Remembering Patrick Henry:
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
When tyranny is a woman, what then?
It is no wonder that it is primarily women who are opposed to legal arms, for guns in The West are more often used in suicide than murder.
It is no wonder that it is primarily women who under the guise of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) instituted a police state of random stops, blockades, “Papers Please,” and bureaucracy to prevent men from enjoying themselves among themselves without a schoolmarm present to police their speech.
It is no wonder that it is primarily women who engage in smoking cessation propaganda dissemination and other tobacco elimination tactics, while curiously resistant to the math of a bureaucracy which depends on taxation of the very vice that swells its coffers.
The U.S. Civil War was funded by liquor taxes. Were Unionist women jealous of Confederate women for having a field of men who appeared to serve them? (Only the tiniest minority of Confederate women, by the way.)
It would seem that any energy expended in something that does not directly benefit the Feminocracy must be outlawed under pain of incessant nagging. Surely war would seem to be a preferable outcome to their husbands.
It is no wonder that it is primarily women who engage in Health Nannyism of all sorts to prevent the possibility that somewhere a man is enjoying his food rather than catering to the Feminocracy in dull, dour, or “rabbit diet” austerity.
At what point will women cease this relentless drive to enslave men and all women who appeal to men’s rebellious and independently-driven natures?
When women and men are segregated from each other into government harems and cannon fodder, respectively, in the quest for a Globalist Socialist Caliphate? Only the most ruthless in each camp will survive. Then what?