As Conservatives, We Should Make our Own Movies, Music, and Social Media Platforms: I’m thinking seriously of becoming a movie producer

After this week I am seriously thinking of becoming a movie producer for my next big project. After considering the astonishing success of Rosanne’s return to television, the box office take of Tomb Raider overseas—especially in China, the controversy of Facebook data theft and the general liberalism of all the tech companies from Microsoft to Twitter—I am thinking that there is a serious need for a conservative voice in the world filling these entertainment markets. That is the ultimate solution after all. I have all these scripts sitting around from my Hollywood pitch days which went on from roughly 1995 to 2006 that I have sat on for a long time because only liberals were putting money into films. It was obvious to all of them that they wanted to go in this liberal direction and I didn’t fit at the time. But it hasn’t worked out for Hollywood and there are a lot of lost opportunities to make a lot of money and to make people in the world generally very happy. It really hit home for me this week while Steven Spielberg was doing press for his upcoming Ready Player One movie. He is well aware that he has lost his touch, because essentially epistemologically he has change. Spielberg directed some of the greatest gunfights in cinema history in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but he never has since as he found friends in Hollywood that he didn’t want to piss off. He is now one of those people who put $500,000 behind the March for Our Lives anti-gun march which was an excessively liberal crusade. As conservatives feel vindicated somewhat that Disney put Rosanne back on television as a “Trump supporter” there is an obvious starvation out there for the kind of movies that Hollywood used to make, to be made again, and rather than complain about it, some of us should just get together and fill that market void.

As a Star Wars fan I had to get The Last Jedi Blu-Ray when it came out this past Tuesday. I liked the movie and I thought Rian Johnson did some really good work as the writer and director. But, it has epistemological problems with its foundation philosophy. These new filmmakers are just so San Francisco liberal that it gets in the way of their stories. George Lucas when he made the original Star Wars movies was not a liberal. He might have spent all his time around liberals, but he had enough small-town conservative in him to detest Hollywood. When he took a big chance and went to the bank to fund The Empire Strikes Back with his own money—that was not a Hollywood communist doing the work, it was a passionate filmmaker and that effort showed up on the screen. Lucas may have had liberalism on his mind as a Vietnam protestor, but he like his friend Steven Spielberg grew up on classic westerns that were about good guys against bad guys and he wanted to tell a modern story about those ideas—so they followed the well stated philosophy to great box office success. But George Lucas is obviously missing from The Last Jedi and it was excessively noticeable in the bonus footage this time as opposed to The Force Awakens by J.J. Abrams. Abrams at least is something of a protégé of Lucas and Spielberg so he was able to recapture some of that on-set magic. Rian Johnson was simply a fanboy of Star Wars who was a modern Hollywood Trump hating liberal that was taking the foundations of Star Wars and making a progressive film on top of that foundation.

With all the attempts to show women empowerment and to put Asian actors in various roles in The Last Jedi the film was rejected by Chinese audiences, which Disney and Lucasfilm were obviously trying to cater to. All the female roles in The Last Jedi were liberal embodiments of what the political left thinks feminism is all about, and it comes across uncomfortably political, and it certainly hurt the film. Yet Tomb Raider is all about the magnificent empowerment of Lara Croft and she has guns in her movie, and she kills people and enjoys it—and the Chinese went crazy over it rewarding it surprising in oversea sales. I listened to the bonus footage of The Last Jedi and carefully noted that Rian Johnson thinks the Force is all about altruism and sacrifice, and that his good guys in this movie were all about blowing themselves up for a greater cause—he obviously missed the point of what heroics are classically about in movies. Han Solo is one of the most powerful characters in Star Wars, and he’s all about possession, he loves his ship, he loves his friend Chewbacca, and he loves his friends and would do just about anything for them. Even though in a pinch he is a giving character he is still portrayed as someone who has personal value for things and people due to his selfish need to be attached to them. But the Jedi as Lucas and many other filmmakers struggled with are supposed to get rid of attachments otherwise they become like Darth Vader and this is where their epistemological liberalism destroys their concepts. Those things aren’t at odds with one another, they are connected—personal value and heroics. If the Chinese wanted to hear a bunch of liberal propaganda they’ll just turn on the state-run television—so they weren’t excited for this latest Star Wars movie. But with Tomb Raider, now that is something they can’t get in China and they soaked it up like there was no tomorrow.

Like I said, I think Rian Johnson did a good job with The Last Jedi. It’s good science fiction. It’s no instant classic that people will love way into the future. But its better to have a world with Star Wars in it than not to have it at all. I know Rian Johnson is a Joseph Campbell fan—as I am. But I want to remind everyone that deep down inside, Joseph Campbell was a conservative—and very much an individualist. He would often say, “are you the light or are you the bulb” which liberals immediately associate with values of collectivism. Without the bulb, the light doesn’t come into the world, so the value in story telling is and should always be on the nature of the bulbs. When a light bulb goes out, the liberal thinking is that you just unscrew the old one and put in a new bulb and the light continues. But in reality, the bulbs of our lives are missed. At the end of The Last Jedi you can see the struggle the filmmakers have on this very subject—they are missing the light of Han Solo not just in the story, but in the Star Wars franchise itself. You can’t just unscrew Han Solo and screw in Poe Dameron–then have him get thrown around the room by a bunch of girls and expect audiences to go along with things. It doesn’t work, as liberalism doesn’t work in the world because of the epistemological failures of the basic concepts of the story telling process.

I will continue to cheer on the efforts of filmmakers like Rian Johnson and Lucasfilm in general. And hopefully Disney learns something from their production of Rosanne on television. But I think we as conservatives could make better movies, better music, and even better social media platforms. I certainly know I could. That’s why I’m thinking of doing just that for my next big thing. I’m in the middle of one of those big multimillion dollar projects now, but I’m coming up on a time where I want to do the next big thing in my life, and by the looks of things, I may just start producing some movies. Not from Hollywood mind you, I’d do it from Cincinnati. Back ten and twenty years ago that was an impossible idea, but these days, the rules have all changed. So why not?

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

There is No Society without the Second Amendment: Weeds in the garden and why we must remove them

Like we always knew it was, ANY form of gun control is a goal to eventually repeal the Second Amendment as former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens indicated on his New York Times op-ed piece after the March for Our Lives rallies the previous weekend. The same people who support murdering babies before they are born, the same people who support drug abuse, open boarders and have no respect for private property are the people who want to ban the Second Amendment. That is because the rights to possess firearms is to protect ourselves from those types of people as they emerge in any society—which they always do. Only in America we are meant to have a defense against them. Liberals are like weeds in a nice garden. If you don’t remove them from a well-cared for garden, they will eventually overwhelm all the nice flowers and bushes that are carefully placed there and in no time at all, a wonderful outdoor display ends up looking like a tattered mess. Guns are our means of maintaining our ability to clean out our garden should too many weeds arise to take over our healthy plants. Valueless weeds do not have the right to destroy what we put in our gardens that we value. Be it a shovel or a gun, we are talking about tools which allow us to retake what’s ours to begin with, and without the gun, there is no chance of that ever happening if society swings radically out of control.

