Você está na página 1de 12


by John Walker

Opponents or Enemies?
In any conflict, it is a deadly error to mistake or underestimate the
adversary's capabilities, will to employ them, or ultimate goals.
Around the globe, what was once confidently deemed “Western
civilization” is in an end-stage battle with champions of a collectivist and
statist ideology which, over the last century, has enacted programs of
redistributive taxation, borrowing, and spending whose unsustainability
has now become self-evident and which, unless the present course is
altered, will collapse in at most ten years. Further, the second- and higher-
order effects of these policies have led to demographic collapse in the
societies which have adopted them, crippled capital formation and the
creation of productive enterprises, and been used as a justification for
mass immigration from regions hostile to the culture and values of the
West which have been responsible for its prosperity.
Those who would destroy a society, destroy first its language. As Orwell
observed, when the terms of discourse are corrupted, the corruption
spreads into every domain the language is used to debate. So deep has this
language rot penetrated, that it is difficult to write an essay like this
without succumbing to it—that is the intent of those who spread the
contagion. The present-day culprits identify themselves as “progressives”
or “liberals”. Take a step back and ponder how manipulative this is: if
you're a “progressive”, then you must obviously be on the side of
progress, even though the outcome of the policies you advocate will
ultimately roll back all of the advances in individual liberty and prosperity
made since the Enlightenment; if you're a “liberal”, surely you must
advocate liberty, notwithstanding that the consequences of your
prescriptions will be descent of society into serfdom for the masses,
deemed property of the state, ruled by an unelected, unaccountable elite.
These so-called “progressives” or “liberals” are not advocates of progress
or liberty: they are enemies of them, and the sooner champions of liberty
acknowledge what they are, the better our slim chances for defeating them
will be. Libertarians and conservatives are inclined toward civil discourse
and respect for the rule of law. They must come to terms with the fact that
their enemies—not opponents—are implacable, bent on winning whatever
the cost may be, willing to use any means whatsoever to prevail and, once
triumphant, to deprive their opposition of the means to reverse or even
impede the implementation of their agenda.
They are enemies.

What is to be done?
In the middle of World War II, would it have made sense for Roosevelt
and Churchill to have arranged a secret meeting with Hirohito and Tojo to
try to “work out their differences” and “find a middle ground” where, say,
Imperial Japan would be allowed to keep half of its conquests in the
Pacific? Of course not: Japan was the enemy, and only its definitive defeat
could undo the damage its conquests had wrought.
Enemies of individual liberty control the high ground today in most of the
institutions through which they have made their long march in the last half
century, and they perceive themselves as winning: with every generation
they educate, inform, entertain, and rule, they create more dependent
subjects who acquiesce to their rule and groom a new self-perpetuating
class of elite. They are not people who have a different vision of how to
create a society in which the aspirations of the majority of the people for
themselves and their families will be achieved, but rather aspiring rulers of
infantilized subjects dependent upon the largesse of their betters.
How does one deal with enemies? To survive and prosper, one does not
negotiate with them—one defeats them. There is no “reasonable,
achievable compromise” between liberty and tyranny, freedom and
slavery. One must vanquish the tyrants and slaveholders and ensure that
their spawn cannot reinfect society.
We will never defeat them as long as we view them as “opponents” who
play by the same rules and share the same goals as we. They are enemies,
and must be completely defeated and removed from the political stage.
That is how they view us—they have no desire to compromise but rather
intend to destroy us. Until we take the battle to the enemy with an equal
fierceness, we shall have no hope of success. Here are a few things we can
do, starting immediately, once we come to terms with the fact we're
confronted with an enemy, not a well-meaning opponent.

Reclaim the language from the enemy. We should

have a “swear jar” for every time we utter the words “liberal” or
“progressive” except in scornful irony. May I suggest “statist”,
“collectivist”, “socialist”, or “communist” as alternatives?

Do not trade with the enemy. Do not patronize businesses

which support enemy causes; by doing so you support them yourself.
While an individual choosing not to be a customer of a mega-corporation
has negligible impact, millions of like-minded people deciding to go
elsewhere can. On the local scale, telling the owner of the pharmacy who's
posted a petition supporting socialized medicine that he's just lost your
business and why does have an impact—I did this two weeks ago myself.

