Is the Insurrection Near at Hand?

Posted on March 29, 2016 by Robert Ringer


A couple of weeks ago, in response to yet another question intended to sucker Donald Trump into an answer that the media could turn into more “proof” that he’s a fascist, racist, bigot, homophobe, Islamophobe, sexist … (yawn) … DT once again uttered the obvious, which is a surefire way to bring out the low-information boo birds.

The question was about what he thought would happen if the GOP establishment tried to bring about a brokered convention in Cleveland this summer, to which he responded, “I think you’d have riots.”

“What’s the big deal,” you ask? The big deal is that when Trump says just about anything, the media and their radical-left partners in crime immediately jump on his answer, purposely misinterpret it, rephrase it to fit into their agenda, and worse.

First of all, Trump never said he was calling for riots. Second, he never said, or even implied, that he condoned riots. Third, he never said he was talking about violent riots.

The truth be known, when DT said “I think you’d have riots,” I believe he was, in fact, really trying to tiptoe in an effort to appease his wife and daughter, both of whom have urged him to act “more presidential.” (Like Nixon? Carter? Clinton? Obama?) Believe me, I, and probably millions of other folks like me, are much more explicit about what we believe will happen if Trump is denied the nomination even if he has a clear majority of delegates.

While I am a lifelong advocate of nonviolence and would love to see Cleveland find a way to escape violence during the Republican Convention in July, the overwhelming odds are that there will be rioting — major rioting — and that it will, indeed, be violent. In fact, it would not surprise me if not only were there many serious injuries resulting from any such riots, there could very well be a few deaths. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen, but given that the tactic of choice for the radical left has long been violence, it’s going to be very difficult to prevent.

Unfortunately, any violence will be blamed on Donald Trump, because the radical left does not condone free speech unless such speech is in alignment with its beliefs. That includes tens of millions of Americans who agree with Trump’s views. The truth, of course, is that the people who will be solely responsible for any violence will be those who actually engage in violent behavior.

Whether it’s, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, or any of the other iterations of communist revolutionaries, they all believe in the fundamentals of the radical left, the most important of which are:

  1. Lying (e.g., “Hands up, don’t shoot,” just about everything about Benghazi, and “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it.”).
  2. Violence (e.g., Baltimore, Ferguson, and the frequent assassinations of police officers).
  3. Cheating (e.g., massive election fraud, Supreme Court legislation, and illegal executive orders).
  4. Projection, which is the art of accusing your perceived enemies of being guilty of the very things you yourself are guilty of (e.g., lying, violence, and cheating). Saul Alinsky perfected this clever strategy, taught it to millions of misguided young adults, mostly through his book Rules for Radicals, and proved beyond doubt that it could be made to work.

So it’s not surprising that, with few exceptions, the vast majority of violent protests are organized and carried out by radical-left groups. Though the left loves to employ projection to promote concern over “rightwing extremist groups,” the reality is that violence committed by so-called right-wing extremists is almost non-existent. (A Timothy McVeigh event occurs perhaps once every twenty-five years or so, and even McVeigh was just a mentally disturbed lone wolf.)

The idea of using violence to achieve one’s ends goes all the way back to Marx and Engels, and their belief was brought to life in 1917 by Vladimir Lenin and his sidekick, Leon Trotsky, when they ignited the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.

It’s not a coincidence that every communist revolution in history has been a dismal failure and has destroyed the lives (often through murder) of hundreds of millions of people — from Cuba to the old Soviet Union, from the Eastern European bloc countries to North Korea, from Vietnam to Mao’s China.

In modern times, Barack Obama has carried the mantle of the radical left (a.k.a. “liberal fascism”) by mesmerizing millions of “useful idiots.” Though he was purportedly a strong advocate of violent overthrow of the government during his college days at Occidental College, along the way he decided to adopt the stealth approach to revolution. He even wrote in his own book that when he worked for a newsletter publishing company, he felt like “a spy behind enemy lines.”

To his credit, Obama has been a master at putting the fundamentals of the radical left into practice. Using the Alinsky playbook as his guide, he lies, stirs up violence, cheats, and projects own actions onto his enemies with impunity. And while it’s easy to write off his 2012 reelection to Mitt Romney’s cowardice, lack of principle, and incompetence, the fact is that there are millions of people who actually like what Obama has done to America.