The 93-year-old Stevens said a lot in his liberal New York Times piece—he basically stated what was behind all gun control measures. The implication is that government should be trusted therefore we have evolved as a society beyond the need to have a well-regulated militia. We have in the United States a wonderful military, the most powerful in the world—so we no longer need a militia to defend ourselves from foreign invasion, so its time to abandon the Second Amendment—and while we’re at it, probably the 4th, 5th, 6th the 10th, the 14th—and eventually the 1st. Heck, why not just re-write the entire Constitution with all these modern smart people like old man Stevens? That’s their assumption. To the liberal, the weeds of our society—they want to live just like any other plant in the garden and if there are more of them than the well cared for flowers of spring, so be it. Of course, as valueless weeds, they don’t have a problem with that.

But those of us who are really smart, who have worked hard to keep this Republic a nice garden full of wonderful diversity and esthetics understand that we can’t just let any willing nilly weed grow in our garden. We must have a set of rules to live by, which is our Constitution which says how the garden should be cared for—and anybody who wants to change it would be the weeds looking to overtake all the other plants for their own objectives. The difference in thinking couldn’t be clearer, travel to some place in the world that doesn’t have a gun culture and you will immediately see on the faces of their people the effect of growing up in a society of weeds. Their intellectual growth is stunted, the beauty of their culture hidden, and chaos is certainly ruling their lives. Even in downtown London such a thought is unavoidable. On the streets of Paris where the highest concepts of civilization realized through art danced on the imaginations of mankind, in their gun less society of today the weeds of liberalism have completely taken over. In Mexico they long ago had their own versions of John Paul Stevens and they have destroyed the lives of the people for any kind of prosperity—unless you are part of a criminal syndicate.

I will never accept a society that repeals the Second Amendment. I will go to war with any political insurgency that seeks to change one word of meaning in our current Constitution. The primary reason is that I do not see any evidence which states that we are a more sophisticated society today than we were in 1776. I have read Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations for which America was founded, and it is far more intelligent than the work of Karl Marx or any professor of economics seen in Harvard, Princeton or Oxford presently. In fact, I don’t think the university system has done a good job at all in the last 100 years of advancing society in any way. By my observation we have regressed, and that is because we have let the weeds take over the garden of human knowledge and they’ve brought with them lots of terrible ideas which is killing all the healthy plants of our society. The great minds that would otherwise be flourishing are being drowned out by the noise of the liberal left starting by thinkers like John Paul Stevens and drooling out of the side of the mouths of modern zombies like Sean Penn and Miley Cyrus.

As I watched Ariana Grande singing and dancing on stage at the March for Our Lives event in Washington D.C. I saw a weed sucking the lives away from the beautiful roses, and tulips of a spring time blossom. In the crowd were many potential great minds locked by the youthful sexuality of a pop star icon limiting their scope in life to her political ideology of collectivism and gun grabbing only to find themselves heading to a stunted existence for the rest of their lives. That’s not a good thing. We all know how the birds and the bees work in the procreation of the human race. Young women present themselves as blossoming flowers trying to attract the pollination process of potential males ready to discharge the ingredient B into the womb of ingredient A. When they are young bodies like Ariana Grande at the height of their sexual powers they attract a great many incumbents to their lairs of destruction. And too late many unsuspecting visitors find out that the tulip was really a Venus Flytrap—and their lives are sucked from them ensnared for eternity by the lures of sexuality—even weeds can look appealing at first glance. Twenty years from now nobody will care about Ariana Grande, she will just be another plant in the garden that will be plucked and replaced with something that will bloom in the spring with beauty as by that time she will have withered away into old age. That’s what the political left hates about capitalism and why they like weeds so much. In a competitive society, people have to always reinvent themselves and work to stay relevant beyond their sexual nature—their primal attributes. Intelligence is the real beauty of a capitalist society. Where weeds just want to grow and take what they can while they can. Liberals hate guns because they don’t want to live in a competitive world—because they require the looting of others just to survive the basics in life. They need to take value from others just to function.

Yet it’s the competitive world that generates all the greatness of society. It’s what caused the creation of iPhones and sent us into space. It’s the difference between an untended garden of weeds and a well-managed landscape. The value of that managed landscape is protected by the gun, as all things of life must have a way to protect themselves from the lazy parasites of existence. All life after all is not valuable. Some life yearns to advance, some life yearns to be parasitic in nature and to live off other lives—thus destroying what’s good in the other. Our value systems give us the ability to make that judgment call—to decide who are weeds and who are the plants in our garden that contribute to the aesthetic beauty of our landscape.

Of course, the eye of beauty is in the beholder and we are all left to our own versions of what type of gardens we wish to grow. We aren’t talking about social eugenics here, but personal preference based on our ownership of private property. If we don’t want a bunch of pot smokers in our garden, we can tell them to go away. If we don’t like a bunch of devil worshipping losers near us, we can tell them to go elsewhere. But we can’t do that if we can’t protect the value of our individual landscapes. We don’t have a right to tell them how to live, but we can certainly determine our own fates and that is why the gun is essential to American society. Without it the weeds of life will certainly seek to take over everything of value. So without the Second Amendment we don’t have an America. We would be no better than all the other dumps around the globe who have allowed the weeds to take over and the good that is within their cultures to be sucked dry of their value just as a withering flower fades away once youth has left it—only to be remembered by pictures, literature and a few passing spectators.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Foundations of Good Government: It’s time to take a hard look at American politics

When a person is in the United States they should have some idea of what an American is. It doesn’t matter what sex a person is, what age or country of origin, an American should conger up some image of a common value system that is immediately recognizable. For instance, there are lots of different people in England who have lots of opinions that differ, but there is a kind of basic foundation of value that all English people share and we can term them as people of Britain. We could say the same about China, Japan, India, Mexico—pretty much anywhere in the world. Only in the United States is there an expectation that diversity is the key to a successful society when it clearly isn’t. And to that effect, Republicans and Democrats cannot live in the same country together and expect it to be run properly at the level of government so long as that American definition lingers. America is a big idea country but the nation cannot hold so many differing opinions about the very foundations of our thinking, as a people. It just doesn’t work and it never will. We cannot have such different political philosophies operating our country and expect it to survive. Further, it is easy to conclude that Democrats do not want America to survive as it has and they only care about changing the nature of the nation which is an assault on those who love it in the traditional sense so no matter what happens, somebody is going to be unhappy.

