Why Fear Matters

About the Author

author photo

Ohg Rea Tone is all or nothing. He is educated and opinionated, more clever than smart, sarcastic and forthright. He writes intuitively - often disregarding rules of composition. Comment on his posts - he will likely respond with characteristic humor or genuine empathy. He is the real-deal.

See All Posts by This Author

Why Fear Matters

feature photo

Al Quaeda, the terrorist organization founded and run by Osama Bin Laden, has set the standard of values for many of the radical right wing in America.  Do unto others as they have done unto you seems the common refrain – a refrain based in fear.   This is a remarkable mentality given two precepts – we are a country of law and we are a country predominantly Christian. The threat to America is two-fold: Our government came closer to totalitarianism than at any time in our history during the Bush years, and the radical right wing adopted the tactics of Bin Laden.  The paranoid delusions of the right wing include arming themselves to defend against our own government.
Watch CBS News Videos Online

Background

Our Government:

The attack on America on September 11, 2001, was one of the most dramatic examples in history of man’s inhumanity to man.  The villains broke the fundamental rules of war defined by the Geneva Convention.  We call them villains and terrorists because their value system justifies those monikers.  The response by the top levels of American government was to lower this great country to the same level of villainy.  The leaders of our country openly advocated the dismantling of American values.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The anger welling in the hearts of Americans raged like a California wildfire. Mansions of moral values burned into the new Century. Dick Cheney consciously weighed the options and chose to reduce America to the same tactics, the same brutality, as Al Quaeda. Cheney now readily admits to approving tactics beyond the acceptance of the civilized world:

Dick Cheney has gone on national television several times in recent weeks to brag of his participation in war crimes. As noted in a previous post, Cheney is like Bonnie and Clyde having their picture taken with their arsenal of guns – they dare anyone to do anything about their behavior.  Cheney’s remarks serve as affirmation to a radical right wing – Does Mr. Cheney understand the consequences of his fear campaign?

The Radical Right:

Perhaps as disturbing as our loss of government values is the adoption of the guerrilla tactics of Bin Laden by many on the radical right.  There is open talk of revolution – an open revolt against the United States.  The radical right is adopting the language of Timothy McVeigh - and they are arming themselves with astounding fervor.  Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi.  He has called for revolution in his home country.  Bin Laden is an outcast from Saudi Arabia – as Timothy McVeigh became an outcast of America.  Driven by fear of the unknown the radical right is casting themselves out of American society.

Al Quaeda has set the standard of values for America.  Bush and Cheney  lowered the American values to the standard of Al Quaeda.  And the Radical Right defends their tactics by comparing themselves to Al Quaeda.  The refrains goes something like this: “How did Al Quaeda treat us?  Shouldn’t we treat them the same way?”  This logic actually makes sense to the Rush Limbaugh’s and Shawn Hannity’s of the world.  And they have a following of around twenty million people.  Twenty million dangerous people.  Twenty million armed and dangerous people.  Reducing the quality of American values serves only the terrorists.

Fear of any faith other than fundamentalist Christianity drives a deeper wedge in the world of humanity.  The radical right has adopted the tactic used by Osama Bin Laden of demonizing any faith other than Islam – in the case of the radical right the demon is Islam.  They are using statistics as in the following video to distort reality and to scare American Christians.  They advocate defining Islam as an infidel faith of great danger to humanity – the flip side of Bin Laden’s currency.  The distortion of statistics rests in the redefinition of statistics of population control as statistics of cultural evolution:

This distortion of statistics seeks to shift our assault on terrorism to a holy war between competing religions.  That is exactly the frame of reference used by Bin Laden.

The increasing fear of government control of personal ownership of arms is seen as the focal point of government totalitarianism.  The radical right defends the 2nd Amendment with language of revolt, language of fear of the United States.  The radical right is a real enigma – claiming to be true patriots while calling for a defensive posture against our country.   They are preparing for their own holy war – they advocate the U. S. constitution be adapted to fundamentalist Christian values.  Like Osama Bin Laden – only their interpretation of the religion will suffice – they fear anything else.  The idea of freedom of religion is cast aside, while the freedom to bear arms is magnified.

The following video suggests that Charlton Heston was speaking directly about President Obama.  The video suggests that Charlton Heston would advocate armed opposition to President Obama.

Again, we remind our readers of Timothy McVeigh.  McVeigh was a decorated army veteran of the Gulf War.  His personal paranoid emotional disturbance led him to believe in the United States as the enemy.  While claiming patriotism, he set his course on attacking the government.  His claim – exactly the same as the modern radical right.

The radical right is so immersed in this logic that they cannot see themselves – they cannot see that they have become the central threat to the American way of life.

