Is the Age of Violence upon Us?

Posted on January 20, 2017 by Robert Ringer Comments (52)

Font:

Today is a day in U.S. political history like no other. The excitement in Washington is like nothing the city has ever before seen. Barack Obama’s inauguration was historic to most Americans, but I would estimate that at least a third of the population knew the truth about the mysterious, unknown young man who seemed to appear out of nowhere. Nevertheless, the anti-Obama people stayed low key through his inauguration and well beyond.

Not so in 2017. A lot of people are concerned about outright violence at today’s presidential inauguration and subsequent presidential balls, and with good reason. As I have repeatedly stated, the Radical Left is comprised of true believers when it comes to employing violence as a justifiable way of overriding the wishes of voters and usurping power.

When I use the term Radical Left, I’m referring not only to those who are committed to an ideology that has brought enormous poverty and suffering to every country where it has been tried, but also to those who support this destructive ideology out of sheer ignorance or stupidity. (The troglodytes in Hollywood are classic examples of the latter.)

As I wrote in my December 17 article titled “My Next Unequivocal Prediction,” Radical Leftists will never let go of their hate-mongering, childish name-calling and mudslinging, and nonstop lying. Nor will they ever change their warped beliefs that racism in America is institutionalized, that manmade global warming has been proven beyond a doubt, and that the use of violence is justified by those who believe that their objectives are morally superior to those of everyone else.

So now, after a year-and-a-half of dirty tricks, criminal behavior, smear tactics, and rioting in an attempt to stop the people’s choice, Donald Trump, from becoming the 45th president of the United States, the standard bearers of malevolence and ignorance are primed and ready to try to tear America apart.

I don’t know what’s going to happen today, nor do I know how much violence there will be over the next four to eight years, but there will be violence, of that you can be certain. That being the case, the important question becomes, what will be the result of the violence?

Because of the heightened security, those who are intent on creating havoc at the inauguration or the events that follow it throughout the afternoon and evening will have a difficult time achieving their ultimate goal — inflicting death on those who dare to take part in Donald Trump’s inauguration. But that doesn’t mean they won’t try.

The issue of violence, however, goes far beyond Inauguration Day. Regardless of what happens today, my concern is how the entire Trump family can be fully protected 24/7 over the next four-to-eight years. Let’s hope the Secret Service finds a way to succeed at this seemingly impossible task.

If, however, those who embrace violence succeed in harming Trump, his wife, his children, or, God forbid, any of his grandchildren, what will that do to America? Because there are millions of people out there with sick minds who would like to see the Trump clan harmed, I’ve given this unpleasant possibility a lot of thought.

What would the result be? There are so many variables that’s it’s hard to know for certain, but here are a few possibilities that come to mind:

  • It could trigger a sympathetic backlash that could result in a dramatic improvement in Trump’s favorability ratings, perhaps to as high as 60 percent. If Trump delivers quantifiable results in addition to this, it could hasten the total disintegration of the Democratic Party, which I believe will happen anyway after the Republicans swamp the Dirty Dems in the 2018 mid-terms.
  • Funded by George Soros and other wealthy, far-left evildoers who are masters at profiting from social unrest and national upheaval, it could result in an all-out civil war. Our normalcy biases make it hard to picture such a scenario, but if the far left maims and kills enough people, it’s entirely possible that the intellectually inferior flyover folks who cling to their guns and bibles might just decide to fight back.

    It goes without saying that either way, the violence would be blamed on Trump. When the Radical Left goons inflict pain and death, the Lying Left will yell and scream, just as they did at Trump’s rallies, that it is his divisive rhetoric that caused them to be violent. You know the thinking … the Devil made them do it. As the incomparable Chris Plante would say, “Ah, it’s good to be a Democratic, isn’t it?

  • Trump could back down, which is highly unlikely. However, there are many spineless men and women in the Republican Party — Little Marco, Mush McCain, Gomer Graham, and Paul Ryan, to name but a few — who can be counted on to try to appease the Radical Left and engage in political babble like “We have to all come together as Americans” and “We need a national dialog.”

    This could create a knockdown, drag-out fight between Trump loyalists and old-guard Republicans who are intent on preserving the good life to which both Democrats and Republicans have become so accustomed. Which means business as usual and another win for the Dirty Dems.