A common political philosophy is essential to any nation. Political philosophy is like the foundation of a house. With a foundation you know if you are going to have a basement in that house, and what the shape of the house will be based on how the foundation is dug out into the ground. You’ll know if the foundation is made of stone or is of poured concrete—but the foundation is something that everyone will have to agree on who are part of building the house that goes on top of it. Once a house is built people may differ on the kind of curtains that will hang in the house, what color the paint will be, what type of shingles will go on the roof. But the basic nature of the foundation of the whole building is constant and makes everything built on it possible. The political philosophy of our government has to have a foundation of belief that everyone can agree on otherwise building anything on top of it just isn’t possible.

Democrats don’t just want to argue over the nature of the cosmetics of a house of ideas, they want to change the fundamentals of the foundation itself. If our original house of our Republic was built-in Ohio for instance, complete with a basement Democrats want to move it to California and to have a slab foundation that makes the house much less stable but easier to rebuild after every earthquake. They have no intention of building a house on the foundation of our country, they want to change the location of it and change the basic design as well. We aren’t all talking about the same basic philosophy in how America should be run, let alone agreeing on even basic things because our value systems are just too radically different. Thus, there is no way to build a proper government for the people, by the people because all the people can’t agree on a basic foundation of philosophic thought. And in many ways, that is the point of attack that the political left has leveled at the United States. They never wanted to go along to get along. They always wanted to build the house in another place, a different way. They didn’t care to argue variations on a political philosophy such as a paint color, tile or wood flooring, or window shapes, they want a different house of political philosophy completely on an altered foundation and they are unyielding in that demand.

That is why I think war with those people is inevitable in America. We are currently in a new kind of civil war and both sides cannot and will not be able to live in the same house of a Republic together. It’s just not possible. We’re not talking about basic disagreements, we are talking about the most epistemological elements of a political philosophy. Every organized association regardless of the number of people within it requires a philosophy to unite their thoughts. It doesn’t matter if the organization is as small as a sports team, or it’s a community—there must be a basic philosophy that everyone follows. For instance, people know that if they move into a wealthy neighborhood, they will be expected to take care of their property, mow the grass, maintaining their cars and not run around naked in their streets. A poor neighborhood where people are addicted to government services would likely feature people who don’t care about how tall their grass is, or what they look like, or whether or not there are people running around naked. That’s why the neighborhood has a bad reputation because the people within it don’t have a philosophy that is conducive toward success. They are free to do and think what they want, but if they are competing in the world with a community that does have a foundation of successful thinking, they will lose in relation. If Democrats want to change America into something else while Republicans want to preserve the values that built the nation, how can the two function together?

There is always talk about how dysfunctional our congress is at not only the national level, but the state and local levels too. I doubt these days there is any city in America with reasonable council members who are plugged into reality on governing their municipalities. The reason is because they are not formed, and functioning based on the foundational philosophies that drive the capitalism of the rest of the nation. People who do not recognize the values of people who tend to live in America’s cities for instance, move out into the suburbs and essentially are running their own kind of country. This arrangement works until one group imposes itself on another and there is nowhere left to move to. Much or rural California is conservative, but the cities are very liberal taking the state into that direction governmentally and it has had a crippling effect on the state as a whole. They like Illinois have serious debt problems because they have governed themselves poorly in relation to the rest of the country and this is the essential cause of having two different political philosophies running the country. Its one thing to argue over curtains, flooring and paint the way the Founding Fathers envisioned. It’s quite another to argue foundations and the style of a house to live in. Our government could work if all Americans were functioning from a basic foundation philosophy—such as an agreement on the nature of our Constitution. But if one side wants to adhere to that foundational government and one wants to change the foundation of it, then there is no way the two sides can work out even easy problems because their philosophies are from different houses completely.

Before we can ask a government to work together well, we all have to get on the same page, and if we can’t do that, then we need to just admit that we are at war and one side will win and define the nature of America for all time. Dancing around the issue isn’t good for anybody. Pretending that liberals and conservatives can eat at the same Thanksgiving table is nonsense. Going along to get along isn’t solving anything—its just prolonging the inevitable. Before we can work down the debt, and even begin to ask congress to work together—we must all get onto a political philosophy that is built on a foundation we all agree to. Without that, we have nothing.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Wayne LaPierre’s April American Rifleman Article: We should take away federal money from any school who teaches Karl Marx

I get it. Not everyone was born into a nice family in a nice area with opportunities raining on them from access to prosperity. I am very forgiving of people who have a little liberalism in them from starting out in life not understanding the glory of Adam Smith’s capitalism, because their upbringing didn’t give them exposure to it. However, in America, even the worst prepared of anybody can climb to the tops of society if they are willing to work hard enough, and that is something worth fighting for—with guns protecting those basic foundations. It was with those ideas in mind that I was enjoying the latest American Rifleman magazine that I look so forward to each month from the NRA. I was reading Wayne LaPierre’s pg. 12 column titled “Our Colleges are Breeding Grounds for Socialists Who Will Take Our Guns.” I’ve been saying that for many, many years—well before mainstream commentators like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity have been willing to go so far. I’ve been saying it since the days when Ronald Reagan was president—yet nobody wanted to admit to it. Well, these days its pretty obvious and it was a little surprising to see the executive vice-president of the NRA state so much in writing. You can read the article for yourself at the link below, it is quite telling.

All education both public and private shared in common with guns the promise of equality. If guns gave people of all types, shapes, sizes, color and creeds the equal ability to defend their private property—most spectacularly their very lives, education was supposed to give everyone an equal shot at knowledge and wisdom, and it was a lofty idea to make it part of the American experience. Public education is paid for by the American tax payers off the backs of private property, so it was a socialist concept from the start, but of course it was started with the promise of big social rewards—like everything always is. Only in America within the context of our tradition of freedom, there was a chance to truly make education a good thing if students were taught the correct things.

Even for me I was shocked by a couple of things that Wayne LaPierre reported in his article, such that The Communist Manifesto ranks third among most assigned texts in college. I can see that happening yet hearing it as a statistic was astonishing. There isn’t any place in American culture for Karl Marx yet in colleges today he is the most referred to economist in assignments. I can see letting students study Marx in philosophy class along with other thinkers so that they can draw their own conclusions, but for economics, if you are trying to teach students how to function in the American economy you must start with Adam Smith and his Wealth of Nations. Without that starting point, the experience of teaching and learning is worthless. But according to LaPierre Marx is the go to guy in serious study of economic matters and that is actually dangerous.

I’ve read Marx—and I hated it, but I did it to learn how the other side thinks. To wash it out of my system I had to read Smith over again several times just to get the experience out of my mind. I think Karl Marx was an idiot and his philosophy is dangerous—dangerous to the world. I’ve been to the Great Reading Room at the British Museum where Marx worked, and I wasn’t impressed. I like the room, but the content studied there was not the right stuff and no university in the world should be studying it. Marxism is an economic philosophy of class warfare and poverty. It leads to repressed societies in every situation and should never be taught as the thing to do for a society.

