RULES FOR REVOLUTION

P

Paul B.

New member
The following is an article from the August 1946 issue of the AMERICAN RIFLEMAN.

"RULES FOR REVOLUTION"

On a dark night in May, 1919, two lorries rumbled across a bridge and on into the town of Dusseldorf. Amomg the dozen rowdy, singing "Tommies" apparently headed for a gay evening were two representatives of the Allied military intelligence. These men had traced a wave of indiscipline, mutiny, and murder among the troops to the local headquarters of a revolutionary organization established in the town.
Pretending to be drunk, they brushed by the sentries and arrested the ringleaders-a group of thirteen men and women seated at a long table.
In the course of the raid the Allied officers emptied the contents of the safe. One of the documents found in it contained a specific outline of "Rules for brining About a Revolution." It is reprinted here to show the strategy of materialistic revolution, and how personal attitudes and habits of living affect the affairs of nations:

"A. Corrupt the young. Get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, destroy their ruggedness.

"B. Get control of all means of publicity and thereby:
"1. Get peoples minds off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities.
"2. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance.
"3. Destroy the peoples faith in their natural leaders by holding these latter up to ridicule, obloquy, and contempt.
"4. Always preach true democracy, but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible.
"5. By encouraging government extravagance, destroy its credit, produce fear of inflation with rising prices and general discontent.
"6. Foment unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders and foster a lenient and soft attitude on the part of government toward such disorders.
"7. By specious arguments cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues: honesty, sobriety, continence, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness.
"C. CAUSE THE REGISTRATION OF ALL FIREARMS ON SOME PRETEXT, WITH A VIEW TO CONFISCATING THEM AND LEAVING THE POPULATION HELPLESS.-from New World News, Feb 1946.

All emphasis was theirs. I copied it exactly as it was in the magazine. There was something about this being a hoax perpatrated by the NRA, and supposedly an editor was quoted as saying so. However, in the September 1970 issue of the AMERICAN RIFLEMAN, editor Ashley Halsey, Jr. states "To set the record straight for NRA Members, such a note could have come from only one of two editors: The extremely able C. B. Lister, who was editor when the "Rules" were published in 1946 and who died May 14, 1951, and the present editor, who is not about to "apologize" for something published 20 years before he came to the magazine and especially not under the circumstances.
Instead of publishing the debated "Rules," as many urged, this magazine went to the Library of Congress in May for eveidence to show how Communist leaders opposed private ownership of firearms. This appears in the AMERICAN RIFLEMAN for August, p. 16, "Communism versu gun ownership."
Let's hope that nobody, this time, accuses the Library of Congress and the "gun lobby" of conniving in a hoax-Ashely Halsey, Jr. Editor, THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN

All I can add is, reading those "rules" and seeing the way things are going, somebody did not pay attention back in 1946.
Paul B.

[This message has been edited by Paul B. (edited June 26, 1999).]
 
I've seen these rules before, and they make a lot of sense. They also go to prove the dictum that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
It's one of the paradoxes we must face that liberty carries with it the seeds of its own destruction. I could envision a set of laws that could stop all this, but they would infringe upon a lot of rights. If I don't want to infringe upon rights, then I must allow some of these things to happen.
We aren't perfect beings, and will never be able to create a perfect gov't system, but we can surely work towards the ideal, even if we know it can't be achieved. If you set you sights high on a distant target, you may not hit the target, but you'll be closer than if you don't aim high.

------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard
The Shottist's Center forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=45acp45lc
 
Striker. You're right. All you have to do is look at the current media, liberal lawmakers, and Slick Willies executive orders.
The problem is, what can we do about it now?
The sheeple outnumber us, but as the old saying goes, "It's the squeaking wheel that gets the grease." Look at HCI. They're not that big, but they're loud. They also support rule "C". Maybe we could form a noisy pro-American Constitutional group.
Look how soft the Supreme Court has gotten on pornography. What was it they said? "As long as it doesn't offend the public decency.", or something to that effect?
Look how quickly Congress backed down on censoring the media. Would that they would back down that quickly on our 2nd Amendment rights.
What about the war on drugs? They aren't even trying. Sure they catch a few small timers, it looks good on the brainwash machine.(TV).
Instead of paying attention to what is going on, we have Monday night football, baseball whatever.
Instead of being divided on issues such as crime, abortion,political correctness, etc, we should be concentrating on stopping all the government intervention in our lives.
I posted the "Rules", and on another thread "A Visitor From the Past" hoping it would be a wake-up call. Something to pass on in hopes it would get people off their butts and do something to turn government around.
In the last line of "Visitor" the question is asked,"Is this still the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.?" I would hope we could say yes. I have my doubts. We're too comfortable.
Paul B.,
 
I agree with the idea that someone must have been paying too much attention when those rules were published.. though I would hardly have called that a recipe for a revolution.

To me a "revolution" is a sweeping action, a wave of dynamic force inspired by ideals that radically changes the Status Quo...
Those rules are merely a guide to theft. Theft of ideals, theft of self-worth and theft of independence.

------------------
-Essayons
 
...and a theft of common decency. Notice that we are a nation of sheeple who idolize empty-headed movie stars and spoiled-brat professional athletes. They don't "work", they are in the minority as far as the populace goes, yet the common man looks to them as idols while the heroes of yesterday- Daniel Webster, Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie, Thomas Jefferson, et al. are mocked for their ideals, as they are now considered "unfashionable" and "quaint". Celebrities contribute almost nil to the common good, so why do they have all the attention?

I like the idea of a pro-2nd amendment "squeaky wheel" as counterpart to HCI. No issue is fairly decided unless both sides are fairly represented, and TPTB are NOT interested in a fair fight, they are all about power, and the keeping of it. If we yell loud enough, they will be forced to listen, especially when they realize they don't have the full support of the governed and therefore may be, ahem, "removed".

I don't think you can count quiescence as support, either. Most sheeple in the USSA simply don't care, don't care about guns, don't care about everyone's right to life, don't care about rights- theirs or anyone elses. As long as they are "safe", they don't care. Who do you think is responsible for engendering this complacent attitude?

------------------
"Fear is the path to the Dark Side...
Fear leads to gun laws, gun laws lead to disarmament, disarmament... leads to Tyranny!"

-------------------------

"If it isn't Scottish, it's CRAP!"


[This message has been edited by Jedi Oomodo (edited June 30, 1999).]
 
Rob. Who says a revolution has to be quick or violent. Notice the words to take control ruthlessly. Most of what I see in those rules it the preliminary setting up of the populace for take over. Control the media? Hell they've done that. Divide the people on trivial matters. They've done that. Register firearms so they can be confiscated? They're doing that. Now when you put it to draw a tag for big game, it is a FEDERAL requirement to include your Social Security number. This is ostensibly to locate "deadbeat dads." Yeah sure. How many of you hunt, but got you rifle before GCA 1968? Or bought it from a private person? You apllied for a tag? Guess what. Your number was given to the Feds, and now they know for sure you have a gun.
This was enclosed with my application for deer and elk tags. Quoted verbatum.
ATTENTION HUNTERS!

In accordance with Federal Requirement, 42 U.S.C., Section 666 A13 and A.R.S. 25-320 (K) and 25-502 (E), you must provide your Social Security number in the space provided on the Permit-Tag Application Form. This information is kept on file with the Department of Economic Security for use in identifying and tracking child support offenders.
I can see the state maybe using it, checking, and purging non-offenders, but of what use is it to the Feds? "AH! There are no records of Paul B. having a firearm. He just put in for a hunt. Add him to the list. He must have a gun." Nuff said?
Paul B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top