  • The Radical Leftists in the Democratic Party could suddenly realize that they are committing political suicide and do an about-face. In other words, they would put aside the phony theatrics and lies and act like adults who really want to work with Republicans for the good of the country. Unfortunately, with the exception of a handful of sane but out of place Democrats (Senator Joe Manchin comes to mind), the chances of that happening are virtually zero.

So, my fellow Americans, we shall see what the lawless Radical Left has in store for us today and from this day forward, and whether or not we can survive it. Just know that violence is a virtual certainty. When and how much are the two big questions. Let’s hope that we’re all pleasantly surprised and that the quantity of violence is much less than some might now be expecting.

P.S. I still believe that splitting America into at least two countries is the best possible solution for everyone. The Radical Left could attack each other with reckless abandon in their own country, while those who believe in liberty could spend their time working to make life better for everyone within their borders.

Just think, the United States of Good Guys and the United States of Bad Guys. Has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

 

Robert Ringer

+Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time.

52 responses to “Is the Age of Violence upon Us?”

  1. Doug says:

    "… intellectually inferior flyover folks who cling to their guns and bibles… " Seriously Robert? I can't tell if you are mimicking the radical left and their thinking, or if you personally see these folks that way. I hope it's the former. If it's the latter, you have lost credibility and respect in my eyes. I grew up in the New York City area but now live in what would probably be considered a flyover State. And I love my guns and Bible. But I am hardly an intellectual dunce, and valuing our 2nd-amendment freedom and the Word of God certainly does not make us inferior. As I said, I hope you are simply mimicking the thought process of the dysfunctional radical
    left.

  2. Noah300g says:

    hopefully any violent protesters will be dealt with swiftly and forcefully. These snowflakes don't know how to fight.

    • Jim Hallett says:

      That's the problem. The violent Libtard pukes broke windows, defaced property, etc. and they should be held in a dungeon until someone makes restitution to the property owners. These morons always get away with the damage, and are never held accountable. The lamestream presstitute morons give it lots of coverage to give their "protests" (really just an excuse for reckless, immoral behavior) more weight. The good news is the Marxist narcissist is gone from the White House, no matter how much whining the media or Dumbocrats do.

  3. DICK BARRY says:

    Once again…Robert, you created an excellent article!

  4. Magnum says:

    Yes, I agree that splitting the country into 2 or more states will be the best approach. Let each state hold a referendum to decide which side she wants to join or to be another totally independent state not joining any side. This allows the true spirit of democracy to prevail which also helps to slain the dragon (and the deep state) which has become too big to be tamed as well as reasoned !

    • Phil says:

      Agreed Magnum in spirit, but a state by state referendum would not work so well – I think they need to be geographically contiguous. Hard to say how that happens.

    • Rocketman says:

      No matter which side your on there are always going to be people in your state who disagree with you but are in the minority. Let the liberals have the NE states, California and Oregon. The libertarians can take Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. The African Americans can have the SE and Alaska and Hawaii can go their own way. Announce the break up and then let who ever is unhappy five years to find a place during the next 5 years in the part of the country that suits them. The alternative of doing nothing is going to be a civil war that wrecks this country and kills millions of it's citizens.

      • Jim Hallett says:

        As an anarcho libertarian, I am not to keen on giving Oregon, WA or New England to the libtards. They are very desirable places to live, despite their political nonsense. This is why a 2 Americas approach will run into difficulty, as who gets to decide which desirable places each side gets. Despite having much in common with the values of the "Great Middle" states, they are not to desirable to live in and have nowhere near the natural beauty of the western states or New England. I can see CA breaking off, and then 50 million libtards can go there, and see where they get funding for their massive agenda, once a majority of the productive folks are living in the "other America."

        • Jean says:

          The states you mentioned are desirable places to live – IF you are a producer. The libfeks who choose to inhabit these places will turn them into 3rd world areas if they are given jurisdiction over them; consider WA becoming "Detroit of the Woods." Then your class of people can retake the areas at a discount and return them to their former beauteous state, without the libfeks. They will have either died off waiting for their government to drop food and shelter off to them or learned something about the way the world works.

    • Peggy says:

      Atlas Shrugged….the producers and the consumers

  5. TheLookOut says:

    We can only Hope & Pray that the Radical Left will be exposed
    for the Evildoers they really are. May the Light of Truth shine
    on the ignorant, and the ill informed.
    The real problem is, how to expose the Media, and Soros,
    they must be condemned with non-stop fervor. The Radical
    Elites are ruining the world for their own agenda.