Don't be taken in by enemy propaganda. The

mainstream media are almost entirely in the hands of the enemy. Help to
make them the legacy media by ignoring everything they say, not
subscribing to their enemy propaganda. Rely instead on first-hand
reporting on the Internet whose veracity you can judge based on a network
of trusted sources who comment upon it.

Do not entrust your children to the enemy. So-

called “public schools” (the correct term is “government schools”, since in
recent decades the public—parents—have lost all control over them) have
been entirely captured by the enemy and become institutions of
indoctrination and moral corruption which fail at teaching even basic
skills. It is parental malfeasance verging on child abuse to send one's
offspring to these corrupt, corrupting, and nonperforming schools. If you
cannot afford a well-run private or religious school (most have per-pupil
costs well below that of government schools, but of course you have to
pay that tuition on top of your taxes supporting the failed government
schools), consider home-schooling your children, perhaps in conjunction
with other like-minded parents. Even if you can afford it, don't assume a
private or religious school supports your values; talk to parents of students
enrolled there and teachers: if they show signs of being enemies, don't
send your kids there.

Do not become indebted to the enemy. Higher

education is overwhelmingly in the hands of the enemy. One of the
greatest scams in recent decades has been the explosion in tuition and fees,
which results in graduates of four-year and postgraduate programs
burdened with six-figure debt they're forced to pay off in the key years
they should be saving to accumulate capital for starting a family, buying a
house, educating their children, and retirement. This is not accidental: by
blocking capital formation in people's key earning years, they are rendered
dependent upon the state for their retirement and health care in old age,
which is precisely the intent.
What élite universities and professional schools provide for the exorbitant
fee is a credential which offers entry into the ranks of the enemy, and the
“education” they provide is indoctrination in the enemy's belief system. If
you need a credential, shop around and get what you require at a price that
doesn't sink you into debt throughout your peak earning years. Unless
you've bought into the enemy's credential game, where you went to
college will be irrelevant after you've had a few years of job experience.

Do not hire the enemy. Are you an employer? Why should

you pay those who support the destruction of your livelihood? In our
information-intense age, nothing could be easier than determining the
political affiliations and contributions of applicants for employment, as
well as their sentiments posted on public fora. If they are enemies, don't
hire them. You wouldn't hire somebody without a police background
check to make sure they weren't a crook, would you? So why should you
employ an enemy who will use your paycheck to destroy the values you
cherish and spread the enemy's perverted belief system among co-

Roll back the enemy's gains. One of the enemy's key

intellectual force multipliers is the concept of the “ratchet”: that any
movement in their direction is irreversible and that consequently the
debate is only about how rapidly one will arrive at their destination. Those
who view the enemy as an “opposition” fall for this completely—in effect,
their slogan becomes, “We'll deliver you unto serfdom, but later than the
other guys”. This is not how one deals with an enemy: they must be
definitively defeated, removed from all positions of influence, and their
pathological beliefs cleansed from the society. Any politician who speaks
about “reaching across the aisle” or intellectual who grants any legitimacy
to the anti-human, liberty-destroying nostrums of the collectivists is a fool
at best and a collaborator at worst. Failing to acknowledge that an enemy
is an enemy is to preemptively surrender.
We do not compromise with enemy politicians; we defeat them, regardless
of the political party from which they hail. If they're enemies of freedom
and the other party's candidate is worse, challenge them in the primary.
We do not consent to enemy occupation of the media. These are
businesses, and we will withdraw our support from them by letting
subscriptions lapse and withdrawing advertising from them. This will
provoke a “circulation collapse” death spiral for them. All public funding
and subsidies for media must be defeated.
We choose not to fund enemy occupation of our educational institutions.
All taxpayer-supported institutions must have their funding made
contingent upon abolition of tenure (from kindergarten through university
professorships) and retention based upon objective measures of merit by
third parties outside the academic system.
In the U.S., many state judges are elected; Federal judges are not, and
have lifetime tenure. But their courts are funded by the legislature, which
can abolish them with the consent of the executive. Abolish abusive and
misbehaving courts, and create new ones, and let that serve as a lesson to
those who would legislate from the bench.

