Sleeping Insurgency and Rebranding: The left’s wolfpack and tactics to stay hidden and dangerous in a sea of political conflict, by GuerrillaLogistician

Reference –  17C

By GuerrillaLogistician

@glogistician on X.com

There is no story today… This isn’t a product review but a discussion of conflict and issues with our party politics. It is just me throwing spitballs at people to get their brains moving, and it should in no way be taken as a call to action. God knows we have enough people calling for action in the first place.

So, first things first, let us talk about the left- and let me clarify that there are multiple groups on the left.  Many are pulled around like a bull with a nose ring by finances, and others are driven by ideology, but whoever you want to point to in control of the left, they generally move in lock step. They also organize via funding campaigns, as we have seen with USAID.  Stuff like the rush of the heads of Act Blue trying to go to ground because they might get investigated is also a sign of this being financially driven.  Although, I won’t hold my breath on anyone being investigated, considering the current nothing burgers served up from Mrs. Bondi so far.  Hope for the best, expect the worst. I digress, though.  While monolith in the desire for a specific short-term goal, they follow the socialist/progressive belief of a diversity inclusion and spectrum of action.  These aren’t just trendy catchwords; these are ideologies in themselves.  Diversity, Inclusion, and spectrum are to the left as the phrase “Jesus is King” is to a believer.

While many on the right tend to disregard these terms, it’s important to see them from their angle to understand not only the impact but the deeper meaning to them that we generally gloss over because of the nonsense that it presents us.  Diversity isn’t just about race; it is the diversity of tactics and the diversity of separate people joining a single cause, which in a vacuum doesn’t sound like a negative thing. Just like inclusion really doesn’t mean anything on face value other than including everyone. Even if some of you may understand right now what the consequences of a universal inclusion mean to the left, they don’t think past the first order of things.

Lastly, the word spectrum ” has been used with everything from sex to the color of people’s skins to ideas and how to protest. This doesn’t mean it is a vastly bad thing normally until you see the underlying intent. Let’s face it: if everyone in the whole world agreed that populating Mars was a must, we could do it in a rather short fashion.  As reasonable, logical people, though, we know that everyone involved in doing something like that may not have the best intentions and may have alternative motives. So, don’t take this as me defending these ideas, but let’s understand that they are, to the common person on the left, a very positive thing, just like the analogy above is to a believer.

The next thing most people need to understand is being a counter revolutionary is damn near impossible without a lot of foresight, skill and cunning that sadly is generally missing at the point of conflict for most governments. Suppose we look back into our past at most of the insurgency conflicts that we’ve had over time. Even if we’ve won militarily, the outcome when we withdrew generally turned things sour. And that is the crux of the issue that we’re going to have to deal with overall. More on that later, though. So what really causes a revolutionary belief? It is a dissatisfaction with whatever is going on with the government at the moment, but it requires a substantial amount of the population to be dissatisfied for revolutionary groups to really manifest themselves in a meaningful way. Dissatisfaction doesn’t always have to be a real thing; it could be a manifested argument.

The key component here is to make things look like they are not fair and that some group is being persecuted. We see this in China during their war with Japan and the subsequent outcome of communists taking over that nation. Yes, there were problems, and yes, there were legitimate grievances against the government, but there were also people trying to correct that situation of poor leadership. The Chinese population sensed that the communist revolutionaries were truly for the people, both through actions and statements.  Add to that the major issues before the conflict with Japan really destroyed any hope of leaders resisting the communists, and many other facets I won’t go into.

Fast forward to now, most moderates and Democrats believe the KKK was formed by Christian conservatives, and the South was full of conservatives that owned slaves before the Civil War. So much so now that there is an abject disconnect between the realities and complexities of politics both of that time and of subsequent generations that most people really don’t have a good grasp on history in the first place. So the core point here is dissatisfaction with corruption, and the finishing touch of laying the blame on a specific group can seed revolutionary responses from the people. Even if it is mostly a figment of someone’s imagination.

So, what does that have to do with us right now and in the context of a future civil war in the United States? Well, let’s look at some of the statistics pulled from Brookings during the People’s March.

[A third of participants at the People’s March (33%) reported that they believed that “because things have gotten so far off track, Americans may have to resort to violence to save our country.” This percentage starkly contrasts the 18% of Americans who reported believing that political violence may be necessary in the 2024 American Values Survey. This proportion of the crowd is also much higher than the 21% of the American population who said political violence may be necessary to save our democracy when we fielded a nationally representative survey of the general public with YouGov during the week before the 2024 election (N = 1,000).¹

These findings are even more alarming when we dig deeper into the national data: The survey in August-September 2024 found that only 8% of Democrats supported political violence (versus 29% of Republicans and 16% of Independents). In our study, before the election, the views of left-leaning Americans had shifted, and 17% reported supporting political violence. By the day of the People’s March (January 18), support for political violence among left-leaning individuals who had overwhelmingly voted for Harris had grown further still to 33%.]