Martial Law:

There is a growing fear, widespread in the radical right community, that President Obama is going to use some natural disaster as an excuse to proclaim Martial Law – to use our military to force the final takeover of our country by the ‘liberals.’  Here are some of the preparations the radical right is advocating in the event of Martial Law.  Check out the paranoia that permeates the logic:

SURVIVING MARTIAL LAW

  • Prepare before any declaration of martial law by becoming self reliant. You may become subject to a bureaucratic system and be prepared to stay one step ahead of it which is easy to do if you are prepared and in a position to be self reliant. You may also face mob rule, chaos, panic, or a complete breakdown in law and order. Survival situations may be easier to handle in rural areas than urban.
  • Avoid areas of marital law. Can be imposed due to natural disasters or man caused events. Important to have a retreat or place in a rural area away from populated areas.
  • Create alliances with like minded neighbors or community members that share your views. Team work and numbers may help your situation.
  • Become transparent in the sense that you do not draw attention to yourself or your family. For instance, do not tell people that you are storing food just store food. Be prepared to render assistance to neighbors if need be. You never know when you will need them.
  • Remain calm! Do not panic.
  • Avoid areas of civil unrest if possible. If caught in civil unrest take appropriate action.
  • Get informed and stay informed. Understand martial law can be a temporary crisis or an extended one. In extreme cases the shape of a whole nation can change.
  • Declaration of martial law means your rights are suspended and it is government by decree. Your constitutional rights may no longer apply. This could mean a state of National Emergency.
  • People can be arrested and imprisoned indefinitely without charges.
  • Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly can be suspended, and censorship of the media imposed.
  • Gun ownership will also come under severe attack during marital law. We could see house to house searches by the military or National Guard looking for guns and seizing any they find along with stored food.
  • Take a stand on issues and make a choice that fits your beliefs and the situation. Do you believe as Patrick Henry, “Give me liberty or give me death?” Realize you may have some hard choices to make. Understand you may have to sacrifice your principles on trivial matters or take a hard stand. Always remember that you may have to come back and fight another day.

Just another Conspiracy Theory?

The modern radical right is a different animal than the conspiracy theorists of the past.  As evidenced by the videos attached to this post, the modern conspiracy theorists are  using technology to affirm their distortions of truth.  And the modern conspirator has the means of rapid communications with his comrades.

Even the mass communications potential would not in itself be threatening.  The real problem today is in the Phenomenon of Modern Guns.   The paranoid conspirators of modern America are arming themselves with some of the most destructive weapons ever conceived by man.

We are not talking about a single deranged man like McVeigh, or like Robert DeNiro in Taxi Driver.  We are talking about 20,000,000 armed and dangerous people who believe they are the angels who will deliver a Totalitarian Christian Theocracy – and somehow maintain the values of the United States of America.

When we package the radical right conspiracy theories together, when we consider a theocracy, a holy war, totalitarian control by Dick Cheney, fanatical gun ownership, mass communications, and masterful technological distortion of statistics – we are packaging a recipe for danger in America.

Book Mark it-> del.icio.us | Reddit | Slashdot | Digg | Facebook | Technorati | Google | StumbleUpon | Window Live | Tailrank | Furl | Netscape | Yahoo | BlinkList

There Are 7 Responses So Far. »

  1. “We are talking about 20,000,000 armed and dangerous people who believe they are the angels who will deliver a Totalitarian Christian Theocracy ”

    Um, just who is talking about that? This Radical Right you are talking about doesn’t seem to exist. Who of any consequence advocates a Christian Theocracy at all, let a lone a Totalitarian/violent one? This just isn’t reality.

    “The radical right defends the 2nd Amendment with language of revolt, language of fear of the United States”

    You mean, Radical Right speakers such as the founders of the United States? The very founding of the United States focused around usurpation of the rights of the people (including confiscation of their arms), and the rights of people to use force to repel such usurpation (such as being turned into colonial serfs by the British Crown).

    I’ll grant you, there are plenty nutjobs out there such as the Alex Jones/911 Truthers who are indeed a risk because they promote violence without justification. That however does not apply to every single person who would advocate for support of our protected rights to keep and bear arms (including arms of military character), or raise concern about lawmakers looking the other way to aid infiltration of foreign nationals for labor/political exploitation contrary to the rule of law, or raise concern about a clear sweeping movement of global violence in the form of totalitarian islamic supremacy.

    If anyone is fearmongering here, its you. You are painting with a very broad brush, people with very American ideals, as a population to be feared.

  2. Hey None:

    Thanks for the response. It was thoughtful and well articulated. Suggesting a ‘totalitarian islamic supremacy’ is painting with a pretty broad brush.