So the question is, if communism does not make people better off (other than the elite who have a monopoly on the use of force), why do millions of folks continue to support radical-left leaders? The short answer is ENVY — pure, unadulterated envy.

It may be hard for the average individual to grasp, but the communist true believer has a childish, simplistic view of the world: There are people who are privileged at the same time that others are poor and suffering, and that’s just not fair. In fact, to the radical leftist, it’s downright evil. That’s right, wealth and success are evil, and the only solution to these perceived evils is that those whom they arbitrarily perceive to be privileged (which, in real-life terms, consists primarily of the middle class) must be punished.

The envy and hatred of the radical left knows no bounds. Its goal is not so much to redistribute wealth as to destroy it. In other words, the focus of liberal fascists is to punish those who, in their view, have “more than they need.”

That’s why so-called conservatives who constantly preach about the importance of compromising with the radical left are naïve, ignorant, and/or unprincipled. In the real world, there is no compromising with members of the radical left, because their goal is to destroy freedom, including and especially free speech and free markets.

The only real solution to the problem is the total destruction of far-left ideology. I’ve said for decades that any group that advocates violating human rights and calls for the enslavement of law-abiding citizens — such as the Communist Party USA — should be outlawed.

No, I do not believe that this view in any way conflicts with my fundamental civil libertarian beliefs. Libertarians believe in freedom for all; communism believes in no freedom for anyone. It’s all about the impossible-to-define “social justice” and the impossible-to-define “common good.”

That said, this coming July, look for the rioting in Cleveland to make the 1968 Chicago riots outside the Democratic National Convention look like a social gathering of nuns by comparison. Worse, the expected rioting and violence in Cleveland will continue unabated in the United States and European countries far beyond the Republican Convention.

People like to joke about Uncle Bernie, but we should never forget that Sanders brought out of the woodwork millions of people who actually want a communist revolution. And, at the same time, Donald Trump has inspired millions of people to join a liberty revolution. Even Mary Poppins would have a difficult time believing there can be a compromise between these two diametrically opposed ideologies.

Short of a violent revolution, the only other way to end the conflict between those who advocate tyranny and those who advocate liberty is a two-state solution. And that would be messy, if not impossible, because it would involve, by necessity, millions of people being uprooted and moved to another state.

So, while I don’t know exactly how it’s all going to play out over the next four or five decades, I can say with a fair degree of certainty that the long-anticipated insurrection is rapidly approaching. Either the radical-left insurrectionists will win and finish the job of fundamentally transforming the United States of America, or liberty-minded counterrevolutionaries will push aside the establishment enablers, crush the radical-left insurrectionists, and restore order to America.

Either way, it won’t be pretty, but you and I may not be around to witness the worst of it. In the meantime, if you love your children, teach them what is happening, what is about to happen, and what has caused us to get to this point. Lacking such understanding, they will be vulnerable to the doublespeak rhetoric of the radical left, because liberty is always dependent upon a moral and knowledgeable populace.

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.

54 responses to “Is the Insurrection Near at Hand?”

  1. Lee says:

    AMEN sir! A clear and accurate appraisal of the coming years.

  2. esmartell says:

    Your idea of envy as a root cause is correct. An old Russian joke about Ivan and Igor has it that Ivan prayed repeatedly to God about Igor's goat. God finally came to Ivan and said, "Igor has a goat. Do you want me to give you one also?" Ivan replied, "No. I want you to kill Igor's."

  3. Stuart says:

    The only problem with your article is the Libertarianism: hyper-individualism as opposed to Nationalism. It tends to be too materialistic and believes change comes through the winning of majorities. America was created by a small minority who fought and supported by about 1/3 of the population. When a country approaches a crisis situation violence starts to make it's appearance. As for riots, well it's time for local defense organizations.

    • Jim Hallett says:

      Actually, Libertarianism has NOTHING to do with majorities at all, as it is based on people making voluntary free market decisions, and not coercing ANYONE else. Democracy is the "God that failed" to quote Hoppe, and is by definition, immoral, as it says the majority always has the right to tell the minority what to do, as well as to steal from them to finance what they want. What the Founders fought for is not even remotely present in Amerika of 2016, and they would have gladly stayed under King George vs. the mess we have now!

