The Line in the Sand

Reviewing a post from July over at The Smallest Minority, and the subsequent comments, one person suggested that the "line in the sand" should be deliberately ill-defined. He cited the example of the U.S.'s employment of nuclear weaponry.

This is an unfortunately common viewpoint amongst those who criticize the self-described "Three Percent." Yes, we should have a "line in the sand," but we shouldn't TALK about it, because that will encourage the enemy to test it, I assume.

This idea is built from a fatal fallacy, namely that which holds that vague threats are efficient.

For those of us who might have been bullied as children, let me ask you a question. Did you ever counter a bully's taunts with a vague "Stop, or else?"

What happened?

That's right, laughter. Maybe an "or else, what?" But the taunting probably continued, probably with renewed vigor.

There are two ways to beat a bully. The first is to be thoroughly disinterested. Look at them like a pathetic leper and go about your business.

The second is to stand up to the bully, tell him where the buck stops, and have what it takes to back it up.

You see, vague threats only work when they are credible. Without this credibility, you're a 90-pound nerd trying to look tough for the cute girl. No one's going to believe you, and no one's going to get off your back.

Gun owners are incredible. We fight amongst ourselves, some of us are willing to sacrifice others for the sake of being on the winning side. The government certainly does not believe that we might actually SHOOT BACK! Hah! These backwoods cousin-fuckers are all talk!

There are two ways to beat this bully. Only two.

The first is to stop giving them your lunch money, and just look at them like the leeches that they truly are. Talk to their girlfriend, eat at whatever table you want. Buy that unregistered Title II. Make one yourself. Forget about certain taxes. Pay under the table.

The second is to say to them, "This is IT. You're going to back off, you worm."

But if you do that, you have to be willing to back it up. That, I think, is the real problem with the "pragmatists." They're not willing to back it up.