Dealing with the enemy

Over the last century, much of the enemy's success has been due to the
partisans of individual liberty being unwilling to acknowledge that their
opponents are implacable and ready to resort to any tactic that advances
their cause. “I won't stoop to their level” is simultaneously staking out the
high ground and then preemptively surrendering it to the enemy. Now, I
am not suggesting that we do “stoop to their level”, but rather
acknowledge that the enemy's tactics have been working, and that they
must be countered head-on, not around the margins. We must do this in a
manner consistent with our morality and respect for the truth, but keeping
in mind that the enemy operates under no such constraints.
With elected politicians, there must be no compromise whatsoever with
the enemy, and enemies in elected offices must be forced, through
strategic votes, to disclose their true beliefs and agendas, then defeated by
candidates who call them out on the pernicious consequences of the
enemy policies they advocate. As enemies are removed from elected
office, policies can be adopted to identify and replace enemies in the
judiciary, state-funded educational institutions, and taxpayer-supported
cultural institutions. Complete deregulation of all media will allow the
market to sort out the messages people choose to hear.
I am certain this paper will be denounced a “strident” and “divisive”.
Bring it on—it is both, and that is precisely my intent! If I had changed the
introduction and globally replaced a few words in the body of the
document, this screed could seamlessly slot into what passes for polite
discourse in the fever swamps of the collectivist slavers. You may find it
distasteful to look upon them as “enemies”, but that's how they see you,
and they have no difficulty whatsoever talking about silencing you,
removing you from positions of influence, and shutting down the means
by which you organize.
We believe in a multitude of voices speaking in a free arena, with the best
argument winning. The enemy believes in an echo chamber where only
their message is heard. This conveys upon them an asymmetric advantage,
where we're inclined to let them speak in favour of shutting us up. Fine:
we should not sacrifice our principles, but at the same time we must come
to terms with the fact that they are the enemy, and must be defeated and
dispersed in disarray, not accommodated, lest we forfeit everything in
which we believe.

Enemies and allies

In identifying the enemy, it is crucial to distinguish the enemy: the
collectivist/statist ruling class and its partisans in the media, academia, and
rent-seeking crony capitalist industries and financial institutions, from the
electorate who support enemy politicians. We should view those voters
not as enemies, but allies we haven't yet recruited. Most voters pay little
attention to politics and have little appreciation for the consequences,
social and economic, of policy choices. This is not so much due to
laziness, but rather rational ignorance: since a single vote has a negligible
chance of influencing the outcome of an election, a rational voter will
spend a negligible amount of time investigating the candidates and
researching the consequences of the policies they advocate.
Consequently, elections often turn on the amount of money candidates can
raise, the extent they can attack their opponents with negative advertising,
their hair styles, and what party the parents of the voter preferred, as
opposed to substantive issues. You may find this dismaying, but there is
abundant evidence that this is the fact. In addition, enemy occupation of
education and media ensures that the bias of voters who do not choose to
independently inform themselves will be toward enemy candidates. This
was the premise of an underappreciated 2008 book which breathlessly and
approvingly forecast the calamity the recent enemy resurgence has
brought upon us.
These uninformed and unengaged voters are not the enemy, but it is their
votes which bring the enemy to power. So we must approach them as
potential allies, to whom we must explain the ultimate consequences of the
policies of the enemy to themselves and their families, and why it is in
their own self-interest to defeat the enemy. The present situation is
sufficiently dire that one need no longer appeal to long-term arguments
such as Hayek's in The Road to Serfdom: the apocalypse so ardently
desired by the enemy, as it will present the ultimate crisis to be exploited
to secure their power, is now just a few years away, and this is evident to
anybody acquainted with the numbers.
Our goal must be to defeat the enemy. In a democratic society, this means
apprising those who vote the enemy into power of their true nature,
breaking the hold of the enemy media on the populace, and reversing
enemy infiltration of education. The enemy strategy depends upon an
uninformed, unengaged, and passive electorate. We must turn this around
by communicating, by all means possible, the true nature of the enemy and
the cataclysmic near-term consequences of their triumph.

by John
Walker http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/enemies/
April 15th,
Respectfulness vs. Civility
Fourmilab home page

--The ENEMY within Living it up all on the taxpayers’ expense.