  4. Scott theczech says:

    American presidential politics is complicated. Each state has its own primary elections rules and the GOP has rules and tradition for the convention as well. All of the candidates, including Trump, decided to play by the rules i.e., to follow each state's process for getting on the ballot. While the GOP et al "establishment" is chagrined to see Trump leading, they, like Trump, must follow the rules. It takes 1237 delegates to get the nomination prior to the convention, otherwise there will be one or more delegate ballots at the convention in order to arrive at a decision. In recent history, only Ross Perot was able to garner more than 10% of the primary voting by getting on the ballot of all 50 states and voting territories as a third party candidate.

  5. Kevan Rowlee says:

    Sharing on my Facebook wall.

  6. TheLookOut says:

    Great article Robert, as usual you nailed it. Thanks

  7. William Nessun Dorma says:

    Good article, Robert. I would take envy to a deeper level — to entitlement — as the driving force behind leveling and destruction. Sadly the idea that society owes me something, as opposed to I have a responsibility to produce value for myself and others, begins early in life. It occurs at all economic levels, but it becomes most destructive among those from high income households who are given much more than they ever produce. Self-esteem actually suffers when one doesn't have to produce anything. As self-esteem descends, anger, resentment and violent behavior follow — the sociopathic cycle. Society must then rise up and stop it.

  8. Marte says:

    It's hard to fathom how anyone could WANT to live under communism – but I guess that's what happens when you completely dumb-down the populace, then fan the flames of greed and envy.

    • Jim Hallett says:

      The key to communism (socialism or any other "ism" opposed to freedom) is the state control of schooling (NOT education as they like to call it, but mere brainwashing demagoguery), as it is infested with communist ideology as it has been for decades. Since people are not trained to actually think independently, they are incapable of seeing the fallacy of a Bernie Sanders agenda put into practice. Envy is indeed the root of much of the anger, and lots of the violent protests that take place are just excuses to rain on others' parades if they cannot get their own way. Someone like Donald Trump needs to start acting more mature, however, so he does not fan the flames of the angry, low-information public. Lots of people are sick of the political class criminals like Hildabeast, Ovomit, the Bushes et al., but just being angry only opens the door for dictatorships, which is exactly how a scoundrel like Hitler came into being – the Germans were mighty pissed off after the Treaty of Versailles and rampant Wiemar Republic inflation. The Establishment (in both wings of the one party that runs Amerika) has no real commitment to freedom – only power, so like most great ideas, they must start from the bottom and work their way up, as the elites are not going to write their own ticket out of power.

  9. MX Drone says:

    YES. I believe it is.

  10. Reality Seeker says:

    I tend to strongly agree with the above article; however, I don't know if the violence happens sooner ( within months) or later ( after an economic collapse). Trump is only a man riding the horse. The horse is the trend; and the trend is revolution. The trend is global. Donald may not close the deal. The nomination might be stolen from him. He might be assassinated.

    I've written for years on Robert Ringer's blogs. For the past seven years I've written and rewritten about how the CIA has infiltrated the press. The CIA and other more secret operatives of the "Deep State" are aligned against Trump; therefore, you can expect the MSM to pit itself against Trump.

    I know, I know, I sound like a "conspiracy nut-job", so please pass me a tin foil hat. And while you're at it pass one out to Matt Drudge and hundreds of other clued-in guys — including Edward Snowden..

    The following story is just more proof from the Russians. I expect Putin to spill the beans on Washington, again and again through RT, until the American people learn just how Orwellian Washington has become.

    Trump has no better than a 50/50 chance at the nomination; and a lot less of a chance of actually becoming president; and a snowball's chance in hell of living through a full term as president…. But as I stated above, Trump is only the rider. The revolutionary horse is going to move forward with or without a rider…

    • Jim Hallett says:

      And as you say, the REAL trend that "trumps" all others is the financial instability of the global economy and all its international controllers. I think a financial collapse of some sort is the only way any good and significant change will come about (and it will be messy and painful for many during any transformation), which is one reason I plan on spending some of my time in the southern Hemisphere, away from where all the bad actors reside. There are no isolated islands, of course, but there are many places with greater degrees of freedom than the "land of the free." I still refer back to the old Mark Twain line RE; elections. "If voting were important, they would not let us do it!"