    • Jose Jackson says:

      Reminds me of the oil pipeline protesters. When you ask if they drove a car to the protest site, and that is why need more oil, they have a freak out and get into a rage temper tantrum.

  6. texas wolfie says:

    Take heart guys, the Red states almost all appear to be growing in population, while most Blue states are stagnating, the future is bright for conservatives.

    • Jim Hallett says:

      I was happy to see the Criminal Republic of Illinois was the state to lose the most population in the past year. With evil clowns like Rahm Emmanuel turning their largest city into a shooting gallery, I see no sign of the decline stopping. However, growing states like FL, GA, NC etc. are gaining refugees from former libtard havens so likely will impact those states results so that they are not as conservative as in past years.

  7. Robert Winkler says:

    If us gun toting Bible clingers were the problem America would definitely know about it.
    Don't you think???

  8. Avery Horton says:

    Why two countries? I think a better solution, Robert, is found in your book RESTORING THE AMERICAN DREAM. Government needs to be reduced to 1) Protecting us from enemies from without 2) Policing within our borders and 3) settling civil disputes.

    The problem with the two country solution is where do you draw the borders? In Oregon, the cities of Portland, Salem and Eugene are loaded with dems. The rest of the state, rural areas, are where the sane people, like myself, reside. The dems outnumber us. if it got down to a civil war, we would pick them off like sitting ducks. We are locked and loaded. Must it come to that?

    As you well know, Robert, pure democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on the dinner menu. Democracy is "legalized mob rule".

    • Jim Hallett says:

      EXACTLY! I have been to all 50 states, lived in 10 of them, and southern Oregon (Ashland, Jacksonville, et al.) are wonderful, so I would not want to give that whole state away to the Libtards. Hildabeast got only 50.2% of the vote in Oregon, and most of that was, as you say, in greater Portland, and Eugene, which like most major college towns is always way Left.

      • Jose Jackson says:

        Yes the so called best and brightest not right at all. Time to stop all federal funding of colleges who feel the need to have safe spaces and no platform rules of speakers they don't like. That's a cult and religion, separation of church and state needed. No federal funds, even student loans shall be permitted to such places.

        • Jim Hallett says:

          At my alma mater, they were handing out coloring books and Play-Doh in the safe spaces for "traumatized" snowflakes the day after the election. Pitiful!!

          • Jose Jackson says:

            Yeah at lunch today saw someone wearing the local college sweatshirt and said I voted Trump and go get your sippee and retreat to your safe space and have a good cry. The folks at the check out register laughed!

    • Jim Forbes says:

      I've been a Washington state resident for 40 years, and the eastern half of the state has been talking about splitting off from the western half all that time to escape the Seattle progressives.

      • Jim Hallett says:

        Also lived in Seattle area for 5 years, and despite it being a wonderful place to live, the "progressive" libtards there were a continual aggravation – so arrogant, and yet so clueless about real freedom, capitalism, property rights, etc.

  9. Great article. Great minds think alike, because I steadfastly believe the country is too big and diverse to govern effectively. It should be split into three or four countries. And if there is a civil war., the people in flyover country will obliterate the left, because we have the guns and like myself, a military background which I will put to good use. The left hates guns and the military.

  10. larajf says:

    I think what we really need to do is split California into five or six states to remove the stranglehold. Plus, the majority of the physical land of California is red, and those people aren't being properly represented. I'm stuck in the insane area of Silicon Valley. It used to be great until the cancer arrived talking about self-esteem and fairness.
    Perhaps New York should be split as well and the lower sliver of Texas. Then those states can deal with the repercussions when we have good leadership again that believes in States Rights rather then a Statist mentality.

    • theczech says:

      I had the pleasure of communicating with Tim Draper on this very subject when he proposed a ballot initiative via referendum to split California into six states (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias). It didn't make the ballot due to lack of signatures on the petition. Nevertheless considering the political logjam in Sacramento and the likely continuance of the same, it is a good idea. I would love to see it tried as a model for the country as RJR suggests.

      • larajf says:

        I tried to find how to volunteer for it, and couldn't figure it out. I'm sure we could get the liberals on board by saying that they'd be free to create their own paradise. We just wouldn't tell them that they don't get the water rights.