I was also surprised that liberal college professors outnumbered conservative professors by a ratio of 33.5 to 1. I hadn’t checked in a while, but this was much higher than even I thought it was. That is a terrible statistic considering that many of our education institutions are funded with tax payer investments. Clearly what is happening is that we are funding these Marxist loving liberals to change our kids into socialists from the traditional backgrounds we instilled upon them as parents. It has been one of the biggest scams of our lives, to save up six figures worth of money to send to these colleges only to have them try to scramble the minds of our young people into this socialist indoctrination. I’ve written many articles about the start of the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Revolution, the Mexican Revolution—revolutions all over the globe and they all start with indoctrinated children not yet equipped with wisdom who take over political parties and destroy countries from within. What I saw in the March for Our Lives rallies over the last weekend of March 2018 were the same kind of brain washed masses taught incorrect concepts in public schools that we all paid for, only to have those kids turned into weapons of war to fight us ideologically in the streets of our neighborhoods. Wayne LaPierre wasn’t exaggerating—our schools have become institutions of socialism intent to change the way we live in America—everything from gun control to economic communism and socialism. It’s a bad situation with no clear way to turn back the damage.

However, I would start by saying this, any school that is teaching the works of Karl Marx should have their federal money cut—because they obviously aren’t preparing kids to live in an American economy. It’s not a free speech right to teach kids to be insurgents against the American Constitution and anything being taught by Marx, or Marxism in general should be considered anti-American in its basic intent. Colleges can teach whatever they want, but they shouldn’t get our money to pay for it. So long as we allow this socialism to go on in our schools, we will deal with a declining society—and its an avoidable situation. But first we have to admit that it’s a problem.

A lot of people, many reading this, have a little socialism in them. I happened to listen to Bill Cunningham on WLW radio talk about how emotional he was that his high school of Deer Park finally won a state championship. Cunningham thinks of himself as a conservative, at least he plays one on the radio, but his alliance to a public school—and all public education in general gives away the socialism that he was taught as a very young person who grew up without a father and a single mother trying to raise him. He’s in his late sixties now, but those emotions never really went away, so much so that several decades later, five to be specific, when Deer Park won a state championship, he felt he was one with the community. Many people think that’s a good thing, but it’s the entry to thinking like socialists. The reason we never deal with the socialism in our schools is because we fall in love with their sports programs and we spend the rest of our lives rooting for those programs long after we’ve graduated. Meanwhile, the institutions themselves have committed themselves to Marxism and the changing of students into radicals to do the work of collectivism around the world.

Yet the truth of what makes America great is not in its sports heroes that might play college football or basketball, its in the individuals who live and work where the cameras aren’t and what they protect with the guns in their homes. To really understand what makes America tick you must get rid of all references to socialism and to look toward the magic of capitalism—and it is the gun that makes capitalism possible. That is why the Marxists in these schools want gun control so bad, because they know what the plan has always been. To corrupt the youth into little bits of socialism until they march in the streets to give away their rights to defend themselves and to turn over their economies to the tenured professors who sip coffee all day and study the works of Karl Marx. Secretly they have always wanted to rule the world and they are taking that chance at the expense of the American tax payer. Now they figure they have enough students under their command to make their move—and they are doing it. Their first real target of course is the gun. They have to get guns out of American society before they can bring Marxism fully into America. They already have most of our population looking the other way by choice, because nobody wants to admit that their colleges and high schools were actually dangerous places destroying the future of mankind. But with a careful study of the students of our modern age, how can any conclusion otherwise be made?

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Forces that want to Overthrow America: Mueller’s investigation, Affairs, and Stormy Daniels back fat

I know I’m coming to it late, but my wife and I have been binge watching the television show, The Americans. Its been on my radar for a while and our schedules cleared enough to start watching it. I am completely convinced that the whole idea for the Russian collusion story is because many liberals came up with it after watching that popular show. I am also convinced that the strategy of the deep state was revealed during the racket ball scene during season one between the lead FBI agent and his next-door neighbor, the KGB super spy. Overwhelm your target into making a mistake. Even though the show is fiction mostly, there are realistic elements to it and it only reminded me just how fragile governments can really be. The episode where President Reagan was shot was very interesting because Russia was terrified Alexander Haig was going to step in and take control of the country which of course wasn’t about to happen. The Russians assumed that things would happen in America the way they would in Russia and even though they had lived in the states for many years still couldn’t get the basic concept of how American life worked. Even as they worked really hard to overthrow it at every opportunity. I’ve known about these spies for a long time, I’ve written about them and discussed them on several radio shows, but watching The Americans really shows things in a dramatic way of how fragile things truly are behind the scenes.

Watching how sympathetic the media was to the KGB spies in The Americans and how the FBI operated on that show, it is easy to see how the plot against President Trump was hatched to force him into mistakes, which I think is why he signed that omnibus bill on Friday. I’m certainly not going to apologize for him. We should have had a government shutdown on the issue, but the enemies of our Republic are applying a lot of pressure on him, and he’s making mistakes that he is designed to take. I don’t think there is anybody currently out there better than Trump who could withstand all these forces. At least with Trump, mistakes and all, we can see just how many bad guys there are out there and what they are up to. When Trump was elected he and all his supporters thought they were playing a straight game. Obviously not, the forces already embedded in America were already too deep to fight legitimately through executive orders and populism. As right-thinking Americans, it was all we had to combat the vast tyranny on full display now except for coming to this fight with guns blazing. If Trump can hang on and keep doing his thing we will see improvements, but it won’t be pretty. Let me just say that. I never thought it would, but I am personally surprised that he has held up this long.

The Mueller investigation clearly isn’t about Russian collusion, it’s just a story that the deep state is using to sell their means of overthrowing the American presidency. As I said, the entire story is meant to align with what the public sees on television, shows like The Americans. The truth is far worse. There are many more forces working against American capitalism than what is showed on any television show—the attempted tyranny and the reasons behind it are far more severe, much more so than any Hollywood writer could even begin to put their finger on. To get an idea about that I’d advise you dear reader to read Peter Schweizer’s new book Secret Empires. He’s the guy who wrote Clinton Cash which proved to be way ahead of its time. If you added Secret Empires to the television show The Americans I think you can begin to see what is really going on with the Mueller Investigation. It’s not about truth, justice, and the American way—its about overthrowing capitalism in the world and literally looting off the tax payers to feed these many empires at conflict with each other on the streets of Washington D.C. Most people just want to live their lives, but these many forces at war with the American way of life—many of them are in our FBI, our congressional seats, and in our media and they want an end to all of it—any way possible.