      • Reality Seeker says:


        You're both highly intelligent and well informed. Your opinions are widely held by many expats and anarcho-capitalists. I respect Doug Casey, for example, and he shares your views. I understand the pros and cons of being an expat because I've lived as one. And nobody had a better time living that lifestyle than me. Personally, I've chosen to come back home for many reasons, chief of which was to join in the epic battle which lies ahead. Ron Paul was actually the warm-up phase for me. But I always knew Ron never stood a chance in hell of becoming president.

        Trump is the guy who I've been waiting for because he's the only person in my lifetime who has a chance to disrupt Washington. That is why I'm going to Cleveland this July 18-21 to join forces with Roger Stone, Alex Jones and many others to support Trump.

        I've already explained on this blog my position on why I'm not going, instead, to New Zealand or some other far-flung location to live out my life on the beach. I've already been there and done that. "I was born for a storm". Even if Trump wasn't running, I'd still remain here during the collapse. It's a fallacy that you or I can run somewhere and have a better chance of survival. Sometime in the future I'll go over once again the reasons why living in a foreign country isn't necessarily a wise move for somebody who is moving solely for the purpose of avoiding an economic collapse.

        If you're heading out because you want adventure and to experience different cultures and/or to conduct business, then that's great. But don't think you can run and hide a world-wide collapse in some third-world shit-hole.

        Good luck with that…..

        • patg2 says:

          Your statement that Alex Jones supports Trump would cement my decision to vote against Trump. Alex Jones is a nutcase who either can't tell the difference between truth and lies, or doesn't care and is in it for the sensationalism. I don't know which is worse. But Jones doesn't have a clue. On the other hand, I agree that going to New Zealand (a beautiful country, by the way) to escape a worldwide financial collapse won't work.

          • Reality Seeker says:


            Trump was interviewed by Jones. It was a good interview. Matt Drudge stopped in for an interview. That was also an excellent interview. I always enjoy when Ron Paul is interviewed. Alex has interviewed a couple of hundred individuals ( including some amazing whistle blowers). I guess they're all "nutcases". Why else would they go on the Alex Jones Show? Right? Personally, I think what these people have to say in the interviews may seem "sensational" , and what Alex has to say might seem to be "sensational", but a lot of it is true, mostly true or true enough. And Alex certainly does a better job telling the truth than Fox.

            "Truth is stranger than fiction". Not always, but sometimes.

            Alex isn't perfect. But I'd rather side with Alex and others who are part of the Liberty Movement than the gutless, the dimwits and those who support the Democratic leadership.

            Nobody is perfect. Not Ron Paul; not Glenn Beck; not Ted Cruz; none of them. Who knows? Alex might one day suffer a melt-down like poor Glenn Beck is now. We all have to make judgement calls.

            Still, I'd rather be called a nutcase and be in good company with the "nutcases" than with people like you, patg2.

          • patg2 says:

            I don't really care who had a good interview with Alex Jones. He either lied about the cause of 9/11, or he is too ignorant to be of any use to me. Popular Mechanics proved him dead wrong, but Jones took the attitude, I've made up my mind. Don't confuse me with the facts. Jones also made brash statements about huge numbers of Iraqis and others killed by Americans. These are demonstrably false. There are people I respect who will associate with Jones, but I wish they wouldn't, or if they do, they'd simply take over his show.

            Your statement that you'd rather be in the company of Alex Jones than in my company is telling. You do nothing for your case by making a remark like that.

            Sorry, you can't trust Alex Jones, and I personally think he says what he thinks will get him attention. As for Fox News, apples and oranges.

            I don't know about Glenn Beck's meltdown. I don't respect Glenn Beck, either. He belongs to a cult, and he's very confused.

            I agree with Jones and Beck occasionally, but even a stopped watch is right twice a day.

            If Alex Jones endorses Trump, I wonder what he knows that would cause me to oppose Trump. Seriously. I do not think Jones is on our side. I think he's on his side, and his side alone. Occasionally I wonder if he's a plant, intended to discredit our point of view.

          • Reality Seeker says:

            "Popular Mechanics"……

            I remember that article. It was about as good and useful as the shit you find in the National Review these days. Do you read and believe the National Review, too? Talk about planted info….

