Below is my testimony for two Senate bills regarding police accountability being heard later today.
Dear Judiciary Committee Members:
My name is Carla Gericke, former Republican state Senate candidate in District 20. I live in Manchester, NH, am an attorney, and serve on several nonprofit boards, including Right-to-Know NH, a nonpartisan, statewide citizens’ coalition that works to improve government transparency and accountability.
Today, I’m submitting my written testimony in my personal capacity, and ask that you OPPOSE SB39. I have also signed up to testify orally, but I ask that this email testimony be submitted into the permanent record for this bill.
I also ask that today’s Union Leader editorial, Assaulting your right to know, be formally submitted into the record.
For more than a decade now, I have been working on police accountability issues in New Hampshire, starting with my own arrest in 2010 for filming police officers during a routine traffic stop. After all charges were dropped against me, I filed and, four years later, won a landmark First Circuit, 1st Amendment court case affirming the right to film police officers in public (Gericke vs. Begin et al).
Thanks to my determination to create a binding legal precedent to ensure citizens can (and one may argue, should) record police officers in the execution of their public duties, more than 13 million people in the First Circuit can now legally record police officers. Indeed, the Court found that the right to film police officers was so clearly established, they can no longer invoke qualified immunity as a defense.
It is undeniable that recordings of police brutality and excessive force have highlighted a very serious problem in our country, and that we need more, not less, transparency and accountability.
Therefore, this proposed bill, SB39, which reduces transparency and codifies hiding ONLY police officers “personnel files, internal investigations, and pre-employment background investigations of any state and local law enforcement officer,” is an affront to police accountability activists everywhere, and is, frankly, an insult to all decent Granite Staters.
Why? Because it took TWENTY SEVEN YEARS to overturn the wrongly decided Fenniman vs. Union Leader decision that originally created an exception saying that government employees’ personnel files are exempt from RSA 91-A.
That’s twenty seven years of secrets, unaccountability, and actively, purposefully hiding abuses, leading to the distrust of law enforcement we see today.
Yet, here is Senator Carson, endorsed in the past by several law enforcement agencies, introducing a bill to again shield police officers’ malfeasance from the public it purports to serve.
This anti-accountability bill also tramples on the NH Constitution by creating a special, separate, protected class solely for law enforcement, in direct violation of Article 10 of the NH Constitution that states: “Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men…”
Then there is the Laurie’s List/Exculpatory Evidence Schedule issue. If you have been following along, you will know this is a secret list of bad cops that is actively being kept secret from the public despite now two court cases ordering that it be made public. Even the stacked Law Enforcement Accountability Task Force recommended the EES should be disclosed.
A reminder: The EES is a list of New Hampshire law enforcement officers with sustained findings of misconduct for credibility or trustworthiness, for things like lying, falsifying reports, stealing, and excessive force.
In a court order dated April 23, 2019, Judge Charles Temple ruled the EES is “not confidential,” and “is not exempt from disclosure under RSA 91-A,” and “that it should be made public”.
Judge Temple ruled there was a compelling public interest in knowing which law enforcement officers have been deemed by their own police chiefs, after a 20-page process, to be so untrustworthy that they cannot testify in court.
Let’s repeat that for the folks in the back: There is a secret list of about 270 New Hampshire law enforcement agents that are deemed so untrustworthy they cannot take the stand in court, that your Attorney General has spent several extra years now, despite court orders to the contrary, fighting to continue to keep secret from you. I also remind you, we saw last summer what happens when you create an institutional process that protects “bad apples,” exactly what SB39 wants to do.
The NH Constitution says: [Art.] 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive. To that end, the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted. The public also has a right to an orderly, lawful, and accountable government.”
Hiding police personnel files and disciplinary actions is NOT “open, accessible, accountable or responsive” government. Everyone knows, police reform, with more accountability and transparency is needed, not less. In order to institute reforms, we must know what is going on. It starts here today, with you. Please OPPOSE SB39.
Thank you for your time.
