FPC, Calguns Presents Clayton Cramer on The Racist Roots of Gun Control

1. Gun control is people control. It can be racist, but usually it is about the elites being in power and maintaining said power. Guns are slavery to the Orwellian State. The abolition of guns to serfs is essential for the creation of an all powerful state.

   • Historically though gun control was used to ensure domination of one group of people over another. Slave owners used gun control to prevent slaves from revolting for their basic human rights. Nazis confiscated guns and arrested jewish gun owners to prevent the majority of them from fighting back once the gas chambers opened.

     Furthermore a lack of guns has never prevented mass murders. Look at the Rwandan genocide. One cultural group forces the other to visually identify themselves (much like hitler did with branding jews), then proceeds a massive slaughter using machetes mainly owned for farming. There wasn’t a distinct lack of guns but any young adult male can overpower people out of their prime with a long heavy object.

     • Oh, it can be racist. Theoretically, Communist states are where all animals are equal, just some animals are more equal than others. Communist states love gun control as well as Socialist states. All states secretly love gun control. Power is an end to itself, Winston.

2. Will the talks be streamed?
   Or at least recorded, including the qa portion?
   I don’t mind the price of dinner but there is little chance for me to make it there in person.

3. The handgun laws we have in North Carolina are a holdover from Jim Crow. It was the state governments way of preventing/restricting african americans from owning handguns

4. Would be great to see a recording of the speakers and the Q&A sessions, if they have them. Doubt that I will be able to drive or fly to the Sacramento area either but would be great to see the videos afterwards. Sounds like a great event. Thanks.

5. Racism is the MOST overused word in the world and was coined by none other than Karl Marx and propagated by Lenin to stifle dissent as it is today. The term in essence holds that one race is superior to all other races and in the extreme “entitles” that race to subjugate and/or eliminate the other(s).

   There are very few real examples of genuine racism on a grand scale. The best known are chattel slavery which began in Muslim Africa and spread to the Carribean and on to the U.S. Then you have the Holocaust in which Hitler, had he known 2 Jews hid in Atarctica would have sent an einsatzgruppe to kill them. The current example is MUSLIM racism which is not a pure form as Arabs are Semitic as well as the Jews.

   This is more a cult of cultural and religious “purity and cleansing”. Islam is the ONLY “faith” that demands the world submit or die. A few modern enlightened Muslims like Zudi Jasser, Nonni Darwish and Brigitte Gabriel speak out under a fatwa and Darwish is now a Christian.

   The term we need to use is BIGOTRY. A bigot shares the sense of superiority ad entitlement of the racist but extends his barely concealed loathing to ANYONE who differs from him and his “people”. Thus there are racial bigots, religious bigots, sexual/gender bigots, ethnic bigots and cultural bigots. The antis are cultural bigots to their cores.

   Ray from Bloombergia

   • I’m with you Ray. We charge racism, and never question what race is. In fact the Jews are not a race. The modern concept of race has a history. The problem is that we read post-colonial accounts of race back into history, but the ancients didn’t even have an understanding of race as we do. The Greeks and Romans categorized people as barbarian and civilized. Aristotle’s text that there were “natural slaves” in misinterpreted, and it isn’t likely his view was typical of other Greeks in any case. It is also overlooked that he said you cannot categorize people by any “accidental” properties, of which skin color is certainly one.

     Skin color was was not to be any defining characteristic until the economic system that was slavery needed justification. The modern term for race was invented after the fact for the purpose of promoting white supremacy. Scientific racism was cooked up for the same reason. But the fact is that racism needs to be taught, and without teaching it to people and defending it by pseudo science. Lacking that it would never have come about, and it would fall away on its own.

     But the dirty secret is that not only is it the Libs who won’t let it go, but many Conservatives won’t let it go either because they think if there never was any there there to racism then that smacks of rationalism and lack of appreciation for our human “embodiment”. Those Conservatives I’m speaking of I classify as “romantics”, anti-liberal (in the classic sense -free expression and such), and anti-modern. There are more of these people than we think. They aren’t “racist” in the common sense of the word, but they want to preserve an understanding of “race” where it is an essential feature of a person, but it simply isn’t. Race is a social construction. It’s a shame we can’t all just admit that.

   • According to the Oxford English Dictionary, sort of the gold standard of etymology, racism was first used in the year 1902, and it was coined by neither Lenin or Marx.

6. Wow. Great panel and the price is right too. A bit of a drive to Sack-a-tomatoes for this socal guy, but tempting.

Comments are closed.