            I'm not getting into 9/11, but I'll say this: I agree with Judge Andrew Napolitano and many, many others who understand that the U.S. government's version ( you know, the version supported by Popular Mechanics… lol) is less true than Alex Jones' version……

            Trump claims he's going to reopen an investigation and hopefully we'll find out what the Saudi's had to do with it. There's a lot of sealed government reports that need to be unsealed. And if Alex is a "plant", then the government is sure going through a lot of trouble for nothing, because Alex is sure stilling the pot and causing a whole lot of trouble.

            I like disruptors. And Alex is a disruptor.

          • Reality Seeker says:

            "How They Brainwash Us" by Paul Craig Roberts ( aka The father of Reaganomics aka another "nutcase")


            A timely article that was just posted hours ago…..

          • patg2 says:

            Sorry, but I SAW what happened to the Twin Towers with my own eyes. Alex Jones' account simply doesn't fit with what I personally observed. Popular Mechanics went into great detail about the events. What they said fit the facts as I know them, and using reason, logic, and common sense, I KNOW Alex Jones is completely out to lunch on this one.

            As for disruptors, Black Lives Matter are disruptors. Like them, too? Jones' disruptions DISTRACT people from the REAL dangers and the REAL issues. That fits perfectly with the government's agenda as you know it.

            As much as I respect Judge Napolitano, he's still a judge, not a scientist or engineer. And far too many people are trusting Alex Jones! Including you.

          • Reality Seeker says:

            There are over 2000 architects and engineers who have joined together for the purpose of finding out 911 truth —- more "nutcases" who don't agree with "Popular Mechanics". And that's only one group of experts. There are tens of thousands more experts "who are afraid to speak out". Judge Napolitano doesn't have to be an "engineer" to agree with the most logical opinion. And what is the most logical opinion?

            I'm a native New Yorker. I was living the good life on Maui during 9/11 and the aftermath. I got the call on 9/11 from both family and friends who were there before, during and after. Many still reside in NYC. NONE of them buy into the official story. Not one. Some think Alex goes too far. Yes. And that's fine. I understand. I have my own idea about what happened. But not one out of hundreds of New Yorkers I personally have known most of my life —-not one of them believe the official story.

            I side with the disruptors who question the official story. "Black Lives Matter" are in a different league. They aren't my type of disruptors because they are merely useful idiots who serve the elite collectivists. I do believe, however, that such groups shall one day turn on the establishment and bloody it. That will be poetic justice.

            I take back the off-the-cuff insult I wrote about you, patg2. At least you have taken the time to research your position on 9/11. It must have been a horrible sight to see. Part of me is glad I wasn't there to personally witness it.

            Good luck, and have nice life.

          • patg2 says:

            The idea that thousands of people agreeing on something makes it true is a fallacy known as ad populum. We don't know the agenda of many people, and need to stick to the facts. Look at all the people who think that modern medicine with all its toxic drugs, is beneficial, or that it is OK to eat genetically modified frankenfoods (and I think Alex Jones and I agree on the latter). Going back a bit further, there was at one time a consensus that the sun revolved around the earth, and that life spontaenously generated on rotten meat. And that there is no reason to wash your hands after examining cadavers before attending women in childbirth.

            Judges are trained to find the most consistent position among evidence presented to them, unlike other disciplines that ferret out information. It is rare for a judge to seek to acquire information beyond what is presented. I have spent many hours in the courtroom, with much success. I know how to appeal to judges. Legal authorities are very important, and they have been constructed elaborately over a long period of time. Often, these are detrimental to our freedoms, but they stand.

            I will mention one simple fact to refute Alex Jones' viewpoint. He says that the disaster was a planned demolition. Here's why that is not the case. A planned demolition causes the collapse to begin on the bottom floors. Every single video of a planned demolition I have ever seen has been this way. When you look at the videos of the Twin Towers, you can clearly see that the collapse begins on the floors the planes hit. A planned demolition could not be targeted for floors where we do not yet know planes will strike, and the planes striking the towers are also plainly visible, as well as the immediate aftermath of flames and smoke. The analysis of Popular Mechanics which centers on strength of materials shows that even though steel will not melt at the temperatures caused, it will lose its strength and buckle.

            I accept your retraction. Thank you. I, too, was glad not to see it the moment it happened. It is most unfortunate that the spiritual "awakening" that happened thereafter did not last. Our country would be far better off for it.

