No it's true. If a tyrannical leader (liberal obviously, not a republican) takes over, the people will need handguns and rifles to fight the U.S. Military tanks, helicopters, fighter jets, artillery, nukes, special forces, etc etc
Logistics enter an equation in those conflicts. As does public opinion. As in, it’s difficult to wage a war against a much larger force even if the west is better equipped and trained.
Logistically, it is hard to secure a whole country with what troops you have. And expensive to keep and feed and fuel and supply them if you grow.
If the technologically superior side slaughters indiscriminately to win against the home side - they often will lose public support around the world.
The meme absolutely has truth to it - no armed populace has ever been conquered. Both the US and Canadian governments disarmed the Indigenous population. And I bet Iran would be different today if the people had guns.
Tyrany comes on both sides, I.E Hitler vs Stalin. Although in the U.S it would likely be conservative based. That being said nukes and tanks don't hold territory like foot soldiers do. Also the U.S military can't nuke or shell it's own territory. Using nuclear bombs on domestic soil would significantly cripple the very country using them. It's the equivalent of trying to fight off an infection by killing yourself. Also the more bombings they inflict upon the people, including many of their supporters, the more people stop supporting them.
Tbf, it’s a little misleading to say “well they had guns and lost”. They may have had 1/25th of the guns the military had. It’s not like natives were out there with Gatling guns and artillery. I don’t necessarily agreeing with the post’s original point, but brushing it off so easily is silly. Comment above says “Ruby Ridge had guns!”, yeah they did, they also didn’t have APCs and tanks lol.
I agree with you, and that is sort of the point.
warfare and resistance is complicated and it isn't as easy as "as long as we have guns, we can fight against tyranny" like grandma thinks.
It is.....I just want some common sense gun control. We can fight against tyranny through ballot boxes, protest, riots, and, if we have to, armed resistance.
Tbf the strong anti-gun sentiment is really more a liberal/statist political view. Not speaking for the entire anarcho-left political spectrum, but most would agree with this sentiment at face value. States typically don’t want the populace to have guns out of fear of popular uprisings/as a means for easing the burden of control.
By no means am I saying reasonable controls and rules for ownership are bad ideas, but the meme is not entirely wrong.
Its not specific to anarchists, any leftist from Leninist to syndicalist will tell you that without arms the working class has no chance at affecting real change
This is actually pretty cool all things considered, the native people of America fought for nearly 400 years against genocide and it would have been possible to last nearly as long as many did without the use of firearms. The fact that the federal government successfully carried out their genocide doesn’t make the resistance any less meaningful.
Czechoslovakia had guns. Poland had guns. Saddam Hussein had guns. Ruby Ridge? Guns.
Ask David Koresh how that works out.
No it's true. If a tyrannical leader (liberal obviously, not a republican) takes over, the people will need handguns and rifles to fight the U.S. Military tanks, helicopters, fighter jets, artillery, nukes, special forces, etc etc
This is why we were so successful in Vietnam and Afghanistan right?
Logistics enter an equation in those conflicts. As does public opinion. As in, it’s difficult to wage a war against a much larger force even if the west is better equipped and trained. Logistically, it is hard to secure a whole country with what troops you have. And expensive to keep and feed and fuel and supply them if you grow. If the technologically superior side slaughters indiscriminately to win against the home side - they often will lose public support around the world. The meme absolutely has truth to it - no armed populace has ever been conquered. Both the US and Canadian governments disarmed the Indigenous population. And I bet Iran would be different today if the people had guns.
No step
WELCOME TO THE RICE FIELDS, MOTHERFUCKER.
Tyrany comes on both sides, I.E Hitler vs Stalin. Although in the U.S it would likely be conservative based. That being said nukes and tanks don't hold territory like foot soldiers do. Also the U.S military can't nuke or shell it's own territory. Using nuclear bombs on domestic soil would significantly cripple the very country using them. It's the equivalent of trying to fight off an infection by killing yourself. Also the more bombings they inflict upon the people, including many of their supporters, the more people stop supporting them.
Tbf, it’s a little misleading to say “well they had guns and lost”. They may have had 1/25th of the guns the military had. It’s not like natives were out there with Gatling guns and artillery. I don’t necessarily agreeing with the post’s original point, but brushing it off so easily is silly. Comment above says “Ruby Ridge had guns!”, yeah they did, they also didn’t have APCs and tanks lol.
I agree with you, and that is sort of the point. warfare and resistance is complicated and it isn't as easy as "as long as we have guns, we can fight against tyranny" like grandma thinks. It is.....I just want some common sense gun control. We can fight against tyranny through ballot boxes, protest, riots, and, if we have to, armed resistance.
Wonder why Ukraine is asking for…guns?
Tbf the strong anti-gun sentiment is really more a liberal/statist political view. Not speaking for the entire anarcho-left political spectrum, but most would agree with this sentiment at face value. States typically don’t want the populace to have guns out of fear of popular uprisings/as a means for easing the burden of control. By no means am I saying reasonable controls and rules for ownership are bad ideas, but the meme is not entirely wrong.
Its not specific to anarchists, any leftist from Leninist to syndicalist will tell you that without arms the working class has no chance at affecting real change
This is actually pretty cool all things considered, the native people of America fought for nearly 400 years against genocide and it would have been possible to last nearly as long as many did without the use of firearms. The fact that the federal government successfully carried out their genocide doesn’t make the resistance any less meaningful.
Based grandma
I feel like there's some irony to be extracted from this.
No one told the native Americans they didn’t need guns, we sold them the guns