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-we-learned-from-the-peoples-march-about-attitudes-toward-political-violence/

Unlike the belief that 3% of the population opposed the king during the Revolutionary War, the real number is about 10% of the population in total were active combatants. This was also seen again during the civil war, but you also have to remember that much of the population was also engaged in the support of these conflicts in some fashion. So, taking the numbers above and looking at them, what do you think the conditions will look like if such beliefs continue to their probable outcomes? Mind you, the 10% is the population of armed males who could actively bring battle to one another. Almost half of the adult male population in the North and a staggering 90% of eligible white males in the South joined the military.

With all this going on and the drastic change from less than a year ago, why the hell have so many of your friends gone to sleep since Trump has been in office?  Ask yourself that as you ponder what you are doing.  I want to be clear here that I am not supporting any conservative doing anything violent because the other side is engaging in this idiocrasy. There are fundamental things you have to understand about the left, and it’s not just a blanket term as much as it is with the conservative party. Even though the left and now many Democrats will call everyone fascist, the reality is that most conservatives will put a KKK member or a real fascist in the same camp as a pedophile. While the left doesn’t think we denounce these people, it happens consistently, but hey, what is a lie without stretching that straw man argument to its full length?  Just like the transgender mice and CNN, even with retraction, the left just propagates the same lie as far as it can go.  This is a tactic, not ignorance; the ignorance comes from the people who don’t doubt everything anyone says on a political position.  You should fact-check everyone from NC Scout, Dolio, and Trump all the way to AOC, even if some are generally more honest and correct than others.  Hell, double-check me, correct me, debate me, as I hope the above people will call me out if I get something wrong. That said, you will see the people who are trying to be honest self-correct, verify, and even say they think something but can’t prove it.

The left, in general, doesn’t play that game, and they will tell you it is the truth and that you should trust them.  Of course, some of you will find people like this on the right, so it isn’t a one-sided issue.  What you will see is when the right is caught, they tend to shut up and hide, whereas the left, for the last 15-20 years, just doubles down, gaslights, and strawman’s any argument they can.  The liberals back in the day were generally more honest and stretched truths to fit things when they could get away with it.  This is why so many people have a trust in them and ask few questions, especially the older generation, while the younger supporters don’t even check an article beyond the headline normally. However, this is an issue of the people who don’t follow politics more than a single-party issue.

So why does this even matter to somebody trying to counter the revolution? To understand this a little more deeply, you must understand that there are ways to deceive and manipulate people and K (@K_CSG) posted a great video on X recently specifically relating to this issue. The left generally has a uniform goal in mind, along with a uniform message they push. I’m talking about almost the whole left from Liberal to Socialist.  While there is still diversity of thought about where they ultimately end up, their movement from day to day is absolutely lock step.  Case in point, while the economy isn’t doing well, the left is currently hyper-focused on the arrest of a foreign student on a student visa and his deportation(at the time I wrote this).  They would instead argue about a student visa deportation then deal with a cooling economy they had a significant hand in. This lockstep message creates a force of coercion designed to manipulate people into believing something. I could go on and on about all the scientific experiments involving group dynamics from the Stanford prison experiment, but I hope you get the point.

So let’s take a standard Democrat, for instance. They want to see more LGBTQ people in the schools. Some of the reasoning involves sexual education to “not be a bigoted monster” to somebody who is different from you.  Again, on the face of things, removing what we are talking about would make this a good idea if it were, say, to respect someone’s religious beliefs. Right or wrong, their intent is to see less harm to certain people in general. However, the socialists initially had the same goal, that is to bring LGBTQ into the schools, but for different reasons.  A diversity of ideas if you will. Still, it is to radically destabilize both the culture and to incite a splitting of democracy to the point that people are infuriated and engage in conflict. Thus, both groups will push for the same things and goals in the same way.  They will use the same tactics and the lockstep vote or protest certain things to engage in their political movement.