My name is Carla Gericke, former Republican state Senate candidate in District 20. I live in Manchester, NH, am an attorney, and serve on several nonprofit boards, including Right-to-Know NH, a nonpartisan citizens’ coalition that works to improve government transparency, a crucial component to maintaining public trust in our institutions.
Today, I’m submitting my written testimony in my personal capacity, and ask that you SUPPORT SB41 in order to increase police accountability by opening police disciplinary hearings to the public. Even though I have also signed up to testify orally, I ask that this email testimony be submitted into the permanent record for this bill.
Last summer, during the nationwide protests, we saw quite clearly that without trust in the people enforcing our laws, everything starts to break down. For years now, law enforcement officials have been overly protected at the expense of your constituents. Today, you have an opportunity to start to right that wrong.
More transparency leads to faster reforms. You can’t fix what you don’t know is broken, and you can’t know what’s broken when you hide the truth. Opening disciplinary actions to public scrutiny must happen in order to restore trust.
Police officers do not have a privacy interest when acting in their official capacities. Other professions have public disciplinary hearings… why not police officers, especially when considering the nature of their work?
Any disciplinary action before the Police Standards and Training Council, of course, creates a significant and compelling public interest, both with regard to the officer and the Council that is supposed to be providing the oversight.
Based on the number of officers that are being hidden from the public on the Laurie’s List/Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (more than 270 at one time), there is an immediate and urgent need for more public scrutiny of this entire process.
The New Hampshire Commission on Law Enforcement Accountability, Community, and Transparency, concurs, recommending under #22 in its Final Report to “Make the existing Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (EES)” a public record. Both the ACLU-NH and the NH Press Association also support this bill to increase transparency and accountability.
Public scrutiny is our best check and balance to hold law enforcement officials accountable. It starts with this bill, and your appetite to do what is right in the name of restoring public trust. Without trust, everything will crumble… Don’t let this happen on your watch.
Thank you for your time.
Somehow, even little ole me got caught up in The Great Deplatforming of 2021. Death to free speech, long live state controlled messaging! /s In other news, the encrypted messenger app, Signal gained 40 million new customers this week. I’d say that means the message of freedom, privacy, and free speech are winning… underground. Suck it, Feds! Suck it, Socialists! Suck it, Authoritarians!
During apartheid-era South Africa, all the cool shit was forced underground. Mixed race bars and jazz in Hillbrow. The authoritarian Regime controlled the movement of people, requiring pass books to travel. This is starting to happen in America, and will escalate. I read in today’s paper that Biden will use an executive order on inauguration day to mandate masks for inter-state travel and in federal buildings. I anticipate soon you will need a vaccine “passbook” to travel internationally.
Fortunately, for now, despite New Hampshire’s misguided governor who is–rumor-warning: possibly planning a VP run with Pence (based on a UNH poll I heard about)–disregarding the people who actually put him back in the governor’s office, here in the Free State of New Hampshire, free staters haven’t seen a significant change in our daily routines.
We still meet in large groups, go mask-less if so preferred, and have continued with our regularly scheduled events. In fact, I am already planning PorcFest 2021, slated for June 21-28, 2021, which should be the biggest and bestest to date. THAT, of course, is ultimately up to you. 🙂
In these frustrating times, it is important to remember one side is spreading darkness, isolation, and fear. Me? I’m just over here reminding people you have one life to live. Live it fully, in lightness, surrounded by people you love and who love you. Live life on your feet. The view is much better up here than down there on your knees. I say it all the time, but here we go again: If you are so scared of dying… how are you LIVING?
Following please find the letter I sent to the Executive Council regarding the potential appointment of Gordon MacDonald as New Hampshire’s Supreme Court Judge. If you’re interested, you can participate in this process in three ways, sent to me from ReBuildNH: “1) Go to the meeting on the 21st in person (they’ll probably make you wear a mask—resist if you are so inclined), 2) attend the meeting using their call-in number, or 3) email the Executive Councilors (firstname.lastname@example.org) and give them your reasons why Gordon MacDonald should not be trusted with the highest judicial office in New Hampshire.”