And they really think we are stupid. Think of the absurdity of these controversies with the old Trump girlfriends. I knew when I elected Donald Trump that in the 80s, 90s and early 2000s that he was the very definition of a playboy. If Hugh Hefner was an old man with a collection of many beautiful women to play with—Donald Trump was the living embodiment of that image. It was the main turn-off for me when he first announced that he was running. But I knew fully what I was getting in Donald Trump and I personally think he should say about Karen McDougal that sure, he had an affair that lasted nearly a year and that he screwed her many times in many different ways. Most men, and women surprisingly, would admire and respect him for it—because that’s how people are. Nobody is surprised to learn that Trump has slept with all these women. He was never a choir boy. Trump fully intended to live a James Bond womanizing lifestyle and Melania knew what kind of man he was, and it took her years to calm him down. He had all these girlfriends while she was dating him and even when he finally put a ring on her finger some of those old flames were still burning, and some new flames starting. I’ve met Melania in person and she is a very beautiful woman, and she’s not stupid in any way. She was the one who convinced Trump to marry her and to move her into a golden palace at the top of the New York social world. And now she’s in the White House after being born into a communist country with little opportunity. Don’t cry for Melania, she knows what she’s doing and she makes Trump a much better person. In a lot of ways, I credit her with his presidency. But she’s not going to go to pieces over a bunch of old girlfriends looking for one last shot at the spotlight now that they are too old to pose for Playboy, and nobody cares about them physically any more.

The media is obsessed with Stormy Daniels because like the idiots in The Americans who thought Alexander Haig was going to take over the country after Ronald Reagan was shot think that the Christian conservatives will move away from Trump if they find out he has slept with all these women. Nobody cares. We all stopped caring about those kinds of things after Bill Clinton was in office. What made Slick Willy such a bad person was that he lied about it. Trump at least indicates that he isn’t living under the weight of shame. That gives him a fighting chance to withstand all these opposing forces. But the media, these are the same people pushing same-sex marriage, loose sex and a life of no judgments, yet they fully expect the Stormy Daniels story to sink Trump. If Trump is ashamed of anything regarding Daniels it’s that she is too fat of a girl to brag about. Looking at her with the lights on and the cameras at full aperture Trump would probably like to forget about that one. But it’s not for the reasons that the media hopes to catch him on. She’s just over his preferred weight class.

We are witnessing at every front a country of insurgents who work in trusted positions at all levels of our social classes to overthrow our nation in favor of something else. They want gun control so we can’t shoot them when they break down our doors once they’ve bankrupted our country for everything that could be sold, and they’ll be looking for the last scraps of food at such a time not caring at all for our wellness. They have already sold us out and now that the heat is on in their direction too, they are making their share of mistakes as well. Trump isn’t the only one screwing up—the hits are going the other way for a change—and that’s a great thing. I wouldn’t care if a tape came out showing Trump in a massive orgy with 50 chicks sucking on him like Karen McDougal. I would care if there were some dudes in on the action with him—that would certainly cheapen him in my eyes, but I don’t think that’s a concern. A man can do those kinds of things with hundreds of women so long as the women are alright with it—which in most cases they are. Women are often willing to share a top-level man so long as they get a piece of the action. But such a man can’t go stick his dip stick into the caboose of some other dude. That just isn’t acceptable. And with that said, the media doesn’t have a story because most people feel that way. The media have nothing to stop Trump which scares them to death. And for a change, it’s a good thing to see.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Surrender is Not an Option: I will never give up my guns, not to the Stayin’ Alive Hogg kid, or anybody……

After watching the various speeches from the March for Our Lives rally, especially the one with the “Staying Alive” kid David Hogg there are a few things that need to be said for the health of our country. It is quite obvious that the people behind the rally have in mind a quiet overthrow of the American way of life. They are clearly intent on being insurgents, and speaking for myself, they are attacking the values I have. When they attack the NRA, I see that they are attacking me, personally—and I take offense to that. Now, up to this point, I think most of us can agree that the laws of our nation are something we can generally agree with. With that understanding we live in a commonly peaceful society free of daily concerns, and I think that’s great. If the police pull you over for speeding, you should be cooperative. If they need to look in your back yard for a fugitive, then you should let them have a look. And if they come over to your house because a neighbor complains about your fireworks on the Fourth of July, you should give them some respect—maybe even given them a hot dog from the grill. If protestors like these anti-gun kids have something to say, we should let them have their First Amendment rights. And we should try to be as fair to as many people as possible. I do not see America as a nation of white people with privilege. Every American born in this country no matter what sex, color, or ideology has upward mobility if one chooses to unleash it and that is a very special thing worth protecting. However, the only way to protect that open opportunity world isn’t with any law, its only with the threat of an armed society.

My new concealed carry gun I decided after watching Hogg speak on Saturday March 24th 2018 is going to be a .50 caliber Desert Eagle from Magnum Research. I hope I never have to use it under contentious circumstances, but I’m going to have it just in case because I see a world emerging for which these little socialist insurgents are looking to change my country into something else and they seek to do it by shaming gun owners into giving up the very defense which prevents such a mass revolution within North America. Guns to me are an honorable device which keeps society on the up and up. What David Hogg is attacking in the NRA as a gun lobby group is essentially attacking me, because I support that gun lobby group to protect the basic foundations of American life. Not as a white male of privilege, but as a way to keep America free so that people of all colors and backgrounds can have a chance at the American dream. Without guns in the background of that protection America simply doesn’t exist. And even if Hogg and his youth are successful in changing out politicians I have to remind him that it has been members of the political left who have broken many laws—specifically illegal immigration and drug enforcement that has openly undermined the American society I love so much. So even if Hogg got his way and outlawed all our guns and ammunition I can say quite openly that I will not surrender my guns to anybody anywhere at any time. And I certainly won’t comply with a world led by people like David Hogg. No matter how many their number there is no force in the world that can make me change my mind. I’m smarter than they are, and so are a lot of people and there won’t be an “oh gosh” moment where a guy like me lives under a flag taken over by insurgents where the meanings of America is changed without there being trouble. I could live quite happily as an outlaw, if that’s what they want. They should be careful what they wish for.

Even as a conservative I am not pro police all the time. I think the thin blue line is necessary for a productive society but I dread the day some officer comes to my house the way they did in New Orleans during the Katrina hurricane and demands to confiscate my guns because I’ll have to say no. And when I say no the police will try to assume control over my individuality for which I won’t yield, and there will be trouble. The police will say they are only following orders for which I’ll have to say those orders don’t matter to me because I don’t have faith in the society that gave those orders. If the politicians who gave the orders to the police were put in power by people like the Hogg youth, then I have to say I don’t support that society and will openly go to war with it. That’s what war is after all, its not about complying with laws. A lawful society is one where people generally agree to follow the same common laws, but liberals of today have openly declared that they are not willing to follow the laws of immigration—they insist on breaking the law with sanctuary cities and other acts of defiance. It was even against the law for Rosa Parks to stand against southern white Democrats and the laws they had for segregation. The law that I follow is the one in the Constitution. Any deviation from that Constitution, any attempt to erode it and to take away the Bill of Rights to me indicates the necessity for a war to protect those rights, and in war there is death. And that will be ugly.