          • Reality Seeker says:

            I will say one final word, only because you seem to be a thoughtful individual, and you might reevaluate your opinion if you take 10 min to watch something.

            Today, on the Alex Jones Show, Alex interviewed Congressman Walter Jones. Walter Jones is an exceptional pol, like Ron Paul, just look at his record if you don't believe me. For example, Walter fought in court for 14 years in behalf of 19 marines who were killed in a tragic accident.The pilots were blamed for the crash, but it was really the fault of the manufacturer, so Walter took up the case so the marines could be properly honored — and he prevailed. You said you know your way around court, well so do I. So I think we can agree that 14 years is a long time to spend on a case. There's many, many other good deeds Walter has done through the years. The latest is his efforts to declassify a 28 pg. 911 report. Walter now has 40 other Congressmen working with him in a worthy effort so the public can know some more of the truth.

            As an aside: Walter also explains in the interview how the army paid 6 million dollars for 9 goats that were delivered to Afghanistan. Sounds crazy, right? Only a "nutcase" would claim that our wonderful military leaders would pay 6 mil for 9 Nubian goats. I have to tell you: if the military can spend 6 million dollars on 9 goats — than anything is possible.

            The interview begins on the second hour of the broadcast. Fast forward to 47:40

            Best regards….

          • Reality Seeker says:

            Sorry the above video is the wrong video. It is Walter, but not today's interview.

            Today's interview is here beginning at 9:20

          • patg2 says:

            I did listen to the entire interview. From that I gleaned that the congressman respects Alex Jones and agrees with him on some major things, and that Alex Jones can be civil to someone he agree with (I already knew that). I disagree with the congressman about being in Iraq. WE NEEDED to be there. Taking Saddam out was necessary. Saddam was involved in the training for 9/11. He had weapons of mass destruction in the country at the time (I never did figure out why Bush denied this, because it happens to be true). He was oppressing his people. Our duty is not just to restore liberty to our own nation. We owe it to other oppressed people to help if we can, because liberty is a gift we did not earn; it was earned for us by the Founders. We won the war in Iraq, but not the peace. If Petraeus had been allowed to manage the entire country, we would have won the peace. So this congressman takes the same anti-war position as Ron Paul and others, and I absolutely disagree. There are some evil people out there who cannot be controlled or contained. They must be stopped. Most people agree you have an individual right to protect yourself and others by responsive force if need be. We also have a right to form a group to do the same on a larger scale.

            It doesn't change my opinion of Alex Jones. He is dead wrong on some critically important issues, and in some very dangerous ways. The mere fact that some civilized people are being flummoxed by what I'd call the dark side of Alex Jones (the side that denies reality and sets up the wrong bogeymen) is very, very troublesome to me. You also seem thoughtful. Pay attention. Alex Jones has made a number of false statements and predictions, and he likes to milk fear for his own purposes. The moment someone uses Alex Jones as an authority on anything, they lose credibility with me. That's simply the way it is.

            I assume you want to draw this conversation to a close. So be it, though I am willing to discuss further. If you do depart, take care. But please think about this, and do your own homework. Yes, 14 years is a long time for a court case (though there have been plenty that have lasted a long time; look at NOW's assault on Joe Scheidler, and he went to the Supreme Court several times, and won). But the mere fact someone has the will to stay with something righteous doesn't necessarily mean he always has good judgment in all things. Please think about it.

          • Reality Seeker says:

            We'll converse again, sometime. For the past 48 hrs. I've been working and playing at a feverish pitch without the benefit of but a few hours sleep. As a result my writing resembles first-draft copy— because that's what it is…. And my grammar is so poor that my subjects and verbs don't agree — if you know what I mean.

            From our previous exchanges I learned you haven't been exposed to Murray Rothbard. Without a foundation in Rothbard, Hayek, Mises, Montesquieu, Rand and numerous other objective, critical thinkers, it might be difficult for you to understand Ron Paul's point of view regarding the welfare-warfare state. But I won't hold that against you. You have a bright, reasonable mind; and you deserve better argument, opinion and commentary than I can provide you with right now.