    Mike Huckabee, a major player in the last Republican Primaries, stated openly and often that the constitution should be subordinate to the Bible – meaning his interpretation of the Bible. Huckabee is only one of many fundamentalist ministers who promote a totalitarian Christian supremacy.’

    The Founding Father were considered enlightened left wing liberals. They were talking revolt against a dictatorial Monarchy. The radical right talks of revolt against the present United States of America – and I note here that you advocated that revolt in your language. Please be careful with your words – they really do mean something and ideology really does have consequences.

    There are about 20,000,000 people on the radical right (as measured by Neilson ratings of popular right wing media programs) If only 1% of these arm themselves with sophisticated military weapons – that is 200,000. If 1% of these act on the talk of revolt then we have 2,000 well armed people with a Timothy McVeigh attitude.

    Is that what you are advocating?

  3. “and I note here that you advocated that revolt in your language.”

    Where exactly? All I see is a discussion of the historical fight for the rights of the people that led to the U.S. Constitution and the government derived thereby. Certainly if a government uses violence against it’s citizenry in contravention of their basic human and civil rights, people unquestionably have the right to defend themselves, but I said nothing, nor say anything of revolt against a duly derived constitutional government within the United States. You are putting words in people’s mouths.

    “Is that what you are advocating?”

    Did I not already make it clear that there is indeed a legitimate threat from a small percentage of radicals? My argument however is that your extension of “Radical Right Wing” status to millions of American conservatives is fearmongering.

    “The Founding Father were considered enlightened left wing liberals”

    Firstly the term “left” only has applicability in terms of who is trying to change society vs who is trying to conserve a given set of institutions. In fact, the founders, while establishing a classically liberal society in America, were fighting to conserve that new order against reactionary assault by the British Crown. Today, those who seek to maintain the indivdiualistic values of the nation’s founding are considered “right” in that they are seeking to conserve these institutions.

    The founding fathers were not however welfare liberals, which is what the term largely implies today, nor modern leftists, which seek to go beyond the individualistic classical liberal ideals of the founding toward collectivist and centralized welfare liberal/social ideas. The politics of the founders have little in common with most modern progressive policy.

    I notice by the way you keep mentioning “sophisticated military weapons”. An semi-automatic AR-15 or AK-47 is far from a “sophisticated military weapon”. There is nothing significantly “sophisitcated” nor “military” about the semi-auto arms the public now hold, as few if any are actually used by any military anywhere.

    As to Huckabee, shall we call anyone who advocates their values, regardless of the source, totalitarian supremacists? I know of no persons in the U.S. nor around the world enslaved by “Christian” masters, nor anyone who is likely to. There are however large populations around the world that must conform to Islamic rulership or die. (You will not convince me that insisiting that the rights of unborn children be considered in addtion to the rights of a potential mother is “Christian Enslavement”. Likewise you will not convince me that advocacy for limiting government recognition and subsidy to domestic arrangements capable of generating children is “Christian Enslavement”) There is a far more compelling evidence for a global Islamic Supremacist threat, than there is for any supposed Christian threat.

    My assertion still stands. The article, which seems to warn against fear, is largely constructed to in fact, generate fear.

  4. To None:

    As Ronald Reagan said, “There you go again.”

    You are well spoken and promote fear of our government – when the next McVeigh strikes the blame should be shared by yourself and others of the right wing.

    http://thefiresidepost.com/2009/04/27/radical-fanatics-are-a-threat-to-americas-safety/

  5. In resorting to unsubstantive and unrelated quotes and abandoning the discussion, you have not spoken well. Likewise in prentending anything I said has anything to do with “fear of our government” or the propmotion of it, you speak falsely. Manifestly it does not. You are being intellectually dishonest, and irrational in asserting that my comments have any relation whatsoever to the terrorist action of McVeigh. Rather, my comments reveal the truth you seek to obscure, that conservatisim in America is not anti-American, nor something worthy of the fear you attempt to promulgate.

    What you are doing is sterotyping, creating strawmen arguments and ad hominem attacks, and offering other logical fallacies. It seems you think if you shout a false “yes you are” just one more time than someone bothers to say a truthful “no I’m not” you win, and make your lie truth. Childish.

    If this what passes for “reasoned discourse” on Fireside Post there’s certainly no point in further discussion.

  6. To None:

    “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”

    You would say this applies to me – I would say this applies to you.

  7. Interesting article, raises some interesting points.

    @none: While I seriously doubt there are 20 million armed and dangerous people in the United States, the Ku Klux Klan, and other groups that adhere to “Christian Identity” would be a good example of an extreme conservative group that advocates the overthrow of the government and setting up a totalitarian “christian” state.

Post a Response

You must be logged in to post a
video comment.