We are in a struggle for liberty. Why are we allowing the left to make it just about guns?

The liberty grabber left wants to exploit the language to argue about inanimate objects instead of freedom.

The latest lie from the liberty grabber left is an attempt to smear innocent freedom advocates on the right as equivalent to KKK members, Nazis and White supremacists. The next few days will see them work overtime to equate ‘gun-rights advocates’ with every ‘hate group’ imaginable, simply because they want to keep their unalienable human rights.

This smear from the authoritarian left and their comrades in the media is more than infuriating given “The Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.” The National Socialist German Workers’ Party or Nazis was a far-left organisation repeatedly proven here, here, here, here and here, along with their white supremacist brethren.

The authoritarian far-left always has a tendency to follow the dictates of it’s historical icons Hitler and Lenin in repeating a lie until it’s forcibly the truth. In this case they are cuing up the lie that ‘gun-rights advocates’ are the same as KKK members, Nazis and White supremacists. This is the reason we need to change the debate by changing its terms to one of freedom and liberty instead of inanimate objects of aluminium and steel.

Questioning the liberty grabber left’s obsession with inanimate objects.

• Why does the left always use the word gun in their assault against liberty?
• Why do they call it gun violence or gun violence prevention?
• Why is it gun safety or gun reform?
• Why do they try to avoid the word control in these discussions?
• Does it make any sense to allow the left to exploit the word gun when this is a fight over freedom?

There are several reasons why the liberty grabber left incessantly exploits the term “gun” in their fake news efforts. These also make the case for using the more appropriate terms freedom and liberty, but we will get to that in a moment.

1. People have rights, guns do not

This is reason enough to avoid using the deceptive language of the national socialist left. Subtly couching the debate in these terms yields them a tremendous advantage – one that we of the pro-liberty right convey to them when we also use this term to our detriment.

The left wants to scrupulously avoid the issue of their destruction of liberty, since it clearly puts them in an extremely bad light. That is why they exploit these terms so they keep the debate away from the issue of our unalienable human rights.

2. Guns are scary to some

We do ourselves a great disservice when we allow the left to dictate the terms of the debate in terms of scary looking objects that make loud noises and can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Framing the debate in terms of these objects alienates those who support liberty in other ways, but cannot get past the fear factor of firearms.

Compare the fear of guns with a fear of liberty or freedom, aside from leftists, who want this only for themselves, no one has an issue with these concepts. Couching the debate in terms of liberty opens up the possibility for a number of new supporters for the cause. That alone should be reason enough to frame the argument in terms of liberty or freedom.

3. The authoritarian left is all about control

The same logic that proves that we need to set the debate in terms of liberty also provides the rationale to use of the word control in this debate. Parenthetically speaking, the fact that the authoritarian left wants to avoid this term is reason enough to use it.

• Why do they avoid the obvious connection between the control of liberty and socialism?
• Why does the liberty grabber left smear opponents of their control schemes as racists?
• Lastly, why do they studiously avoid the terms liberty and freedom in these discussions of our unalienable human rights?

There is always a hidden but direct connection between socialism and the control of liberty. Socialism is essentially the concentration of power into the hands of a leftist authoritarian elite. It attains this concentration of power, with never to be fulfilled promises of security and the radical redistribution of wealth for the purpose of centralized control of society – ultimately by force. It can only attain its control with a monopoly on the use of force. Or as Mao Zedong termed it:

“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”

Arms in the hands of the people ensures the conservation of individual liberty. The national socialist left cannot abide the people having this power. The collectivist ideologies of socialism and fascism demand a monopoly on the use of force. This is why the left obsesses over gun confiscation while lying that they obsess over gun confiscation.

The Bottom-Line: This is a fight over liberty, not inanimate objects

A superb article in ‘The Arbalest Quarrel’ made the point that the radical left seeks to get rid of the Constitution, beginning with the second amendment. Kevin D. Williamson in National Review made this case over a year ago in an article entitled: Democrats vs. the Constitution.

Make no mistake, the authoritarian left wants this debate to be in terms of inanimate objects without any rights. Keeping it in these terms lets them side-step any issues on liberty and the unalienable rights of human beings. This is why it is imperative that we stop using the language of the left and frame this debate in its proper context.

This is a fight over liberty. The 2nd Amendment is just the first target of the authoritarians. Allowing the left to frame the discussion in terms of inanimate objects is a major mistake. Just as it is also a mistake to not correct the record that the Klan, Nazis and others are part of the nation’s socialist left.

Originally published on the NOQ Report