In many ways I wrote my book The Tail of the Dragon to lay out this precise case, when the law enforcement community is not representing traditional America what are we to do? The character in that story decided he wasn’t going to be compelled in such a way to surrender blindly to the authority of the state and as an individual he goes to war with the American military complex starting with police officers and ending with the military. I wrote that book to defend my future self in a court of law for when our society finally breaks and I will be forced to choose. With the Trump election I have a hope that I might avoid that future life. However, living under the changed laws of a David Hogg society is not an option. Even if his youth get what they want and change our society and our gun culture the way that liberals have prodded them into attempting, it doesn’t mean that the gun culture is going to just say, “ah, shucks—here you go. Here are all my guns.” The compliance with officers today is only in the context of an understanding that our society still values the Second Amendment. The minute that disappears, which given the actions of the FBI against Trump has indicated, that time has passed. The weapon I choose to carry needs to be able to deal with all the modern challenges, and these little pea shooters with insufficient muzzle velocities won’t cut it.

The essence of my thoughts on the March for Our Lives rally is that I see it as an attack. If they do succeed in voting out representatives put in place by my gun lobby—because I am the NRA—then the violence that follows will be their responsibility. The NRA is there to protect guns which then protect the rule of law as established by the original Constitution. We know why mass school shootings happen, we know why there are problems in modern society, we know who the villains are. And getting rid of guns will not solve those problems. Instead, it will make America more socialist and much less capitalist, and that’s where I draw the line. I’ll obey the laws as they stand today. But if they change tomorrow, and guns were to be made illegal, then I’d decide at that moment that our society based on historical context is headed in the wrong direction and the only way to defend my life and my country is with a gun—in fact—lots of guns. I’d prefer to live in a peaceful life with other people, and I have shown that I can live well even around people who don’t think exactly the way I do. But surrendering my guns isn’t an option for me. I simply won’t do it, and I have no intention on just sitting around and being a victim. If its war they want, then they’ll get it, and I can promise this much, I have no intention on losing under any condition. The only thing that keeps a truly orderly society is a gun to defend yourself from anything the temptations of power might corrupt in our political system. They must fear what you might do with your guns, because in a world not functioning from the laws of man, or a God who granted rights of freedom to those people—there is only the fear of death which keeps bad people in line.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Idiots on Parade: Coverage of the anti-gun March for Our Lives losers

Infowars did a great job of covering the Austin March for Our Lives event on Saturday March 24th 2018. The evidence is quite obvious regarding the quality of the character of the type of people in the anti-gun movement. It’s important to study them so we can take the next steps. Watch these videos and share.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

There’s Nothing Special about the March for Our Lives Kids: They are tomorrow’s domestic enemies

I keep hearing how special these gun control activists are who protested in the many March for Our Lives rallies across the county—as if this were the issue of their day—that they were the future voters who were going to change it all. There is nothing special about these kids. They have been trained to execute a military objective as designed by the political left. They have been taught with our tax money in public schools to lash out at American society’s 2nd Amendment in the same way that we used to send kids off to war in Vietnam, Korea, and World War II. Over the years we have purposely stunted their growth in many ways to make it appear amazing that such young people would have such articulate thoughts on some social issue, but in reality, most people reach their peak years at the age of 15 and most of the adults herding these kids on television and around society in general are in the same condition. These kids are at their peak years physically and intellectually and they have been trained for this new war since the day they were born. The only people proud of their antics are the Frankenstein creators on the political left who are rejoicing at the little monsters they’ve made the way a mother goes crazy the first time their little babies shit on themselves—“oh look, they are alive. Isn’t that precious.”

What I see as I listened to the many speeches on Saturday, March 24 2018 are a bunch of future zombies who have some distant understanding that they are going to form the same kind of mobs to go to each of our homes in the future looking for food, shelter, violence. I see in them not the gangs in the streets that might be seen in big cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, or Detroit, but the young menaces from The Clockwork Orange prone to violence from years of playing Grand Theft Auto and watching society disarm themselves so that everyone is easy pickings and at the mercy of any mob. That is after all what kids do learn in public school—how to create mobs against those for which they disagree.

In the future of these very same young people will be an economy that will leave them behind. Being taught socialism and demanding high wages for simply existing, those entry-level jobs that were always there for you and I dear reader won’t be present. Robots will replace those positions because too many young people will have insisted on making $15 per hour that fast food chains looking to keep their margins and a steady workforce will replace those workers with automation—so there will be many such jobs that simply will not be staffed by a living person—because too many of them will have made themselves unemployable. So where will these youth, trained in violence and mob relations go to get their money? Well, they are going to rob it.

What is to stop an angry mob of young people from gathering in suburban neighborhoods just as they did for March for Our Lives and instead of asking for gun control, demanding all the food we have, or our electricity. Or even a spare room with an online connection so that they can play their video games? Already when adults live in areas of high concentrations of youth car break-ins are common, sharp words in the streets are frequent, and toilet paper hanging from porches due to vandalism are expected. Young, untested and with what they think are their entire lives ahead of them—young people can go from America’s most valuable asset to an internal villain that is a domestic threat to the Constitution of the United States in just a few short years. Their minds lack depth of knowledge so they have no context to reality—all they know is what they’ve been taught which in this case is leftist radicalism. It’s no miracle that they gathered to protest guns, it’s simply act one of a military strategy imposed by domestic terrorists hungry to overthrow the United States and reunite it with Europe after 200 years of jealous empathy. The only way that can happen and all of America’s enemies know it is to disarm that free country so that the youth can do what the armies of the world could not.

Yes they will be motivated to do so, the young people with many lost opportunities are coming into a world riddled with debt. They have no reason to work since home ownership and even having a car are no longer their prime objectives. They haven’t been encouraged to marry and start their own families and to put up a white picket fence to call their own. There is literally nothing for them to sink roots into intellectually. The only thing that they really care about are their video games and their cell phones, both of which change constantly. A video game played today will be considered old and outdated in just two years, and the same can be said for their phone apps and their Facebook friends which they invest far more into than real people. Take away opportunity, take away morality, and take away the guns of a society and what we end up with are a pack of wolves looking to take everything that America has built-in value over the centuries and leaving it a husk in ruin. Look at places like Venezuela, or even Detroit where hopeless youth with no future at all roam the streets raping and pillaging innocent people and you can see the future of America without guns. It’s what the political left wants, the Steven Spielberg’s, the George Clooney types, the little Arianda Grande chicks—what’s to keep her from licking all the donates at the local grocery in a world without guns? She has been known to do that—the answer is nothing. Even though it may appear to be a little thing, the ability to destroy property and terrorize individuals who are not associated with the latest mob goes completely unchecked and what may appear to be a civilized society today becomes a mob infested landscape overnight.