          • patg2 says:

            Actually, it is dangerous to jump to conclusions about me, as you have done. I have read Hayak and Bastiat (don't forget him). I read Atlas Shrugged (and the entire radio speech, which took me hours, and I read four times as fast as the fasted speaking speed) and Fountainhead, The Virtue of Selfishness, as well as several books by Nathaniel Branden. And I spent many years of friendship with someone who knew both intimately. On a side note, we have a similar name to one John Galt, and live in the Rockies. :) I haven't read a book by Rothbard that I know of, but I know who he is. I have read articles by him and others on various web sites. Etc. I simply do not agree with everything I read, though I agree with some things. As for the welfare-warfare state, that's an oversimplification, and really doesn't describe what we as Americans need for our government to do to fulfill the mandate to protect the people from violence, especially violence by evil rulers in the rest of the world, who are now perfectly capable of raining mass destruction on us.

            I hope for your speedy recovery from your first draft status. Understood. Been there, done that, have some T shirts. Take care.

  11. Thomas tom1 says:

    Political correctness is a cancerous tumor on the body politic of America. The progressive-socialists have been waging culture war since the '60s. This election is about culture war; not politics as usual that the Republican status quo is engaging in.

    Donald Trump's popularity is because he is the only candidate that can stand up to the PC vigilantes (Cruz doesn't have the persona or clout that Trump has.).Trump is the only effective fighter in Culture War but unfortunately, the politically correct control our education system and the prospects of an American renaissance grow increasingly dim.

  12. franksgue says:

    There is a lot of truth in the old two-line adage:
    * Anyone who, by age 20, is not a socialist, is a fool, while
    * Anyone who, by age 30, is still a socialist, is a fool.

    Frank, Burlington

  13. Andrew P. Baker says:

    Mr. Ringer, it's McVeigh not McVea and you refer to sleuth approach rather what I believed you wanted to say was stealth approach.

  14. Thomas tom1 says:

    Political correctness is a cancerous tumor on the body politic of America. The progressive-socialists have been waging culture war since the '60s. This election is about culture war

  15. D_Striker says:

    Very good, enough that I republished this as
    To which I wrote:
    In this post, while perhaps Insurrection is possible, I believe that:
    1. Far too many “citizens” have become too fearful to dare stepping off the yellow path to resistance, and
    2. It seems far more likely that governments across this planet Earth are headed for bankruptcy and will thus be “Out of Business”, leaving mankind free at last to continue Not being Governed. A Voluntary system will then get it’s chance at last!

    • Reality Seeker says:

      Reply to D Striker:

      "A Voluntary system will then get it’s chance at last!"

      Yeah? Really? What evidence do you have to support your extrapolation? "Voluntary systems" or anything resembling such systems have never been viable for any length of time. Why? Because humans are still too primitive. Humans are driven to co-opt, concur and exploit each other. And so long as humans are driven by the mindless primitive that lurks in each one of us, there shall be no voluntarism, anarcho-capitalism or free-market socioeconomic system of any kind whatsoever.

      Moreover, a voluntary system is not what happens after "government" goes "out of business". Ancient Rome was one of the greatest empires in history. And what happened when it finally went completely out of business after almost a millennium? The Dark Age.

      What do you think would likely happen if all governments went bankrupt to the point of total collapse without the possibility of a recovery? A Neo-Dark Age, and perhaps an all-out nuclear war.

      • Robert Ringer RJR says:

        Your point about Rome is a good one, and something high-information people should think about. And an all-out nuclear war followed by a Dark Age is certainly a possibility.

      • Ragnar says:

        Suggest you read "Sic Itur Ad Astra" or This is The Way To The Stars by Andrew Galambos on how a voluntary system can be built. Of course it will be difficult but not impossible. We either get rid of coercion and protect property completely or its all over for mankind as we will be destroyed by the state. There is not much time left as the mob is taking over, glad I'm old.

  16. Nasdaq7 says:

    CNN blocks out Trump responses in interview:

  17. Nick Lucko says:

    The answers can be found in "Restoring the American Dream" by … who ELSE? Robert Ringer!!!

  18. Ted Pawlikowski says:

    After Obama was reelected, I came to the conclusion that there are actually 2 countries in the USA, the Blue States and the Red States. I realize that to separate the 2 will be extremely difficult, I believe it will eventually happen, with some of today's Red States moving to the Blue States.

