Red Alerts is Changing Part I: Why We’re Changing

I’ve been blogging since 2005 or so and blogging on Red Alerts since October 5, 2006. Red Alerts’ focus may have seemed scattered, but the main goal has always been to expose readers to the people, organizations and cultural trends that negatively impact the lives of Americans. That, of course, meant my heavy involvement in politics, but also law and order issues. At the time there was a need in the country for counter opinion to what were essentially neo-Marxist dogmatic social theories that produced most of the societal ills we face.

But almost four years later we live in a much different world.

Or maybe it’s just a much clearer world. When I started this blog the theory was that there was a political debate in this country, that the marketplace of ideas was the battleground where what social conservatives call the Culture Wars were being fought. To be sure, everyone that has followed this blog knows it’s not altruism that drives my many different blogs, but I did believe strongly that while working as a web content developer I was going to add to the discourse, convince people with open minds of the rightness of my rightism. Indeed, I still think in some limited circumstance that may be the case.

But it’s a waste of time.

Western Civilization isn’t collapsing as many social conservatives claim. It has collapsed. American prosperity isn’t in danger, it is over and we are now living on the rotting carcass of economic freedom. We have lost the war against militant Islam, we have ceded Latin and Central Americas to violent communist movements that are building up their military capability for a confrontation with us and we have effectively lost control of the Southwest. The answer the left in this country has to this is to support groups that openly endorse a second Holocaust. Democrats have been caught red handed in treasonous dealings with narco-terror groups like FARC and the Federal government along with the media is attacking Arizona for passing a law that is basically a verbatim copy of federal immigration law that is already on the books.

Does anyone think there is a debate to be had here?

My wife told me that the gals at Feministing are ecstatically happy that there is some new birth control that involves using ultrasounds to temporarily sterilize men. Do you have to be Freud to figure out a woman who is giddy at a scheme where she dangles the reward of unprotected sex to men who have some procedure done to their genitals which damages the sperm inside, and for which we aren’t sure what the long term effects, if any, will be? On her post she even has a cartoon of an unhappy sperm which looks suspiciously like an older man. Is there a political argument to be had here? Or isn’t it clear that this is primarily a psychological issue for these women?

Long time readers know I’m an “Anti” as in anti-Pedophile activist allied with groups like Pagans Against Child Abuse and blogs like Absolute Zero United. I have had multiple people tell me in the past several weeks that I was a fascist for being opposed to child sexual exploitation, many of those people college-aged women. You tell me how that debate should play out. How do you argue with a person who thinks a 40-year-old having sex with a 9-year-old is “not that bad” if they both consent?

And how does society keep running when people like this are becoming teachers?

We live in a world where people who live in cities want to ban fossil fuels but have no idea that without the big rigs making dozens of trips a day into New York or Los Angeles they’d starve to death. We have “environmentalists” who don’t know that coyotes will attack children, or that raccoons eat cats. I estimate 80% of Americans can’t take care of themselves without the complex web of industry and energy that makes their lives possible, and it is this web of industry and energy exploitation that they have helped the left destroy. In 2008 retailers had to ration rice, flour and other grains because there isn’t enough food being produced. In 2009 reports were released that were released that global rice stockpiles were dangerously low. A new strain of wheat rust called UG99 has the potential to wipe out 90% of the world’s wheat.

These are well known facts, yet leftists promote causes that limit, not increase, food production. They want to ban genetically modified foods when GM wheat is the only way we can stop what could be a worldwide famine. They want ethanol production increased when we need all the corn we produce for food because of crop shortages. The people promoting many of these environmental policies know it will lead to decreased food production. So where is the debate?

There is none. The time for debate is over. The time to stop America from collapsing is over because it already has. These people who collapsed the system are one empty grocery shelf away from kicking in your door and killing you for what’s in your fridge.

