with respect to the infamous cases and controversies arising from the institutionalized corruption of government, the crimes and improprieties of Civil Officers of the United States and several States, and the partisan politics enforcing state and federal policies and laws violative (sic) of the Supreme Law of Liberty, Equality, Justice, Equal Protection, and Due Process of Law ordained and ratified in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. All persons participating and engaging these forums and its membership agree to self-censor their free speech to the narrow purposes of engaging in discussion, debate, education, and outreach to our fellow citizens about infamous cases, controversies, and institutionalized corruptions of government violative (sic) of our Supreme Law of Liberty, Equality, Justice, Equal Protection, and Due Process of Law."
As in question what others think but do not question what we think or do.
"2: This association shall be non-partisan. No member shall engage, attempt to engage, or attempt to co-opt the platform, audience, and membership of this association to engage in the promotion of partisan rhetoric, partisan ideology, or the promotion of any political candidate. Such prohibitions shall not prevent any member of this association from publicly stating or debating constitutional issues or controversies of why they believe any political candidate or officer or any partisan rhetoric or ideology is affirmative or violative (sic) of the constitutional principles of Libery, Equality, Justice, Equal Protection, and Due Process of Law ordained and ratified in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, provided that such is not merely used as a guise or pretext to engage, attempt to engage, or co-opt the platform, audience, and membership of this association to engage in the promotion of partisan rhetoric, partisan ideology, or the promotion of any political candidate. "
Typical liberal babble… they get to decide what you meant by what you wrote and you are not allowed to stray from the "purpose" or "platform" or question the views of others. All views are equally valid is the phrase used I believe.
"3: Every person participating and posting on these forums are to conduct themselves with the respect, courtesy, and dignity customarily expected of persons presenting themselves before their churches, communities, government bodies, and courts of law. Cursing should be constrained and restrained to expressing contempt of violations of our Liberty, Equality, Justice, Equal Protection, and Due Process of Law as ordained and ratified in our Constitution and Bill of Rights."
Good lord, Church and a court of law? Cursing allowed only to express contempt of the enemy?
Within hours of posting the Muslim lovers were back with a vengeance, cursing, name calling, posting long rants to release their pent up rage at previous "attacks" questioning how a Muslim could ever believe and support liberty or rule of American law when their culture follows Mohammad as the perfect man to be emulated in all things. When others called out for the rules to be enforced… crickets chirping… it seemed that indeed some animals were more equal than others and only conservatives were being censored.
Sadly this is how many of the so called liberty groups operate. Many are openly anti Semitic and highly protective of Palestinian or Muslim members. This sort of thinking is why the Sooner Tea Party was never supportive of the militia movement; there was zero control over what sort of nut bag running the show and they seemed to stamp out any questioning of their agenda. That would be a nightmare, to see society to collapse to the point where a citizen militia was needed and finding your country turned into a dictatorship.
Strangely enough these sort of groups survive mainly by proclaiming liberty and free speech yet are almost always ruled by mob behavior or a strong dictator. People like to hear themselves talk, they like to see their words published even if it is on a nut job Facebook site that is closed to public view. Perhaps they understand down deep in the darkness in their souls that only in a closed system where their views are echoed by others and defended from criticism could their speech be allowed?
The point is that society works only when the freedom to question and hold accountable is present. Otherwise dictators grow up and they happen only because others crave the safety and comfort of rules. Just because they are small and irrational doesn't make them harmless, indeed history is replete with dictatorships and theocracies being the rule instead of the exception. What it boils down to is that few people that reach for power are capable of wielding it with humanity and decency. The majority of the so called leaders of the liberty movement are in it for personal gain, notoriety, or simply to hold the reins of power even if over a handful of like minded zealots.