Does The Oregon Occupation Further the Cause of Liberty

For the sake of discussion, let’s assume that everyone on every side is well-intentioned. Citizens for Constitutional Freedom (CCF) has no hidden agendas and the government has no hidden agendas.

CFC hasn’t been too clear on their objectives, other than saying they don’t plan to leave soon. Although this tweet from Ammon Bundy was later deleted, he tweeted that the occupation would end when “the Hammonds are freed and the federal government gives up control of the Malheur National Forest.”

The Hammonds through their attorney have distanced themselves from CCF.

The government so far has been pretty clear with their goals of negotiating a peaceful end to the occupation.

We in the liberty movement must have a tactical goal and a strategic goal.

Our tactical goals should be all local. We need to be prepared locally, building caches of supplies, building groups, learning skills and training others like us.  Local role models for liberty.

Our strategic goals are different.

We can’t win this war by fighting tactical skirmishes and ignoring the strategic battle. The original III% would never have won the first war if they had not had at least the acceptance of the majority of the people.  Yes, maybe only III% actually took up arms.  But the majority didn’t support the enemy.

The government has been spending a lot of time in the past 15 years trying to convince the middle 40% that we in the Patriot world are evil at best and domestic terrorists at worst. They have many willing co-conspirators in the media helping them sell this concept.

Bundy ranch was a strategic success, but not because we won the tactical battle on the ground. It was a success because the federal government was shown to be out of control tyrants who terrorized regular folks.  Regular Americans who never thought about or even cared about the liberty movement rallied in support of Bundy ranch.

So far we don’t have this kind of situation in Oregon.

Some in the blogosphere are commenting that we need to support anyone who is willing to step up in the face of tyranny.

Heroes of Lost Causes are heroes, but the cause is still lost.

Some in the blogosphere are commenting that this is a good cause because it’s time to point out the overreaches of our government, particularly the BLM. Oddly enough, there was no such support and discussion when Ammon Bundy and others were involved in last year’s dispute between miners and the BLM at the Sugar Pine mine near the Oregon coast.

It might be useful to point out the overreaches of our government in the BLM, NSA, congress, etc. That may be true, but as far as I can see there is only one candidate for President that has emphasized government restraint and liberty in every speech.  And Rand Paul is far down in the polls.

We call ourselves the III percent, but no one really believes that there are that many of us.  The US military can be sent to fight in lost causes, but they have virtually unlimited resources.  We have few.

Just as our country has gotten into this mess from the top down, our success in achieving liberty will be won from the bottom up. We must achieve local, tactical success.

My family needs to be ready to go. I need to develop tribes to our left, right, front and back.  And then they do the same.  My street.  My neighborhood.  My area.  And liberty grows.

At this stage of the war for liberty, we must pick our strategic battles from the perspective of whether or not it helps us to get the majority to stop seeing us as the enemy.

Does CCF’s occupation help us to get the majority to stop seeing us as the enemy?

No matter how it comes out, we’ve already lost.

Does that mean that we ignore the Oregon situation?

Of course not.

It is imperative that we do not let the government conduct another Waco operation. No matter how it comes out, we’ll be painted as domestic terrorists.  We can help to make sure that those in Oregon receive the full due process protections that our country used to guarantee.

Does that mean we all should pack up and show up in Oregon? Is a show of force by folks who don’t know the locals and don’t know the terrain a good idea?

There are some who in hindsight suggest that we should have all gone to Waco and surrounded the federal government. How could we have done that?  How much of your logistics is fully mobile?  How much ammunition, food, water, gear can you carry?  Is putting all of your supplies in a single vehicle and traveling to a place you don’t know a good idea?

If it appears that Oregon is going to turn into another Waco, a better solution is for folks to create Oregon situations all over the country. Can the government respond to five situations at once?  How about ten?  Maybe 30.  All peaceful on our part; but principled in cause.

The lesson of “no more Wacos” isn’t that we somehow can engage the government on the field of battle and beat them. It’s not that we can engage the government and get them to back down. The lesson is that we won’t let such atrocities go unchecked ever again.

Now that these folks have started Oregon, we’re in the Fort Sumter situation. We can claim all day long that CCF was provoked, but the message currently sent is that CCF started it.  Our responses need not be to help them double down. We need to be resolute in our beliefs and plans so that there won’t be another Waco. So far it appears that the government understands what this means.

It’s time to double down on our local preps.