So why does this even matter if they’re not being violent? Most readers here probably know that they are indeed violent at times.  The kicker is that every time the left is in charge, they dial back the flames of an overt color revolution. That said, the revolutionaries continued to work and prep for all of this stuff that they know will come again. So when a Democrat wins and they stop the money flow, the socialist keeps pushing forward even if they don’t have the support from the Democratic Party. As there are fewer socialists than Democrats, this means that they have less access to many of the resources the Democrats give them.  This allows the Democrats to reduce violence and cool things as the democratic party moves more progressively.  The Democratic Party had a more stabilized presentation for the common person with the reduction of violence and turmoil on the streets when they were in office.  I also know I’m preaching to the choir, but you must realize that they look at every conflict as a spectrum, not as a specific event with specific tactics. But let’s look at conservatives

Case in point, the conservatives go out, they’ll protest, and then they’ll come home. For the most part, you don’t see physical violence at conservative protests, and in fact, that is frowned upon by the majority of conservatives. I know many of you probably saw January 6 and thought ohh shit this isn’t good, and initially probably got concerned about the backlash. Even my ignorant ass at the time told somebody who said they were going there to be very careful because it looked like it could be a powder keg used against the conservative party and get you in a lot of trouble. This wasn’t me being some intelligent intuitive mind like NC Scout, but we had seen liberal media already presenting the dangers of a mass protest. If nothing had happened that way, I’m sure there still would have been “some violence” the media would have glommed onto. It was very widely publicized that people were calling for violence and then being booed and called a fed days before the actual event. I’m sure everybody knows who I’m talking about at this point.

Liberals, on the other hand, have the same mentality with one another at every single event; that’s an unspoken rule. You can see this from people like Andy Ngo and other such independent reporters who deal with antifa regularly. They set themselves up where they could show a spectrum of defiance. This means that grandma can come out with a little flag for whatever she wants and scream and protest. She can have a permit lawfully in her rights to do this, and antifa will not interfere with her actions. Then let’s take somebody else that possibly is protesting topless with her breast painted in a United States flag and a swastika. She’s out at the same protest but is legally in a Gray/Black spectrum of a protest where she isn’t legal, but it could be argued in court as freedom of speech. Is she doing much more than the grandma who thinks it’s absurd to be topless protesting the current topic? Absolutely not, but grandma, even though not appreciating this kind of protest, is told that she should not engage with these other people and that she should respect their way of protesting.

So grandma, coming from an older age, may not be cool with this, but they’re all fighting the one fight for the specific thing they want to have changed. Now, there might also be a transgender person who doesn’t look like they’re the opposite sex at all dressed up, and the grandma and the feminist may possibly not appreciate this bearded man pretending to be a woman, but they are also told both to respect his freedom to protest as he likes. I know this will be a far reach, but let’s say all three of these people are very pro-capitalist, and here comes a socialist antifa member screaming not only about the topic but also about the ills of modern capitalism. This person attacks people who are not protesting along with them and smashes things. At this point, the grandma’s probably already going home, and the feminists might be a little scared so that they might go home too. Not wanting to be involved in violence, the transgender leaves as well. Not one of them will tell the antifa socialist that they have gone too far because all of them were told they must respect each person’s spectrum and diversity of protest.

Why did this become important for the conservative and the anti communist Contra? When you’re having these discussions, you’re not having these discussions with people who are monolithic in their thinking, nor do they act in such a terrible manner as some of the others. That grandma, when you say there was violence at your protest, we’ll say no, there wasn’t. I wasn’t violent; I walked around; I protested with my sign; I have my permit. Sure, there is some delusion because she knows what happened before and after she left, but she says that isn’t us, even though she didn’t try to stop it in any format.

Now, I’m not sure what’s going to happen in the future. I’m sure funding will go to these people, and a lot of these people are very active in politics by nature. Still, some specific people go around and engage in honest discourse, and try diffusing any arguments between different protesters. These good, honest, misguided democratic voters will quietly be slid out by people who want the mobs to get more hostile.  These conductors will also direct mobs, which is easier than most people think. Just like they did with January 6, mobs can be easily moved by a handful of people if done correctly, and if you don’t think that’s happening to standard run-of-the-mill generic peaceful capitalist Democrats, you’re wrong. Now, this doesn’t give them a free pass any more than we should give violent people on the right a pass as well, but I want you to think about how this is boiling up for them and how they see things. As almost every knowledgeable military tactician has said throughout the eons, know your enemy. Many of us don’t understand this, and to be fair, if you’d asked me during my college years, I would have been very binary in my thinking initially as well.