I ask that this email be read into and form part of the official record. I, Carla Gericke, former Republican State Senate candidate in District 20, ask you to vote AGAINST Gordon MacDonald’s nomination as New Hampshire’s Supreme Court Justice.
On top of the fiasco created by Sununu’s unConstitutional Emergency Orders, fully supported and enforced by the AG, for which there is NO LEGAL JUSTIFICATION, you should NOT confirm MacDonald based on his appeal of Judge Temple’s 2019 order to release the secret list of bad cops, aka, the Laurie’s List.
If, as MacDonald claimed by filing the appeal, he believes Granite Staters have no right to know which law enforcement officers have been found by their own police chiefs after a 20+ page process to be too corrupt to testify in court–officers who lie, cheat, falsify police reports, and use excessive force–then what sort of Supreme Court judge will he be? MacDonald’s misreading of this issue is so egregious, the NH Supreme Court late last year remanded the case back to the lower court, saying this information is, of course, in the public interest and must be disclosed. Due to MacDonald’s decision to file the appeal, his actions directly protected known bad actors for several extra years, years during which we have seen massive social unrest due to lack of police accountability or any appetite for real policing reform. This lack of judgement has wasted tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars in unnecessary legal fees, and, rightfully, led to a deep mistrust in the justice system.
I remind you, the NH Constitution says:
MacDonald has proven time and time again, he will protect the Establishment at the expense of the people he purports to serve. In fact, thinking people might argue it is a de facto conflict of interest for a former Attorney General to become a Supreme Court Justice because he will be incapable of protecting New Hampshire’s citizens against Constitutional overreaches by the state. We need a bench with judges who serve the law, not politicians, their cronies, and unions. MacDonald, through his own actions, has proven he is not up to the task.
I ask you to vote AGAINST Gordon MacDonald as New Hampshire’s Supreme Court Justice.
Thank you for your time.
Former Republican State Senate Candidate, District 20
This week on Manch Talk, I get a little feisty and frustrated at an article written by a Soros-funded anti-liberty authoritarian who goes around NH spreading misinformation about the Free State Project. Usually, I let people like her slide, because, life’s too short, ‘never punch down,’ eye on the prize, blah, blah, blah, right?
Readers know I generally try to focus on the positive in life, and see the best in people, but this lady is, in my opinion, an awful human being. Why? Because after her last dog-and-pony misinformation show held at a library in early 2020, several Free Staters spoke up to tell their personal stories about why they are liberty activists…
And, since it was clear our words moved the audience and helped them gain a better understanding of where we are coming from (ostensibly a good thing if you are trying to heal the world), she told me afterwards she would never let us speak again.
Most of us who spoke up that night are immigrants from repressive regimes (Russia, China, Ukraine, Apartheid South Africa, etc.), and we *know* what suppression of individual rights looks like, we *know* what happens when the Powers-that-Claim-to-Be start saying things like, “Well, yes, this may be bad for you, personally, but it’s for the ‘common good’.” This, of course, is one of the oldest authoritarian lies in the book. Trust me: We know. We’ve lived it.
That same evening, this was my message to local progressives: Can we find common ground between progressives and libertarians in NH? According to this lady, no.
But, I will not be dissuaded from trying to reach people with a message of peace, love, respect, founded in the principles of individual liberty. If we are not free as individuals, we are not free at all.
“You were the best of us; may you yet bring out the best in us.” ~ Anonymous, Jan 13, 2013
Liberty activists need to always remember people like Aaron Swartz, who committed suicide in 2013 after an insane overzealous prosecution for which, of course, no one was ever punished and nothing changed… In fact, things have gotten worse, much, much worse… as in, even I have been suspended from Facebook (for a month), but I can still see my memories on Facebook and is this post from Anonymous is worth re-sharing, so here it is…
A brief message from Anonymous:
“Whether or not the government contributed to his suicide, the government’s prosecution of Swartz was a grotesque miscarriage of justice, a distorted and perverse shadow of the justice that Aaron died fighting for — freeing the publicly-funded scientific literature from a publishing system that makes it inaccessible to most of those who paid for it — enabling the collective betterment of the world through the facilitation of sharing — an ideal that we should all support.
Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice of U.S. computer crime laws, particularly their punishment regimes, and the highly-questionable justice of pre-trial bargaining. Aaron’s act was undoubtedly political activism; it had tragic consequences.
We call for this tragedy to be a basis for reform of computer crime laws, and the overzealous prosecutors who use them.We call for this tragedy to be a basis for reform of copyright and intellectual property law, returning it to the proper principles of common good to the many, rather than private gain to the few.
We call for this tragedy to be a basis for greater recognition of the oppression and injustices heaped daily by certain persons and institutions of authority upon anyone who dares to stand up and be counted for their beliefs, and for greater solidarity and mutual aid in response.
We call for this tragedy to be a basis for a renewed and unwavering commitment to a free and unfettered internet, spared from censorship with equality of access and franchise for all.
For in the end, we will not be judged according to what we give, but according to what we keep to ourselves.
Aaron, we will sorely miss your friendship, and your help in building a better world. May you read in peace.
Guerilla Open Access Manifesto
Information is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keep it for themselves. The world’s entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations. Want to read the papers featuring the most famous results of the sciences? You’ll need to send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.
There are those struggling to change this. The Open Access Movement has fought valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrights away but instead ensure their work is published on the Internet, under terms that allow anyone to access it. But even under the best scenarios, their work will only apply to things published in the future. Everything up until now will have been lost.
That is too high a price to pay. Forcing academics to pay money to read the work of their colleagues? Scanning entire libraries but only allowing the folks at Google to read them? Providing scientific articles to those at elite universities in the First World, but not to children in the Global South? It’s outrageous and unacceptable.
“I agree,” many say, “but what can we do? The companies hold the copyrights, they make enormous amounts of money by charging for access, and it’s perfectly legal — there’s nothing we can do to stop them.” But there is something we can, something that’s already being done: we can fight back.
Those with access to these resources — students, librarians, scientists — you have been given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet of knowledge while the rest of the world is locked out. But you need not — indeed, morally, you cannot — keep this privilege for yourselves. You have a duty to share it with the world. And you have: trading passwords with colleagues, filling download requests for friends.
Meanwhile, those who have been locked out are not standing idly by. You have been sneaking through holes and climbing over fences, liberating the information locked up by the publishers and sharing them with your friends.
But all of this action goes on in the dark, hidden underground. It’s called stealing or piracy, as if sharing a wealth of knowledge were the moral equivalent of plundering a ship and murdering its crew. But sharing isn’t immoral — it’s a moral imperative. Only those blinded by greed would refuse to let a friend make a copy.
Large corporations, of course, are blinded by greed. The laws under which they operate require it — their shareholders would revolt at anything less. And the politicians they have bought off back them, passing laws giving them the exclusive power to decide who can make copies.
There is no justice in following unjust laws. It’s time to come into the light and, in the grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our opposition to this private theft of public culture.
We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with the world. We need to take stuff that’s out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to file sharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open Access.
With enough of us, around the world, we’ll not just send a strong message opposing the privatization of knowledge — we’ll make it a thing of the past. Will you join us?
July 2008, Eremo, Italy
(Postscript: We tender apologies to the administrators at MIT for this temporary use of their websites. We understand that it is a time of soul-searching for all those within this great institution as much — perhaps for some involved even more so — than it is for the greater internet community. We do not consign blame or responsibility upon MIT for what has happened, but call for all those feel heavy-hearted in their proximity to this awful loss to acknowledge instead the responsibility they have — that we all have — to build and safeguard a future that would make Aaron proud, and honour the ideals and dedication that burnt so brightly within him by embodying them in thought and word and action.)”
On January 7th, 2021, together with hubby, Louis, and our rescued dog, Nellie, I attend the rally outside the state house while Chris Sununu was being sworn-in in secret inside. For weeks, King Sununu, who now rules New Hampshire by decree, has been perpetuating the Big Lie that “armed protestors” made it impossible to safely handle a public swearing-in ceremony. Everyone involved, Chris included, knows the untruths being perpetuated here, but be it as it may, the fact is, Chris Sununu is unwilling to face his constituents. That says everything I need to know about his character.