Now is the time to get prepared. You or me or the Republicans or the Tea Party cannot save America from slipping into second world status. We can save ourselves however. It’s time to start thinking about protecting your family and your communities. The best case scenario for many of us is that, as Russian “scholars” are predicting (meaning would like to see happen), America breaks into regions. At least then there may be a “little America” for you to move to. In reality we’re going to look like Argentina, except more violent and the target of other countries who see American weakness as an invitation to attack our interests.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ll still be voting and keep my NRA membership. But if the Republicans sweep the house in November, so what? It’ll be a reprieve, a time for you to start getting self-sufficient. California just announced a new budget late today for a reason. There will be riots when social programs start getting cuts. And California’s problems are coming to New York, Detroit and every major city where more people are getting some sort of assistance than are paying taxes. Cali came up more than a billion dollars short on income tax this year. Think about that for a second.

It is now imperative that people have access to information on how to survive in a coming world where food and resources will be scarce and revolution of all kinds will be in the air. Red Alerts will no longer be covering the political but the practical. We will deal in self-reliance, self-sufficiency and reports that warn you of actual dangers to avoid. My crime blogging will now be found on Greenville Dragnet.

I will post later about the specific changes coming and want to thank the readers who’ve supported Red Alerts for the last few years and hope the new Red Alerts is as edifying to them as the old Red Alerts was.

8 thoughts on “Red Alerts is Changing Part I: Why We’re Changing

  1. Thanks Rob… I’m really interested in seeing what you’re going to post here, and I’ll be linking the Dragnet blog on PACA.

    Will you still be doing the survival blog?

  2. The states just need to stop cooperating with the federal government. Just cease and desist. Of course, it will take a groundswell from the bottom up for that to happen. There doesn’t have to be a de facto article of secession, all it would take is collective acts of, let’s call it civil disobedience. If the states stop cooperating in the enforcement of federal laws, what can the feds do, arrest them, shoot them?

    If Arizona passes an immigration law, they should enforce it, and if the federal courts rule the law is unconstitutional, Arizona should just continue on with business as usual, keep enforcing the law. Put the feds in the position of waging war on a sovereign state, and see what the results are.

    All states should follow this pattern, as the federal government is by its nature a toothless tiger. It has only as much power as we the people give it. The minute we take that power away from it, it will collapse. Otherwise, their only option is an American version of Tianamen Square.

    But like I said, this has to come from the grass roots. People have to be willing to send people to their state legislatures who are willing to follow their mandate.

  3. Patrick-I agree. But remember Holder was involved with Waco so in reality yeah, he’d send feds to shoot it out with Arizona when push comes to shove.

    Dodia- I’m folding ASB into Red Alerts.

  4. I don’t think he would or could. It’s one thing to send the military against an armed compound of far left religious freaks controlled by a guy who thought he had a God-given right to marry any teenage girl he took a fancy to, and as many of them as he wanted to boot. It’s quite a different matter sending them in force against an entire state, and ostensibly its population. Remember, the key is, a majority of a state would have to be behind this, and willing to send the right people to the legislature to enact their will to do so. I know it seems far-fetched, but really, how much more can the people be pushed before they go to extremes? And what really could the feds do about it?

    Also, bear in mind, I’m talking about a kind of passive resistance, though at the same time, an outer and active one, but not an armed violent insurrection by the state. What it amounts to is the states just simply declare that if the feds step out of line, they aren’t going to obey such federal mandates.

  5. True enough. I’m big on the going Galt movement too. I’m in a position to limit my tax liability if I want (I live frugally) and if everyone stopped feeding the welfare state for a year or two the left would be decimated.

  6. That’s why the right needs to stand behind Arizona vociferously. All this is about is drawing in more Democratic votes. In between them, some business leaders who want that cheap labor, and the Catholic Church looking to replenish their flock, you have a triple unholy alliance that makes George Bush’s old “Axis of Evil”-Iran, Saddam’s Iraq, and North Korea-look relatively benign. I shit you not.

Comments are closed.