Let’s look above at what NC Scout, Dolio, and Patriotman have said for a while now. Many times, people point to specific things that have happened in this country on this list, and it is to drive home a point that this particular event, such as overt and covert pressures against government, strikes, riots, and disorders, are happening right now. If you use this chart for conservatives, you could directly point at which line they were acting on in almost an entire capacity. The difference is that the left may have somebody doing sabotage and terror while also having people spread subversive organizations in all sectors of life. In fact, think of this as an envelopment tactic the left uses while most of the conservatives are in alignment formation. While we are in lockstep, walking in a rectangular box towards the enemy, the enemy is trying to outmaneuver us by checking every box it can without pushing the societal norms too hard. This is key to their tactics, as they know if they start shooting everyone with a MAGA hat, it would get them major backlash.

Every time something violent happens on the left, there is a whole spectrum of people mitigating what has happened and also trying to cool the situation. A case in point would be Luigi Mangione, who is now a hero of the left. Not only when this happened, it got minimized by several news organizations and bloggers. A calculated assassination of a person regardless of their job was slowly shifted into A cause for the people. Realistically, this attack is probably one of the most socialist things you can think of, even if you hate the medical system and the CEO on that board. The reality is that the assassination was a horrible crime. That said, these types of assassinations look really good to socialists, and the left also knew that if the idea that this was a bad thing got galvanized to the average person, they would be fighting drastically to mitigate a bad optic. So, instead of coming out and denouncing this, they minimize the effects. They maximized the problems with the medical system and tried to direct it towards dealing with universal healthcare, all the while demonizing people with wealth.

There is a disturbing trend going on in the US right now with extremist leftist groups. As you can see from the video above, the left is training more and more every day. They are preparing to go to a civil war with arms, supplies, cunning, and their diversity of battle the most on the right do not understand. While the video was more of a puff piece to show a kind, gentler, more liberal gun enthusiast, the reality is that these people are not just an average citizen who wants to be armed for self-defense. Sure, a lot of the people in this video are saying just that, and while I don’t have an issue with people on the left being armed for self-defense, I want you to understand that these little groups are precisely the seeds of revolution that so many have enjoyed for decades. As I discussed the spectrum of protest and how they engage in political dissidents all the way to sabotage, they are trying to amass an army to fight you specifically. Anyone to the right of Mao would be an enemy, and those enemies must be killed if they perform any resistance.  These groups present themselves just like most conservative groups.  They show a call for only self-defense and also engage in philanthropy, such as helping out during hurricanes, etc. The reality is that most of these groups have close ties to very egregious organizations.

As we discussed before, much of this comes from the conclusion that our government has major flaws, and they have remedies for them. That said, their remedy is to shoot everyone with whom they disagree.  Sure, they will say they are anti-violent, but they will always tell you not to be OVERT. If you have any questions on that, look at how many acts of violence have started since the election.  While never atritubted to any of thes groups normally minus Redneck Revolt in the past, many nut jobs do seek these groups out, even though the group will deny it.  In the meantime, though, they will set up groups like this, display a positive face, and slowly draw in a concerned liberal scared of a MAGA army of fascists.  They will then convert these people, and this is not anything new.   Redneck Revolt, and Pink Pistols are other groups that have died out and revived with who is in office.  One is very different from the other, and rightfully so, as the Pink Pistols is, for all outward appearances, only around to train and defend gay and Trans people from would-be attackers.  The reason I bring up the pink pistols along with redneck revolt which is also called the John Brown gun club is there outward representation of themselves. Both present themselves as lawful citizens actively protesting and look at weapons only for self-defense.

https://www.pinkpistols.org/find-a-local-chapter/ – This site should be looked at not only for its active chapters, but its defunct list.  I don’t have the time for it but I bet correlating these groups, and Antifa cells might not be a 1 for 1 but that Ven Diagram of all these groups and locations probably is close enough to be a sphere if you squint.

Also, if you note the pink pistols, the Utility Manual isn’t one on how to shoot and be safe but one of leftist ideals bumping up against socialist dogma.  They do however make a strong point don’t be OVERT about your hate of a politican.

https://pinkpistols.org/PPUtilityManual.pdf

[This is important: ALL legal issues MUST go through National. It is different from dealing with the press, and we MUST maintain consistency. To avoid any potential accidental contradictions that might cause issues, if an attorney contacts your chapter about an amicus brief or other court case, send them to the First Speaker. You may be involved in the case if your local expertise is advantageous, but National has evolved mechanisms for dealing with court cases.] [To put it bluntly, what we do not collect, a rogue agency cannot file suit to demand, and what we do not charge cannot be tracked or taxed.]