In Depth NH covered the rally and swearing in, and you can read more HERE.
Patch NH covered it HERE, and includes the following quote from me:
“The question we have is what do we do next,” Gericke asked. “I am a peaceful person but I am very much in favor of problem-solving and I think we all understand we have a serious problem. If our politicians will not even face us … when our politicians suspend the U.S. and New Hampshire constitutions … then he, Chris Sununu, has opened the door to a discussion of New Hampshire independence and peaceful secession. If we cannot drain the swamp, then we need to take matters into our own hands … peacefully.”
Back in the studio after the holidays, we hit the ground running with COVID updates, information about the vaccines, how viruses work over time, and more!
They admit they don’t know what they are doing. WHY is anyone still listening to these harbingers of darkness?
Here is the reality: Nothing any government official mandates changes anything anywhere. The virus curve is the same shape and size across the globe despite different places trying different things, with some variation for the overall age/health of the population–countries with older, fatter, sicker people are hit harder… Maybe a question Americans should be asking ourselves is why do we have so many old, fat, sick people? Hint: it’s SAD… it’s the Standard American Diet!
Here’s another hard truth: The powers that be could have spent the past year trying to help make people healthier. They could have advised you start taking care of yourself. That you start taking Vitamin D and Zinc. That you get outside in the sunlight for some daily exercise in fresh air. That you stop fueling your body with junk and start cooking whole foods from scratch. That you get enough sleep, since sleep deprivation is a recognized form of torture. But see… They like you like this… they like you fat and slow and obedient. They like being able to literally terrify you out of your mind.
For the past year, the people who purport to have your best interests at heart, instead of choosing life and health and vitality and hope, chose darkness, tyranny, control, isolation, snitching, and force. They chose to terrify you into submission without solid justification for their actions.
They have spent the last year changing your brain’s neural pathways, priming you to live permanently in fear and unable to think for yourself, which, in case I have to spell it out for you, is a lot worse for your health and wellbeing than a case of Covid.
Stop listening to these people. They 100% do. not. have. your. best. interests. at. heart. Trust your instincts! Peace and love to y’all!
My friend Sarah Chamberlain wrote this essay on Medium, and I wanted to share here too. If you only read one thing today, let it be this.
Please save, screenshot, etc., then boost.
I don’t usually ask for my content to be shared. What I am about to say though is perhaps the most important thing I will ever say in public, and in the present landscape of the internet, there is a very high probability that it is being silenced or erased even now as you read it. So, I am asking you to please, save an offline and/or archived copy of this letter RIGHT NOW.
If, once you’ve read this letter, you feel that it has any value or interest whatsoever, please, as a personal favor, send it on through whichever channels, to whichever people you feel safe doing so.
If you think what I say is absurd, please share my letter with your friends so you can all laugh at me.
If you think that what I say is evil, please share it with your friends so you can all rage at me.
If you think I deserve to be punished for what I say, please send my letter on to the “authorities” or to any person you think might hurt me for writing it. At least then, those people will have a chance to read it.
an American, a New Hampshirewoman, a lover of liberty, and a happily married mother of four beautiful children. I have a wonderful life, a bright future, and could not ask for any greater blessing than those I have already received.
My enemies are
in a word, communists. Modern communists do not usually call themselves such. They do not talk about workers rising up and seizing the Means of Production.
Instead, modern communists adopt a rhetorical stance where they assume that all people and all property are ALREADY COLLECTIVIZED, then calmly discuss what WE should do:
– What WE should ALLOW people to own.
– What WE should ALLOW people to do.
– What WE should ALLOW people to say.
– How WE should ALLOW people to use their property.
– How WE should ALLOW people to conduct their businesses,
– … and WHO should be ALLOWED,
– … and WHERE.
– How WE should ALLOW people to raise their children.
– Who should be GIVEN which roles within society.
The issue under discussion is always something sympathetic, something most decent people would like to see fixed: Intergenerational poverty, police brutality, environmental degradation, bigotry, violence.