  11. Rock Roach says:

    I will try to go back to one of your former articles to show how radical the left really is.You were making comments about CNN and Fox news,how good a job guys like Don Lemmon and Wolf Blitzer were doing,and Fox seemed to become stagnet.The whole thing was just a ploy to help Trump win the Republican nomination,because in the eyes of the liberal media (and they were right),the only candidate HRC could possibly beat was DT.
    Once the Republican nomination was sealed for DT,Cnn shed it's image and Grandma turned into the attacking wolf trying to push Clinton(whose own selection was rigged) into the White House.Thank God enough people had it figured out.

  12. Rocky Creed says:

    Very insightful article, but I am very curious how you would split the country as the radical left on both coasts. Could you please let us know how that would be done? I am in Oklahoma and I think the people here would be glad to go that route
    .

    • Phil says:

      As a Texan I could easily see Texas breaking off, and attracting more conservative individuals. But we are unique in that we are not "landlocked" by other U.S. states.

  13. Jana says:

    Last alternative, least likely. First, most likely given that most Americans are basically decent, honorable, patriotic people.

  14. Reality Seeker says:

    The level of violence shall be measured in direct proportion to the level ( or lack thereof) of success DT has in making the American Empire great.

    If DT can make the American people feel great again by spending tens of trillions on " rebuilding the military and infrastructure", then violence shall be reduced; however, if DT has over promised and he under delivers, then violence shall ramp up.

    It's now all about meeting or exceeding expectations. The one thing that can be counted on is that GOP insiders will be looking for every opportunity to stick a dagger in DT's back…

    Here's my prediction: DT won't be able to deliver enough of what he's promised. This shall cause an oh-my-fucking-god moment! The insiders and talking heads will claim DT has failed! Panic will set in. Some people will say, "Oh my god! Now what! If DT can't make America great, who can?" The public will panic. And the ensuing economic crash shall be named " The Trump Crash of 0-18" or "The Panic of 2019!" or "Trump's Depression"… I hope I'm TOTALLy wrong.

    Actually, I'm amazed we got through Obama's presidency without a depression.. It just goes to show you how resilient America is and how important economic cycles are… Everything now depends on whether or not the economic cycle holds governed by the invincible hand of Adam Smith. The banking system and economy might just nose dive under the strain of Trump borrowing trillions to fund his Empire.

    Long live Caesar! Long live Donald Trump! Long live the American Empire! Long live the Economy! Long live the Central bank!

    • Stephan F says:

      “I'm amazed we got through Obama's presidency without a depression.”

      Not to put words in your mouth, but I’ll bet you meant to say, “…without a crash.”

      The US economy has been bottled up and trapped in a grinding economic depression for the last eight years, aka D. Casey’s “The Greater Depression” (I would argue it’s been longer than that). The reason for our ongoing economic malaise, and why we haven't pulled ourselves out by now (and why we will probably remain there for sometime) is that the govt made economic recovery impossible with its massive intervention back in 2008/2009. If they simply left things alone, we would have experienced massive deflation (a good thing), something most people have never experienced in their lifetimes – and probably never will.

      The Fed gleefully stepped in with their printing presses and dramatically inflated the currency. The expected & obvious “price deflation” that should have occurred during that period didn’t… it wasn’t allowed to occur. The end result was that those who held savings were systematically looted. Those who saved for a rainy day, spent prudently, had little or no debt, were deprived of a just, deserved, and rightful higher standard of living that should have occurred as a result of a normal deflationary correction that occurs naturally after an inflationary bust.

      DT was in fine form today. I thought his speech was excellent, brief, to the point; and he chided Obomber with just the right amount of needling he so deserved.

      Oh, is it just me or is today’s pomp and fanfare just a little over the top in the modern era?

      • Reality Seeker says:

        You make a good point. And I understand those erudite individuals ( e.g., Casey) who claim we are actually in some sort of shadow depression or invisible depression. I hold a differing view.. You shall know without a doubt when we enter into an actual depression, because millions of people will be malnourished and/ or starving just like circa 1930s….

        Perhaps sometime in the future we can have an honest discussion about the factors that actually make up a depression. Venezuela is a good example of what economic depression actually looks and feels like. I was in Burma when that country was in a depression. Not a pretty picture. Starving people, oppressed people, dead people…. everywhere.

        Millions die in a depression from starvation and lack of basic services. America has an obesity problem, so we aren't in a true depression, yet.

        If DT can make the bread and circus great!!! Then the masses shall be appeased.

