Written to Brynn Tannehill--
Her detailed response (you can skip down to her conclusions in large type if you like):
"Populist conservative".
Ok, fascism is a type of populist conservatism, and Nazi-ism was an example of fascism. So we're off to a great start here. 2/n
"folks like me want more guns."
Seems like if 400 million guns (one for every man woman and child in the US)_ and 20 million assault rifles (more than all the personal weapons built by the US in WWII) isn't enough to fix our problems, more probably won't help. But what for? 3/n
"I don't trust people like you. I distrust your motives and beliefs."
People cannot seem to fathom that my biggest political motivation is to have a functioning democracy, like New Zealand, where votes matter, civil rights are ensured, and public will prevails. 4/n
The US is currently none of these. As one friend put it, the US is "50 squabbling developing-world nations in a trench-coat with a military budget big enough to take on God."
So, what do we need all these guns for anyway according to this guy? 5/n
"It is time for a national divorce."
Ok, are we talking about a "soft break" where states take SCOTUS rulings as advisory in nature and we devolve into confederation like the EU, or is he talking about a hard break, which is basically impossible for a gazillion reasons? 6/n
"You leftists are not my fellow Americans."
Okay, yep, it's the latter and this guy is on board with the Claremont Institute. They need weapons to kill their enemies in a second, bloody, civil war that involves driving out the "Non-Americans". So, Rwanda Part Deux. Not great 7/n
"I no longer wish to reside in the same polity as you."
Ok, props for using "polity" more or less correctly. But this is an open declaration that the goal is to kill or drive out not only LGBT people, but anyone who disagrees with him. 8/n
It's an open rejection of a pluralistic society, and embrace of conformity at the end of a gun.
You know, fascism.
For the record, I want a pluralistic society where we accept differences and try to accommodate everyone, including this guy. 9/n
"This is the peaceful path forward."
Clearer version: leave or we will kill you, with or without state approval. Getting real Kristallnacht vibes here. Totally not fashy at all.
It ignores that urban areas in red states can be deep blue. 10/n
Are you going to depopulate Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston? Or round up the intellectuals there and shoot them like it's the Khmer Rouge in the early days of their regime? How will you function without college educated people?
Not sure he's thought this through. 10/n
"Once leftists reside in their own nation, they can ban all guns."
He presumes I (and other people who aren't fascists) want to ban all guns. First, it's not feasible. Second, and how most countries do it, is regulations to keep them in proper hands. 11/n
Training, storage, registration, annual refreshers, laws about universal checks, eliminating loopholes like private sales, etc... For things like assault rifles, you could introduce requirements like those placed on fully automatic weapons or silencers. 12/n
All of these, plus other steps, would likely reduce the number of gun deaths in the US without an outright ban (which would be nearly impossible to implement given that nothing is registered, and all gun sales are only recorded on paper. 13/n
The Low-Tech Way Guns Get Traced
There is one place in the country where a law enforcement agency can trace a gun found at a crime scene back to a buyer: the ATF's National Tracing Center in West Virginia. But the tracing process is …
https://www.npr.org/2013/05/20/185530763/the-low-tech-way-guns-get-traced
"You need armed police to suppress future revolts."
The people who have looked at what a civil war and national divorce would look like (@StephenMarche and @bfwalter) and I agree: right wing gun nuts would likely fuel insurgency in blue states post break-up. 14/n
In functioning democracies without so many guns (and fascists) protests are largely peaceful, and many police don't usually have guns, because they frankly aren't needed. I'd like policing in the US to look like it does in functioning democracies. 15/n
"Become a proponent for national divorce."
No. Not only because it's functionally impossible (even the NR thinks so), but because you (by your own admission), and people like you, intend to drive out or murder the millions who get left behind. 16/n
National Divorce Is a Poisonously Stupid Idea | National Review
Quitting on America should be unforgivable.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/10/national-divorce-is-a-poisonously-stupid-idea/
This email tends to confirm a lot of what I have been trying to impart on the public for years:
* This is a violent fascist movement
* They want an end to democracy
* Their long term goal is to drive out or kill opposition
* Guns are a tool to implement their vision 17/n
* He fundamentally doesn't understand and distrusts where people like me want the country to go (I want something like New Zealand, not the PRC)
* He does not see opposition as Americans (Levitsky and Ziblatt commented on this). 18/n
* It fundamentally rejects the notion of a pluralistic society where there is space for basically everyone who agrees to play by the rules and uphold democratic norms (FWIW: there's a lot of Mormons in NZ, and they're not threatening a bloody civil war) 19/n
* It fundamentally rejects democracy as a means by which to make legal and policy decisions. Instead, "populist conservative" people with guns get to decide these matters because they dislike the direction culture is taking. 20/n
All in all, the email was incredibly informative, just not in the way the author probably intended: because it has helped me explain to a much larger audience, in their own words, what the conservative movement today is all about. 21/n