But the solutions modern communists put forward are rarely passive, and they are never liberating. If a problem can be solved by individual action, voluntary charity, by the free market, or by the passage of time, that is never seen as good enough. In fact, nothing that fails to increase the power and control of governments or certain institutions (or to grow the people’s dependence on them) is ever regarded as a solution at all.
The people who do the work of modern communism, debating and voting on these “issues of the day” are mostly not aware of what they are doing. A majority of them are decent people who want real problems addressed. But their thinking is confined to a multiple choice question presented by prestige media and schools where only oppressive proposals are listed as options.
Even those higher up the food chain, the ones who create the policy proposals or set the bounds of debate around them are not usually conscious of the way they are manipulating the public. They are hobbled by a theory of history (care of the school system) where the past is merely a series of dragons slain by government policy, where everything is “systemic”, and where the free choices and conscientious actions of individuals have no meaningful effect.
This is how the enemy operates.
In order for modern communists to have the latitude to execute their plans, they need every citizen to be as weak and dependent as possible. They especially need the middle tiers of management, professions, and bureaucracy to be filled with minimally competent placeholders who owe their position to political and institutional favor. These sorts of people, since they are only able to achieve their present position through the system, are more pliable to coercion and less likely to see freedom in any aspect of life as promising or beneficial.
As a consequence, modern communists wage eternal war against every wholesome and sustainable aspect of life, society, and culture which gives people or communities strength and independence. They see it as desirable to destroy the natural optimum which people discover through freedom and competition and replace it with fragile, orchid-like solutions which could not thrive without government and/or institutional intervention:
– Those with demonstrable skills must be replaced by those with credentials.
– The self-employed must be reduced to the status of employees.
– Property must become regulated or burdened with tax and debt, and wherever possible, wealth must be rendered intangible as abstracted financial fictions constructed of laws.
– People must come to rely on government programs for security where they previously relied on themselves and each other.
– The traditional family and organic communities it forms, such as churches, must be invaded, defanged, and delegitimized to leave people at the mercy of authorities.
To a modern communist, “freedom” means the opportunity for individuals to choose some fundamentally maladaptive way of life and be protected from consequences, encouraged and subsidized by power.
The weaker you are, the more useful you are to those in power. Those who choose to be weak and dependent where they could be healthy and independent are collaborators.
This is what I see happening.
The American public has come to accept all the components of totalitarian states.
– We have come to accept a militarized police.
– We have come to accept ideological indoctrination in schools.
– We have come to accept mass surveillance.
– We have come to accept speech codes.
– We have come to accept the rewriting of history to serve the interests of the ruling party.
– We have come to accept the tarring of political dissidents as “terrorists”, “extremists”, and “White Supremacists.”
– We have come to accept the State telling us when and where we can meet.
– We have come to accept the State shutting down our places of worship.
– We have come to accept the idea that parents should have no special authority over their children.
– We have come to accept the manipulation of thought through the manipulation of language.
– We have come to accept the radical reordering of society by government in the name of crisis.
In the 2016 election, the full-throated manipulation by the mainstream press, academia, and the political establishment was so intense, and so obvious, that many people (myself included) who did not consider themselves “conservative” voted for Donald Trump just to poke a finger in the eye of Leviathan. So many people did so that his margin of victory exceeded the margin of cheat, and he was actually able to become president.
In the intervening years, the modern communists of both parties (though more so the Democrats) and those same media and academia mandarins have only doubled down on their commitment to subjugating the public and clamping down on our personal freedom and political prerogatives. Somehow, in losing electorally, we are to believe that their mandate for runaway collectivism and authoritarianism was strengthened.
Now, in the 2020 election, the fraud and manipulation became so glaringly obvious that, at the time of writing, at least 47% of all Americans, regardless of party loyalty, understand that the election was stolen and Joe Biden is illegitimate. Somehow though, it is still a long shot that Donald Trump, the person who has done more to expose the mendacity and incompetence of the ruling party and institutions than anyone else, will be seated as President.
