In both personal and international conflict, it is important to accurately assess the intentions and the resolve of one’s potential adversaries. Failure to do so can cause a situation to escalate quickly in an unanticipated and undesired way, when that adversary does not respond as expected to a threat or provocation. The bully who verbally and physically assaults a supposedly inferior and easily-cowed victim may be surprised and dismayed when that victim fights back and does so effectively.
History is filled with wars which began when one side misjudged its chances of achieving a quick and easy victory. Germany’s invasion of Poland in 1939; Japan’s bombing of Pearl Harbor; France’s and later America’s involvement in Vietnam; Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait; and of course Russia’s current invasion of Ukraine. In each of these cases, the aggressor believed that a fast and overwhelming attack would destroy the adversary’s will to fight and bring swift resolution. In each of these cases, that belief was wrong and the attack had an effect opposite from what was intended: it steeled the resolve of the adversary – or at least of the adversary’s allies – and the easy victory became anything but. These are just a few historical examples, there are a great many more.
Often, the side which initiated the conflict would not have done so, or would have done so differently, had they known the degree of resistance that would be met. By the time realization sets in, it is far too late. The provocation cannot be undone, and the situation spirals quickly out of control.
What causes an individual or a regime to so badly miscalculate an opponent? Often, it is because that opponent’s culture and mindset differ so greatly from that of the aggressor. The bully cannot account for the anger that the bookish, socially-awkward target has bottled inside, because he cannot relate to or understand the “nerd” subculture. Germany mistakenly thought that Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement and the vocal anti-war movement in American accurately represented English and American sentiment. Iraq operated under the false belief that the US and its allies would not intervene when it invaded its neighbor. Japan thought that they could cripple American naval power and force concessions from a cowed and humbled America. Russia was shocked at the tenacity and effectiveness of Ukrainian resistance.
We are seeing the same dangerous miscalculation in the aggressive anti-gun rhetoric of the political left. Liberals tend to be out of touch with mainstream America; they believe that their own leftist ideology is mainstream, and that only a small and inconsequential minority of far-right white racists resists their enlightened and wonderful ideas to bring about a better, more equitable America. This is somewhat understandable, since most liberals interact only with other liberals. If every one of your friends embraces a similar ideology, it is natural to assume that this ideology is held by the majority. They simply do not understand conservatives, do not understand how we think. For that reason, they consistently misjudge us. A great example is the recent use of the Ultra MAGA label; this was intended to be a pejorative term and a left-leaning communications firm assured the current administration that it would dishearten conservatives. Instead, conservatives have gleefully embraced it, and are scrambling to purchase Ultra MAGA T-shirts, hats, mugs, and bumper stickers.
In many ways, this cultural rift is not only between the political left and conservatives, but also between urban and rural cultures. While there are exceptions, most densely-populated metropolitan areas tend to be predominantly liberal. Conversely, rural areas tend to be far more conservative. This geographic divide exacerbates the ideological divide.
In the mind of the urban liberal elite, all that is required to disarm American citizens is to enact the proper legislation. After all, America is a modern, civilized nation, a nation of laws. If the President signs legislation outlawing some or all firearms and requiring that those arms be surrendered, those nasty Republicans won’t like it but they’ll have no choice but to comply, right? If the Supreme Court upholds this legislation and claims that it does not constitute infringement, that’s the final word, right? If Congress votes to repeal that pesky Second Amendment, well, game over, right? Oh, sure, a few white supremacist, extremist, fascist nut jobs will make some noise, but the police will put them in their place, right? And if necessary, the military will step in to handle those home-grown domestic terrorists, right?
Wrong.
The left does not understand how deeply and passionately conservatives – especially rural conservatives – hold dear those natural rights that our Constitution affirms. We will never surrender those rights without a fight. We will fight in the voting booths, we will fight in the courts, and if necessary we will fight in the way our founders did.
Leftists do not understand the resolve of conservatives to resist their plans for a socialist utopia. They dismiss as ridiculous any claim that heavy-handed and unconstitutional action will result in widespread, armed resistance. They cannot believe that anyone would risk their life to fight back, when they could just accept the inevitable. Why would anyone choose prison or death when they could peaceably enjoy the benefits of a benevolent dictatorship: socially conscious entertainment, an electric car or (better yet) public transportation, and “free” (albeit poor quality) health care?
Even if such resistance were to manifest, the liberal elite believe that it would be isolated and easily crushed by law enforcement and military action. This is clear evidence that the left not only fails to understand conservatives, they fail to understand rural sheriffs and other rural law enforcement agencies, they fail to understand the military rank-and-file, and they fail to understand the dynamics of asymmetric conflict.
In the past few days, we have heard alarming and dangerous rhetoric from prominent leftists, including Senators, members of Congress, and even the President. This rhetoric has included calls to ban and confiscate so-called “assault weapons”, calls to ban the 9mm pistol cartridge, even calls to outright abolish the Second Amendment. It is highly unlikely that such legislation would make it to the President’s desk, or survive a legal challenge that made it to the Supreme Court, but these schemes represent the ultimate goal of the political left: the complete disarming of American citizens.
If this type of legislation were ever enacted, if steps were taken to enforce it through confiscation, the result would be something that no sane person wants to see in our country. The damage would be incalculable. Perhaps the decision-makers on the political left know this and accept it, foolishly believing that they would prevail and that the destruction would advance their plan to establish a socialist system of government. They do not understand their intended victims, and they are making the same mistakes that so many others have made. The quick and easy victory that they anticipate will become instead a storm of righteous fury that will engulf them and the violent mob which does their bidding.
Please, let us all hope that they come to their senses before it reaches that point.