This future can be seen in any teenage infested house when the parents go for a vacation and leave the home to the youth. We’ve all seen what they do to it—the children have a house party where half the school shows up to destroy the dwelling slowly with malicious sex in the beds of the parents, every room fills with cigarette smoke and the side rooms become drug induced hells as the history of the house that raised that child is ceremoniously destroyed to initiate the youth into the welcomed arms of the mob. The parents halfway know that something like these parties will occur, they feel they need to sacrifice their assets to putting their children into the acceptance of group rebellion—so they go on vacation, do their duty and tell the young people not to have a party, and the moment the plane leaves the tarmac at the airport, malicious young people are in the home taking it over—pissing on the carpet, going through all the treasures of the family in their private places, and otherwise showing complete disrespect for everything the owners of the home worked their entire lives for. The whole “let’s party” idea wasn’t a creation of capitalism, it came from communist run Russia and was injected into American culture by KGB agents looking to infect the education system in the United States with a slow, controlled destruction from the inside out. Fifty years after the radical events of the 1960s the political left have their army and they are on the march for our guns, so that the next step is the overthrow of everything our nation has built, just like we see in a typical house party. The notion of such parties is never good, only a domination of the house culture to the whims of the mob.

When the question was asked many times over the course of the Fight for Our Lives event that we are supposed to care about the lives of these little menaces so much we are supposed to give up our guns. Well, speaking honestly, I don’t care about those young lives, they are likely the people I’m going to have to fight in the future. I can’t say that I honestly want to help them along to be able to gather in such a way where I have to fight them, because that is the only option for me. If I see a couple of dopy teenagers walking in front of my house I find some means to run them off, and they don’t get the point if you ask nicely. They may have the potential to be the next great mind in society, but if they are demanding our guns, and thus the things those guns protect, they will be useless to me in a social context. Hurt them now or hurt them later, regardless, they will be hurt if I have to make a decision between my personal assets or their life.

I raised two girls who suffered all the pressures of public school culture. And we never had an unsupervised house party for them—never. In fact, I did everything in my power—which was considerable—to keep them from making those mistakes just to be tossed into the category of “cool kids.” Now that they are grown up those pressures are no longer part of their lives as they are now mature, but when they were teenagers the peer pressure for group acceptance was incredible and to be a cool parent you were expected to yield to the wants of the mob. The same sweet kids who just a few years prior would come to your kid’s birthday parties with Smurf themes or some other cute pop culture reference now wanted to bring games from Spencer’s gifts selling adult sex toys and to dirty up your children with illicit sex practices and mind-altering substances. And as a parent we were expected to just go along to get along. If we let the mob into our homes to molest our children we’d be spared the eggs thrown at our cars and the cat calls from the streets. Well, I never yielded to those pressures then, and I certainly won’t now. Speaking for myself if a mob of young people show up in my neighborhood, they will be met with great force—and they won’t know what hit them. They’ll wish that life was so simple as it was in the days where each home was protected by the Second Amendment, because if they change the rules through future elections and expect people like me to go along with it—they have another thing coming.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Joe Biden and the Nature of Gun Control: The mobs of March for our Lives

As we prepare for the March for Our Lives event across the country where students inspired by their radical public educations are demanding gun control—Joe Biden said again at Miami University, Florida that he wanted to beat up Donald Trump. As we all know most of the mass shooters in America are left leaning political activists, CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW. This is because it is the political left who are the collectivists and require submission to their group think—and the way they enforce that need for their philosophy is through force. If they cannot inspire violence and thus fear of what might happen to people who don’t join their group, they are powerless. That is why the political left wants gun control and also why they have pushed the March for Our Lives events. It is also why Joe Biden feels he needs to rally the Democratic base with threats of violence against the current President. Trump’s response to Biden was appropriate understanding the real motivations. The way to beat collectivists is to take away the threats and to force them to debate the ethics of a situation—for which they are always at a disadvantage.

The gun debate isn’t a debate at all, it’s an essential philosophy of freedom to live one’s life outside of group pressures. To own a gun is to have the ability to stand against a mob who expects through a democracy to alter our lives against our individual wills. So it is ironic that leftist progressives are advocating marching against guns because it is just such mobs that the guns are intended to protect American civilization from. If a horde of people arrives at your theoretical doorstep at some future time demanding milk, cows, a bed, or even your spouse and children, you must have some means of fighting them off. If one of their leaders happens to be in congress at the time, or the White House, then they will expect to bend the laws of the land to their efforts, and we would all be defenseless at that point to the intentions of the democratic mob.

The assumption is that majorities rule in spite of the intelligence involved. As the rules of mobs go it doesn’t matter if the contents of the mob have an IQ of “0.” What does matter to them is the amount of people in the mob. So if there are thousands of people in the mob the belief is that there is intelligence there which surpasses the individual intelligence of any single person. Quantity matters, not quality—which is the biggest problem of any democracy and why all democracies taken at their face value lead to periods of anarchy only to reset society much later with a devolution back to theocracy. Joe Biden reminded us this past week what the real juice behind their movement is, the threat of violence if things don’t go as Democrats want. They want essentially gun control so that they can have a chance to take people behind the woodshed and beat them into submission. That is the way of the Democrats—it always has been and continues to this day.

Speaking personally, I love to fight—I have all my life. I’ve never been for anything that groups enjoy doing—I have always been happiest on the fringes of social thinking. It just so happens that more of my personal philosophies are at play with Donald Trump in the White House, but it’s usually not that way. I never liked public education because I quickly realized that the whole point of it was to assimilate kids into group think. I never liked college because it wasn’t about learning, but in learning how not to think—or to put it more accurately how to think what the group wants, not necessarily what’s correct. I’ve been involved in all kinds of unique situations and what they all have in common is a love of fighting bullies who try to impose group think on other people. I personally love fighting people like Joe Biden as I meet them. I enjoy driving them into the ground as far as they can go, because I have an obvious dislike for their core characters. People like me will never yield to the pressures of a group—I don’t care if there are 20 million people outside my home chanting toward me to think a certain way. It will never, ever happen.

When people tell you that you must change because a majority of the people here and there think this way or that way, they are essentially declaring war against your individual thoughts. And to me that is a major assault that is something that merits defense by the gun. There are obviously thousands of steps to exercise peacefully first, but ultimately if the other side threatens death or else, you have to be able to respond. Collectivists all essentially believe the same thing, that what’s best for the majority is best for society. The measure is never what the quality of thoughts are for the masses—for instance if the collective associations are all idiots, the merit of the group is still considered by Democrats to be superior—which is the ultimate mistake. If you are a good person, and you work to have a proper—thinking mind—why should I or anybody change that to the whims of stupidity just because the stupid outnumber the intelligent? That would be a disgrace to the human species as a whole. In the nature of human beings, it is the single sperm out of thousands that penetrates the egg during conception where life begins. All the other little sperms that don’t break the circumference of the egg don’t get a consolation prize. They just don’t get the opportunity to make a living being. The same is said about the single person defending their individual rights with a gun pointed toward the masses. The masses are not superior to the individual. They are not correct because there are more of them. And they don’t have a right to enforce violence against others to drive home their theft of intelligence.