Every one of those Americans who understands this must realize that this is it. This is the last moment for the American Republic, the last time we will even have a glimmer of a chance of an honest election result, and the last time any opposition to modern communism will be afforded space in the public square. And yet, neither I nor most of you are going to do anything about this situation that might risk our present status or comfort.
This is why I won’t yet act.
Unfortunately for me, the crisis has come either too late or too early. Our family has four young children, a single income, and a base of assets which could be easily lost but probably never replaced. We are maximally vulnerable to the sorts of attacks which collectivists bring against those who fight back.
Even so, if the fight were on, if the majority of Americans who this past election shows are opposed to creeping collectivism were on the march, I would risk it all to join them. No comfort, no wealth, not even life itself is as important as preserving the possibility of human freedom. The hive-society prison which is being built around us must be demolished at any cost.
But when I look around me, I see many people who are paralyzed as I am. We know that the fight for our republic is unavoidable, and that the time is now, but do not see a nucleus of resistance to which we can pledge our lives, fortunes, and sacred honors without it being tantamount to suicide. We are watching and waiting for someone else to be that nucleus.
Most people who have not committed to the cause of freedom are not conscious supporters of modern communism. Some hold out the futile hope that things will all go back to normal, others have convinced themselves that what is happening is inevitable and cannot be opposed. Both are dead wrong. As open struggle against collectivism, communism, authoritarianism, and globalism rises, both of these positions will weaken, and support for freedom will grow.
If you have the courage to act where I do not,
here is what I WILL do:
– If you speak out against them, I will listen.
– If you act against them, I will not stand in your way.
– If they portray you as uncool, cringey, old-fashioned, unintelligent, or low-class, I will not laugh at you or think less of you.
– If they call you a racist, sexist, xenophobe, homophobe, Nazi, granny killer, etc., I will not believe them, nor will I care.
– If they call you a terrorist or an extremist, I will not assume that you are in the wrong.
– When they ask me questions, I will lie, forget, or evade as I am able.
– When they tell me their version of history, I will smile and nod and know they are liars.
– If they dispossess you, I will share what I can.
– If they martyr you, my children will learn your name as that of a hero.
– If you have the courage to be shameless in opposing them, you will be honored in my house.
This is what I will remember.
1. The universities and the class of “experts” and “professionals” to whom they grant legitimacy have no constitutional role in the American Republic. No amount of schooling grants one authority over others, and no consensus among the educated should have the force of law.
2. The guarantee in the Constitution of “Freedom of the Press” is not a grant of authority to the legacy media or to professional journalists. It is, in fact, a right belonging to the people: WE have the right to publish and disseminate views and information the same as those who work for newspapers or television networks.
3. The Intelligence and Defense establishments of the US exist to secure the rights and liberties of the American people. The US has constructed a vast apparatus to deploy force, subvert or overthrow governments, and disseminate propaganda, but these activities are only legitimate when they are directed OUTWARD. When the geopolitical capabilities of the US government do not act to empower the American people and sustain our Constitution, they are just as criminal as the same actions taken by private citizens.
4. Law enforcement and defense against violence is the responsibility of each and every person. Even though we have become accustomed to having these services provided by professionals, they remain our right and our personal responsibility.
5. Education of the young is the responsibility of parents and natural communities. Even though we have become accustomed to having this service provided by professionals, it remains our right and our personal responsibility.
6. Provision of necessities such as food and shelter is the responsibility of each and every person. Even though we have become accustomed to these goods being delivered by a vast and interconnected economic machinery over which we have little control, it remains our right and our duty to provide for ourselves and those we care about.
7. Though peace, prosperity, happiness, and a long life are all wonderful conditions to experience, they are not what makes a human life worthwhile. Humans have dignity and value insofar as they are free agents struggling and striving to obtain these ends. “Treating someone as a human being” does not mean coddling them and providing for them like you would a child or a pet. It means getting out of their way and leaving them the freedom and latitude to provide for themselves.
8. Whoever relinquishes their freedom to obtain comfort or security is not acting as a human, but as an animal. Because our fates are all intertwined, such a person is betraying all of us, and does not deserve our concern or regard.
— Sarah Chamberlain