We also see an old list of possible instructors that support them.  That said I did a local search and found one guy who was not a Trump basher on the list with a blog, and fairly moderate.  Don’t use this list as an absolute list of bad actors, but only as a list to watch to see if they are going to be possible bad actors.  If I can find a guy who is very 2A is skeptical of Trump with 2A but in the same article goes after the Dems for pulling Kamala in and all their failings, the list might not be too fair.
https://www.blazingsword.org/instructor-list-page/

One of the other noteworthy things is the chronological order of these groups and the fact that their organizations always tend to have between 45 and 55 chapters and an average of about 30 to 33 states.  Just like how the USAID distributed money, these organizations tend to have the same States and the same locations and generally the same people in charge of them.  We can also see this in the Huey P. Newton Gun Club and its separation into Alpha Company, which has a different political direction more aligned with its original socialist origins.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huey_P._Newton_Gun_Club

[Due to the disagreement in the direction the club was taking the Huey P. Newton Gun Club Alpha company was formed by Yafeuh Balogun, as a way to adhere to the original socialist and intercommunal ideology of the Black Panther Party, in particular Huey P. Newton.]

Last but not least, we can’t forget The Liberal Gun Club, which also holds about 34 states and about 50 chapters.  Also, if you note the times that the more questionable groups evolved, we’re during conservatively held presidencies. While this connection cannot be concrete in nature, it is highly circumstantial. I won’t go so far as to say they are the same organization, but one should wonder.  That said, the current organization seems to be the Socialist Rifle Association.

While I don’t want you to focus on this one group fully as the big bad because they indeed aren’t all bad or all going to shoot you, the connection with those groups actively allows them to filter in more descent and more fear. They, in fact, use the same argument against most of us on a regular basis, and it is a strong tactic. As Joe Dolio has pointed out in his first book, you should know who is around you and what they are up to. You should be tracking groups like the socialist Rifle Association because right now, they won’t be engaging in anything hostile, but they could be, and a lot of people who are far more radical will be drawn to these groups. As NC scout has said numerous times, these communities have special forces training them and getting them skilled. They also buy his books and teach radios to their followers as well, so if you think you’re the only one reading Scout’s books, you’re wrong. It is very hard to mitigate information being disseminated to people, especially in a nonclassified sense.

So, what do the more conservative people need to do? Well, this is going to end up being a multifaceted discussion, probably. I’m not sure if I will get political on a podcast, but I will tell you right now that I am not the arbiter of complete knowledge on this subject, and this article is to make you think and come up with your own ideas. Why did I say this? I have my own answers and beliefs on how we should go, formed by reading, history, and the people around me. That said, if I give you an answer, will you really think one up for yourself?  Maybe you can write an article and send it to Patriotman on what you think should be done.  For one the reality is the left is freaking right do not fight a monolithic style fight against somebody who is maneuvering multiple units to engage you.

One of the key facets I recognized recently was that of a book on guerrilla warfare and how to combat it. The book is called How to Eat Soup with a Fork, and in it, he talks about how some of these revolutions defeated the current government even though there wasn’t that much wrong in the first place. The liberals love to set up a multifaceted multi-argument attack every time, and they drive home with lies, facts, and everything in between to win every battle they can. So, my answer to this plight? We need people who will make art and comics, people to instruct others on how to support one another, and the infrastructure to move people to go and engage in political discourse or protests.  We need freelance intel guys who can dig into these subjects and bring raw data out to be refined.  Then that info needs to be made into a useful plan.

The reality is that I think most conservatives have way more of a lone wolf mentality, and if you know anything about a lone wolf, it is going to die alone. Maybe it’s the nostalgia of 90s action movies and being the hero, or perhaps it’s because we don’t work as well together as we should. I will draw this back just slightly and say if you see something heinous or if you are going to paint a horrible picture, there is a point where you should stand up and fight against that, and that is one thing that makes the left so disgusting. The full-on lies and blatant fear mongering can be a powerful tool to sway people, but calling it out can be equally as strong if you can proactively shoot it down.  They (the far left not your average Dem) will work with pedophiles to move the bar forward in their direction without much care at all, and I bet that’s part of the reason why the left lost this last election so badly.

I know the argument that they didn’t lose by that much and that if X number of more Democrats had come out to vote, they would have won. How many of those people didn’t come out to vote because the left had left them with nothing moral and just? So, while deciding what to do, ensure you are not stepping into the realm that will turn you into the next boogeyman. That said, maybe get creative in your arguments and get creative in how you engage other people. Maybe it’s time the right starts the multi-spectrum engagement of liberals. As one barracks lawyer told me a long time ago, anything can be done legally, even if it is absurd, with enough forethought and engaging in twisting the words of the law to your benefit. Again, I’m not saying to go out and cause any violence, nor should you, and you better know that if you cause violence, it will just give the left more fuel than they’ve ever had before. Be ready for them to react and push the boundaries of the scale above until it breaks.