        But I hear and acknowledge your point about depression…

        The gold cycle is finally bottoming, so I'll repeat what I said last year at this time… The Gold Bugs have been wrong for years with their calls for a dollar collapse and a gold bull market. But, the tide has now turned, so buy gold, buy silver and have faith. Gold may or may not go lower in dollars, but long-term gold and silver are on the way up. Moreover, they are an excellent insurance policy against a Trump Depression. Let's all hope we never need our gold insurance policy, because that means the SHTF….

  15. Kevin says:

    Will not split the country in to two and let the communists win. The communists have taken over China, Vietnam and, at one time, Russia. But not America.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZtKZWSoOSM

  16. Rock Roach says:

    Looks like DT wants to stick to his guns according to his inaugural (and it was quite refreshing).And now God can be a part of our lives again instead of political correctness.

  17. NickLPlated says:

    "The issue of violence, however, goes far beyond Inauguration Day. Regardless of what happens today, my concern is how the entire Trump family can be fully protected 24/7 over the next four-to-eight years. Let’s hope the Secret Service finds a way to succeed at this seemingly impossible task."

    Has anyone considered the potential of the SS TRAINING the First Family in their OWN self-protection? This is not to eliminate the need for the SS to protect the family, but to AUGMENT their action by enlisting the Family's ability to protect ITSELF. So, instead of having half-a-dozen sitting ducks in amongst an armed phalanx, you have an ENTIRE armed force, of Family members AND their entourage.

    Reference the novel "Hope" by L. Neil Smith and (the late) Aaron Zellman.

  18. Charles N. Steele says:

    How about waging a (non-violent) offensive on the left? One thing that needs to happen is a draining of the swamp of higher education, and humanities programs in particular. State legislatures need to reduce funding for these programs — zero is about the right amount of funding — and especially for departments that teach Critical Theory, "social justice," and the rest of the left's cultural Marxism. Giving the left a hard time at the state level would reduce their focus on things at the national level, and they need to be kept off balance and on the defensive.

    It would be good if citizens would start clamoring for their state legislators to stop funding the insanity on college campuses.

  19. Jurgy says:

    What a wonderful nation it would be if all those who were in fear of Trump or who hate Trump simply shut the eff up and emigrate to other places.

  20. AlinaAustin says:

    No one can be as great as Barack Obama. Historic inauguration. http://usessayhelp.blogspot.com

  21. Scott McKinney says:

    Just saw this tweet from Stefan Molyneux:

    "@Lauren_Southern shoved.
    @Cernovich pepper sprayed.
    @Gavin_McInnes fist-fight.
    Gunshot wound outside Milo event.

    Stay safe everybody."

    I tweeted back: "Robert Ringer foresaw this…"

  22. Restless Harry says:

    Hi Robert,

    You say: "but I would estimate that at least a third of the population knew the truth about the mysterious, unknown young man who seemed to appear out of nowhere"

    I live in England so am not well up on all the news but I'd like to hear an explanation about
    "the mysterious, unknown young man" and how did he appear from nowhere?

    He must have come from somewhere, what's the thinking on this?

  23. This article is so difficult to read! There are so many invectives against the so-called Radical Left (goons, Lying Left, hate mongering). I'm surprised that it is so biased in the negative, when in fact, many of those very insults are directly attributable to Trump and his current cabinet (lying, e.g.). While I would never condone violence in any form or for any reason, to ascribe such wholesale attribute to the Radical Left is practically insane! Invoking George Soros as a participant in pushing for this ideology of radicalism is preposterous on its face! It suggests that Democrats WANT violence? Are you mad?? or that this ideology – democracy – has been the cause of so much poverty and war in any society that has tried it? Robert writes in this article, "an ideology that has brought enormous poverty and suffering to every country where it has been tried, but also to those who support this destructive ideology out of sheer ignorance or stupidity. (The troglodytes in Hollywood are classic examples of the latter.)" Destructive ideology? Why is it destructive? How can you claim it to be destructive? And why do you claim that the Hollywood troglodytes are "classic examples of the latter" (stupid)?

    Call me naive, if you will; but I'm curious. The claims that Democrats are lying, while it is plain as day that Trump and his entire cabinet have been lying? That Trump and his minions are pushing an agenda that is downright scary to some of us, that makes us "Radical Left"? There is nothing "radical" about wishing to be respected, rather than lied to, wishing to understand his agenda, rather than being kept in the dark ("I want to be unpredictable"). Robert, you are glibly leveling name calling at the so-called Radical Left, while accusing the Radical Left of name calling. I'm flummoxed.

Leave a Reply