Joe Biden said it not just once now, but twice. As a spokesman for his party he is articulating the basic essence of his Democratic Party. All for one, one for all—and if you don’t follow us, we’ll beat you up. Well, finally we have a president in Donald Trump who is willing to fight back against such threats and I’m glad, because it saves me the wasted time in doing it myself. Because there will never be a time where I surrender to any Democrat—anything. They can think what they want, but I am not compelled to follow them, and neither are you dear reader. Yet without that threat against us, they have nothing. They want to believe that by taking guns we won’t have the option to stand against them in the future, so they have used these children taught in our public schools as weapons against us. But it doesn’t matter. A mob is a mob and they don’t have a right to stamp out intelligence just for an adherence to their political ideology due to a lack of other options. They desire to destroy the options so that the masses have nowhere to turn but to the mob—and that is how they plan to always acquire power and how to keep it—which isn’t acceptable.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Mind of Austin Bomber Mark Conditt: My experience in knowing people who wanted to blow up stuff

It doesn’t get the FBI off the hook for all the crimes they have committed in Washington D.C. or the many police organizations around the country who seek to preserve a protective barrier to allow a deep state to permeate our lives unimpeded—but the police work in Austin regarding the serial bomber there was what we all expect. Under great pressure, they did a wonderful job of figuring out who Mark Conditt was, as the 23-year-old terrorist bomber and how to pinpoint his location and stop the crimes giving the young kid no other option but to blow himself up saving us all a lot of money in legal costs and incarceration. The way they captured him was just as good as the fact that they did. Snuffed out of his hideaway hotel outside of Austin Conditt knew the cops were onto him so he tried to leave in his car noticing that they were following. He pulled over to blow himself up before he was caught. Conditt waited for the cops to get close enough before detonating the device hoping that he’d injure some of them with shattered glass, but the wounds were minimal, and the incident ended quickly—and in a good way. You could say the kid went to pieces over the incident.

Yet the most disturbing attribute to the case was something I have been warning about with more frequency. Conditt left behind a confessional video that showed what viewers called an “outcry from a very challenged young man.” From all outward appearances Mark Conditt looked like a nice all-American boy. But like the millions of kids who are growing up now in broken homes where it would be assumed that government schools and the many institutions of human endeavor could replace the need for strong families to raise children, that has turned out not to be the case. However in Conditt’s case, he had a conservative background, got along with his sisters, was renovating a house with his dad and worked at a semiconductor manufacturer. By all outward appearances, the kid had it together. So what could have possibly gone wrong?

I’m sure it will take time to get all the details out as to why this kid who seemed to have it all literally came apart in his car as authorities closed in to arrest him for terrorist activity, but I would add the suggestion that there is a quiet desperation emerging from all young males in this modern world which seems to be handing out opportunities to everyone but young white males these days—ostracizing them in the process with a sense of hopelessness. Conditt was oddly enough homeschooled which is unusual for a violent case of this kind but does bring up some interesting observations. Sometimes it is just as bad to know too much as it is to not know enough. It looks to me at these early stages that Austin Conditt knew too much about the way his future was shaping up and it generated anger in him that he destructively chose to unleash in this devastating way.

I knew a kid like Conditt once who grew up in a very conservative house in a very conservative community who ate lunch with me a million years ago in the cafeteria at Lakota schools. Every day we had a group of kids who sat at our table where we planned to set off a series of bombs on the last day of school in our freshmen year. I was the group leader who pulled everyone together for the endeavor, but my friend was the mastermind behind the various bomb devices. The intention wasn’t to kill anyone, but it was intended to show our disrespect for the education institution we all felt trapped in. This kid was a valedictorian in our freshmen class and at that time had the highest scores in any conceivable testing available at the time. After hanging out with me for the next three years though he dropped down into the top ten in our school because I was always telling him that all that ranking stuff was useless. The thing that plagued him most was that everyone around him, his family, his school, and even the state of Ohio had his life all planned out for him and his desire to blow things up stemmed from a quiet declaration to claim his own life for himself. I think his friendship with me kept him from really hurting anybody. Every day at lunch we planned for this big last day of school event, and when it finally came, instead of blowing up cars and entire buildings it turned out to be a nice compromise of a few fireworks launched by the buses—totally harmless and quite festive.

My concern as the day came near that if we actually blew things up that our entire summer would be ruined with court appearances, so I think what we ended up doing was a good thing in the end. The fireworks went off. People liked them. We all got on our buses and went home for the summer and we moved on. That kid spent the summer with me doing all kinds of adventures and by the next year was a different person no longer angry at the institution itself but was much more able to focus his anger. That lasted so long as we were friends. Many years later when we stopped having much in common to talk about he drifted back to that same self-destructive state. It wasn’t because there was anything wrong with him, other than he was so smart that he didn’t have filters to see things other than how they really were, and that was just too much pain for him.

I see in Mark Conditt a lot of the same kind of thing. He was born into a time when the Christian white male is being condemned in the media just for existing, and it can look to such a young person that there isn’t anything to live for. It also provokes a person to lash out at the system that is blaming him for just being alive. So for those guilty of it, there is a lot of danger in trying to redistribute the notion of privilege from one sector of civilization to another. When it is considered that opportunities are limited and one sector of society or another will have access to those opportunities, there will always be someone like Mark Conditt out there looking to lash out at how miserable their future forecasts are. The real problem is in the artificial limits that our present society has created for people, especially young people. There are opportunities for everyone if we would take away the regulations that prevent economic growth and allow the human imagination to expand our society in such a way that adventure in thought and action would give kids like Conditt and everyone else a shot at the dreams that can be achieved in America—instead of leaving them as hopeless husks of human flesh victimized by the limits of a progressive oriented society.

If we really want to solve these problems we have to deal with the philosophy that is delivering youth to these desperate outlooks. To become a terrorist bomber takes some real commitment, and the energy behind that commitment comes from somewhere. We have to understand that, because there isn’t any regulation on earth that can stop such a desire. Those who think that a more managed society is the answer they couldn’t be more wrong. The more that human beings are regulated, the more they desire to rebel. 95% of society may fall in line, but there will always be a dangerous few who will rebel on any side of the political spectrum. The real solution is in less social tampering and unleashing more opportunity to more in the world. If there is a theme to the violence of human civilization it is in the struggle for the perception of opportunity. Without the hope for opportunity, people—some people—will do desperate things. And so long as that is the case, dangerous people like Mark Conditt will always be out there.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits