Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Montana Threatens Secession & The Spartan Women

The Spartans used to say that "men start wars, but women end them." It seems to work for gang members. According to the Lysistrata by Aristophanes if they were sufficiently angered, women could use sex to show the "foolish men" who were the supreme rulers of the democratic world. In his words, "what they could not win through force of arms, they would win through their thighs."

Not exactly politically correct reading.

All it points to is that women ARE a primordial force of nature.

I suggest that that needs to occur in Montana soon to prevent the state's secession from the Union.

Who would have ever guessed how pissed off Montana gets when someone threatens its citizens right to own guns......and following their March declaration and warning to the supreme court, their Supreme Court Justice warned us all that 1984 is here....

First lets parse an excerpt from the full transcript of Montana Supreme Court Justice James Nelson's opinion:

I feel the pain of conflict, however. I fear that, eventually, we are all going to become collateral damage in the war on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever war is in vogue at the moment. I retain an abiding concern that our Declaration of Rights not be killed by friendly fire. And, in this day and age, the courts are the last, if not only, bulwark to prevent that from happening.

In truth, though, we area throw-away society. My garbage can contains the remains of what I eat and drink. It may contain discarded credit card receipts along with yesterday's newspaper and junk mail. It might hold some personal letters, bills, receipts, vouchers, medical records, photographs and stuff that is imprinted with the multitude of assigned numbers that allow me access to the global economy and vice versa.

My garbage can contains my DNA.

As our Opinion states, what we voluntarily throw away, what we discard--i.e., what we abandon--is fair game for roving animals, scavengers, busybodies, crooks and for those seeking evidence of criminal enterprise.

Yet, as I expect with most people, when I take the day's trash (neatly packaged in opaque plastic bags) to the garbage can each night, I give little consideration to what I am throwing away and less thought, still, to what might become of my refuse. I don't necessarily envision that someone or something is going to paw through it looking for a morsel of food, a discarded treasure, a stealable part of my identity or a piece of evidence. But, I've seen that happen enough times to understand--though not graciously accept--that there is nothing sacred in whatever privacy interest I think I have retained in my trash once it leaves my control--the Fourth Amendment and Article II, Sections 10 and 11, notwithstanding.

Like it or not, I live in a society that accepts virtual strip searches at airports; surveillance cameras; "discount" cards that record my buying habits; bar codes; "cookies" and spywear on my computer; on-line access to satellite technology that can image my back yard; and microchip radio frequency identification devices already implanted in the family dog and soon to be integrated into my groceries, my credit cards, my cash and my new underwear.

All I can say is wow. This kind of opinion is what you would expect from reading this site.....NOT from a Justice of a State's Supreme Court, it is the kind of opinion that Steve belts out like my rendition of Elton John love songs when I am a few sheets to the wind in a Japanese karaoke bar.
And now on to an even more explosive excerpt from the March 2008 Idaho Observer with the full text here:

Montana Warns U.S. Supreme Court:

On, Friday, February 22, the State of Montana warned the U.S. Supreme Court that it must uphold the Second amendment as an individual right in Heller or failure to do so would place Montana in violation of its compact with the United States.


The legislature of the state of Montana reasoned in the resolution that, "when the Court determines in Heller whether or not the Second Amendment secures an individual right, the Court will establish precedent that will affect the State of Montana and the political rights of the citizens of Montana; when Montana entered into statehood in 1889, that entrance was accomplished by a contract between Montana and the several states, a contract known as The Compact With The United States (Compact), found today as Article I of the Montana Constitution" and, that it was understood, as Montana entered the Union with the Constitution approved by President Harrison in 1889, the "right" for "any person" to bear arms, "[was]clearly intended as an individual right and an individual right deemed consistent then with the Second Amendment by the parties to the contract..."

Therefore, the 60th Montana Legislature resolved,

1. That any form of 'collective rights' holding by the Court in Heller will offend the Compact; and

2. That the Second Amendment and the Montana right to bear arms are both statements securing a preexisting right from government interference, and do not confer any boon of government upon the people; and

3. The level of review for the Montana right to bear arms and for the Second Amendment are specified within those declared rights—'shall not be infringed' for the Second Amendment,and 'shall not be called in question' for the Montana right to bear arms;

4. Montana reserves all usual rights and remedies under historic contract law if its Compact should be violated by any collective rights' holding in Heller..."

The resolution by Montana is the strongest warning from a state threatening secession to date.

The generally peaceful, "Big Sky"state has a very active gun culture that has influenced the legislature to stand in support of an individual's right to keep and bear arms.

Holy shit! This is not exactly what I would expect from peace loving big sky country.... but hell, if you have the power use it right? Well, that is what the Montana legislature is doing.... though I never knew they were THAT upset, their eloquent defense of the 2nd Amendment makes me want a T-shirt that says,


"HOT CHICKS WITH LOTS OF GUNS" and on the back,



or even better "CHINESE RED ARMY WOMEN, I SURRENDER" and on the back,


Good God....for a peace loving , libertarian and diplomatic type of guy I am not sure which I want more- to be Interrogated by Army Girls, Surrender to the Women of the PLA, or be Conquered by Montana Mountain Women.

Any one of these is an acceptable alternative as long as it ends in procreation.

Any one of these women could keep me as a docile home husband, forever.

Guns notwithstanding.

You heavily armed Amazons have me under your spell.

I am so totally Gynaikokratumene, a Greek word which roughly translates to "reigned by women," that you can do with me whatever you want.....

Perhaps it is like Ovid said, "Whether they give or refuse, it delights women just the same to have been asked" that is especially true when they happen to be standing over you with an AR-15 laser sighted on sensitive areas, the optional grenade launcher primed, while dressed in dragon skin body armor with camouflage fatigues, combat boots and a standard issue helmet.

Real Amazons.....God it makes me swoon with love.

You know what I mean when women get that glimmer in their eyes that makes Jack Bauer look like a girl scout- even if you are not honest enough or too politically correct to admit it, you know you love it.

Or when they spend their weekends licking dangerous bladed weapons at a crazy party with Mick Jagger's wife.

I could go on, but let me end this ode to the war maidens I love so much here before it becomes a lame rendition of Ars Amatoria.

And while Montana mulls over its course and expresses its State's rights and sends its messages to the Federal Government over the egregious actions it is upset with- aside from exposing my preference for and unconditional surrender to gun toting mamas, all it proves to me is that the Spartans were right all along.....

Women Rule.

(h/t to Derek for the story & to the entire World's Army Women)


Delaware Watch said...

It's difficult to see the connection between Montana's threatened secession from the US and your fantasy about FemDoms the autonomous self (although ironically and, tellingly, necessarily conceptualized and presented in the utterly communal medium of language) only to find a Libertarian almost pornographically extinguishing his self in submission to an imagined gun-toting Amazon goddess.

But I'm not the least bit surprised. When any political philosophy tenaciously tries to stamp out one pole of human experience & human nature (in the case of Libertarians, self-as-instantiation-of-the -communal)it invariably produces what Jung called the Shadow.

One of the features of the intrusion of the Shadow is its intrusion lacks the symmetry and fit in what is intended to be presented consciously.

And so we see a Libertarian writer starting out on a matter of personal and states rights suddenly and awkwardly seized by a motif and archetype (your uniformed FemDom figure)who makes others surrender all their rights by force.

I repeat, it's not the least bit surprising you found the image irresistible.

Nevertheless, posts like yours does my heart good. It makes me glad I am a social democrat and don't have to experience the severity of repressing the communal for the individual or equality for liberty (or visa versa in the case of Marxist socialists).

Admittedly, it is not always easy to tell where the weight lies in some situations & w/ some issues regarding the legitimate claims of a community or personal liberty. The adjudications can get nuanced and often don't lend themselves to the excitement that comes from sloganeering.

But at least dealing consciously and deliberately w/ the legitimacy of both poles doesn't come out all twisted and weird-like, as in the images of women-as-lone-shooters and as a film of female Maoist soldiers marching in lock-step as part of the people's army.

The toll required to deny the word "self" has a legitimate plural must be tremendous.

Brian said...


Try laughter....lolz.... there is a world of difference between the libertarian left, which I discussed before and the objectivist Ayn Rand libertarian who I am consciously teasing; I have no problem with the issues of liberty and equality as a libertarian who follows the classical models of Solon, Jefferson and the Greeks.

I am glad you made the connection and saw it for what it was....and in my own twisted humorous way I am very glad you were able to see through it. Try my article about Bolivia, and you will see it is very hard to pin this way of thinking down as it is to pin down a bird in a Zen kind of way....

I am just a little disappointed you did not see the tag that said satire. And what of it if I like Amazon chicks....you ever meet one?

Thank you for pointing out myfreaky shadow man....

Anonymous said...


I hate to bust the bubble, but I'd like to to see your analysis of why Fidel likes chicks with guns too.


Brian said...

No Dana is right, I like chicks with guns.

Delaware Watch said...

My guess would be that Fidel fantasizes about women on Wall Street raiding corporations. :)

Brian said...

What I meant is that I like to write about all those types of women...and ladyboys...but none of that is very tame and very little of it comes from my classical education.

It comes from living with people in a communal setting where there is an actual and stunning amount of diversity which is tolerated between individuals and within the community without any judgment. One famous anthropologist called it, a "loose-close social network system" it gives the individual seemingly total freedom within severely strict limits. It is not a “western” culture but a mixture of individual freedom and strict obedience.

If you define “western” culture as the puritanical witch hunt that the neocons seem to think it is or the narrow social limits of what is “acceptable” I would typically say you are not using your mind analytically enough to embrace the diversity of the world in your thinking. Only the Libertarian philosophy does that.

In fact where I lived, even the limited view of individual freedom we have here was called into question as a society that monitors your "social progress" or engineers your "social response" is considered a violation of the individual social compact of freedom.

But in a later post I want to bring up this problem of how to deal with states rights and angry men without the implied or real use of violence.

In this case I was thinking of a scene from famous Thai historical drama where when the army comes to the renegade province of Chang Mai, the first thing the native people do is send out is all the women with gifts for the soldiers and they wind up pacifying each other without ever fighting and it allows the political and physical survival of Chang Mai and keeps the King's army intact.

In the case of Montana, I would argue that the Schwarzenegger should send a legion of women from California to intermarry and pacify the state. :)