TINVOWOOT

Demand their resignation? Or they get a time out? They have control of the most powerful nation that has ever been. They are not letting go, if they do their lives are over.

Not coming. No one is coming to save you. It’s going to be a disorganized resistance. A 4th generation warfare guerrilla conflict.

Exring, your question relating to “where is our leader?; provided me an opprotunity to write a few comments that I have relating to the subject. No disrespect is intended. It is just my thoughts, about the requirement of a leader to address the current situation we find ourselves in, where freedom and property rights are on the decline.
History is really interesting and it should be our guide. History shows us that very small, decentralized units, using non-electronic communication methods are highly effective, and almost impossible to detect and neutralize. The smaller the unit the better. A small unit has less chance of being compromised by loose lips.
Two books that I would recommend reading that show the effectiveness of very small units are:

1. Unintended Consequences by John Ross. This is a great book, and I am sure many people that visit this site have read it. John Ross begins the book slowly weaving the treads that will come together to form a fascinating story of a highly effective, decentralized, small unit, resistance to unconstitutional federal acts.
2. Jack Hinson’s One-Man War by Tom C. McKenny. This book is not really a novel, but instead it is the historical story of Jack Hinson’s war on the Union Army. The book was recommended by Matt Bracken on a podcast with Fernando Aguierre’s The Modern Survivalists. It is also on the Abbeville Institute’s reading list. The book is a really fascinating. Of course, it was during a time when men were more independent, and did not ask for group approval to act. An interesting point is that General Grant was a guest at Jack’s house.

A question continues to be asked is; Where is our leader? This is a good question that needs to be addressed. Is a centralized leader required? Possibly, at some point, but I am not sure. The reason I question the viability of a centralized leader, is primarily because history confirms, that the majority of man’s leaders tended to betray their followers. Yes, I realize that there have been exceptions, however, the fact remains, that the exceptions, were just that, exceptions. The Tea Party was a good example of the leaders that betrayed their followers. The leadership of the Republican Party, has an exceptionally long history of betraying its followers, yet, many conservatives still vote for the betrayers. They justify voting for the betrayers by stating that they are voting for the lesser of two evils. How is that strategy working out for freedom and personal property rights?
I believe most people require a leader and structure to provide them with actions and orders to take. In short, they require an organized leadership structure, because they lack strategic, tactical and planning competencies. Many, but not all, ex-military personnel suffer from a lack of organized structure when they are no longer part of the military.
The lack of a centralized leadership structure is both a strength and a weakness. But, keep in mind, a centralized leadership and organizational structure is the communist / globalist paradigm.
Jack Hinson, operating alone during Linclon’s war made the Union Army suffer, to such an extent, that General Grant had to assign 9 regiments to find and kill him. Even with 9 regiments looking for Jack Hinson they never were able to find or stop him, because he operated alone, therefore, there were no loose lips.
History, is clear, a centralized leader is not a requirement to in order achieve personal freedom and protection of personal property rights.
Regards,