  19. patg2 says:

    You know what is so ridiculous about this? They don't have to uproot people. With modern computers, a person could specify what kind of regime he wants to live under, and it could be implemented as he wishes, with everyone all mixed up. You pay taxes for welfare, you're eligible for welfare. You decline to pay taxes, you are not eligible. People are always buying into false dilemmas.

  20. Robert Ringer RJR says:

    Interesting point.

  21. Nasdaq7 says:

    How far they are going to stop Trump.

  22. βιβλία says:

    If "Libertarians believe in freedom for all", then what do you call people who believe that organized criminals like commies, socialists, "Progressives", etc. should enjoy no freedom? Surely not conservatives, for they are almost of a single mind in support of military conscription.

  23. Tim says:

    Goodness me, Robert, that's 12 times you mentioned the "radical left", 5 times for "communist", 2 times for "communism" and 1 each for "far left" and "radical leftist".
    Even for you, that's really frothing at the mouth, have a glass of warm milk and a seat on the porch of the old homestead.

    • Nasdaq7 says:

      What is happening is that the Democrats want to secure future elections with illegal immigration and with someone or the political party in power that promises welfare to a degree that eventually the US will become a welfare state, far more in scale than it is at the moment. And the socialists and Communists from Europe will descend upon the US government for job opportunities, for promotion opportunities. You will be surprised to see how many from socialistic Scandinavian countries and other European countries will soon work in the US government as advisers. The US probably won't become a communist state in name, but the crashes in the stock market and economy will be blamed on the capitalists. You must think ahead… the chances are great nothing major will happen, but you can be sure it will definitely be more difficult in future for Republicans to win elections, they will have to spend more money. It will be a difficult situation for them to win as many elections. On the positive side, better relations with socialistic countries across the entire world. So winning the elections will definitely be more difficult for Republicans. The ISIS issue, illegal immigration and migration issues are actually overshadowing all other issues. But those are the medium to long term trends. The capitalists and economic freedom and profitability is definitely under siege.

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      I don't know any other way to refer to things, people, ideologies, etc. except by their actual names. Always open to suggestions, though.

      • Tim says:

        While I have the utmost respect for most of your opinions, Robert, there are times you get a bit carried away with reds under the beds, to the point where it assumes McCarthyist proportions.
        If you keep the rhetoric down you may convince people who are wavering, instead of just preaching to the converted.

  24. Max says:

    This election, especially Trump, has exposed the thoroughly rotten and corrupt political industrial complex. No one but Trump who was in a position to come in and take on the political establishment. He has the decades of public exposure and billions of dollars of personal wealth and the backing of other prominent billionaires (Icahn, Wynn, Beal, Ruffin, et al.). But the establishment controls the will of the people, irrespective of the people's wishes and votes. The attacks on Trump have been 24/7 and most of the treachery has come from Republicans and conservatives. I have been voted straight Republican since 1984, sometimes out of default. If Trump has the GOP nomination stolen I will never vote Republican ever again. I can't believe I am alone in feeling this way. There is a reason why Dante has treachery as the lowest ring of Hell, including those who have betrayed their community. And not only will I not support the Republicans, I will actively work to subvert them. And I will make half-hearted attempts to disguise my schadenfreude when the majority of middle American conservatives– who voted against Trump– have their economic future, their freedoms, their idyllic communities, et al., flushed down the toilet for the coming globalist dystopia.

  25. Robert Ringer RJR says:

    I am impressed with your moral courage.

  26. Pitch says:

    William SImon summed up America's plight very poignantly way back in 1979 in his forward to Robert's book, Restoring The American Dream with the following statement:
    And of course, the main objective of every tyrannical Government has been to make certain that they do not comprehend and understand by utilizing every known form of deception available.
    I predict that if the very controversial Donald J. Trump survives to let the chips fall where they may in Cleveland, the riots and violence will be of monumental proportions. Common sense and truthful answers to intentional Governmental contrived intellectual entanglements is so foreign to most American's there is no way they can understand how perilous their situation really is. How else can one explain so many low info American's feeling the Bern and eight years of a small time Chicago hoodlum Communist community organizer?
    Yes, the insurrection must surely be near at hand.

  27. larajf says:

    Bring it. I'd fight to the death to protect freedom for my daughter and her children against the tyranny of "social justice."