A liberal case for Gun Ownership by Bret Weinstein

ToolAA · Nov 27, 2021

I was introduced to Bret Weinstein’s podcast through one of the discussion threads here. I find some of his topics quite interesting. For those who have never listened or read his work, he is an evolutionary biologist and former professor at Evergreen State College. His career there was abruptly ended a few years ago as he was targeted by the Woke Cancel Culture, even though he is, for all intents an purposes, a self identified Liberal. However, Bret is also a symbol of the great divide that is now occurring on the left as extreme progressivism and wokeness push to purge the democrat party of traditional liberals and free-thinkers.

While I have listened to many podcasts I haven’t ever heard any mention of firearms or the 2nd amendment within any of those discussion topics. So I was a bit surprised when I found this OpEd article he just posted. It’s his story of how a liberal became a 2nd Amendment supporter and now advocates for it’s value and preservation.

https://unherd.com/2021/11/the-liberal-case-for-gun-ownership/?s=09

Read it yourself if you like. Here is a quote from the article.

This is what gun ownership comes down to, whether you’re a liberal or a conservative. If there is a way to protect liberty from spasms of tyranny that does not condemn us to the spectacular cost of regular gun violence, I’d love to know it. But if the dynamism of the West, the productivity, the ingenuity, and the quest for fairness can only be protected from tyrants at the point of a gun, then so be it.

teratos · Nov 27, 2021

Good read. Thanks for sharing.

I suspect he’d find most of us “gun nuts” to be aligned with him on his “liberal” feelings about violence. I don’t think there are many folks out there who don’t feel the same way. The difference is, we came to his conclusion much more quickly. Of course, he was handicapped by being a liberal.

I’m glad he acknowledged we are friendly.

Inigoes · Nov 27, 2021

If only he can convince his fellow liberals...

Seagrave1963 · Nov 27, 2021

Well worth the read. Although his perspective is thought provoking, I suspect many of his liberal or progressive "friends" won't agree and continue to pursue the utopia vision of the future tyrants.

pbharvey · Nov 27, 2021

I listen to the darkhorse YouTube channel almost every day. He is an interesting person. He’s really more of a libertarian than a liberal.

Johnconlee · Nov 27, 2021

I have a friend who displays BLM propaganda on his vehicle. He made a negative comment about a political sign I was displaying during the 2020 election. It’s very interesting that we agree on all kinds of things and have common interests.

It always gets negative when politicians or political groups enter the conversation. As a nation we agree on way more than we disagree on. When you stop putting yourself and others in boxes or political camps it becomes clear where the problems really are.

Uncle Duke · Nov 27, 2021

If only we didn't have the guns......

Like with most liberals, I see this theme resonate throughout the dissertation here as well.

My guns have never harmed a soul. That's simply a fact. Why? They've never harmed a soul because I've never employed them in such a manner as to do so. That's also simply a fact.

Violence is a function of people. It always has been. It always will be. It cannot be and never will be properly addressed by focusing upon objects, and objects of any sort, to the exclusion of people.

I personally see this article as again being about diversion. Skillful diversion perhaps. Perhaps not purposeful diversion. But diversion none the less.

TheOriginalMexicanBob · Nov 27, 2021

At least one Liberal at the Washington Post is starting to get it...just starting to. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/26/dcs-homicide-crisis-isnt-just-about-guns-its-about-why-people-are-willing-kill/

Occam · Nov 27, 2021

It is worth reading, but like most liberals new(er) to an understanding of the 2A’s value, he still has doubts about the founders’ thoughts, and considers the 2A to be somehow vague, when there are troves of supporting letters, debate transcripts and published documents that completely clear all of that up.

His other fundamentally flawed premise is that the 2A is the cause of thousands of “gun deaths” every year. He’s a scientist. He understands data. He needs to look at who causes the overwhelming majority of that violence: criminals already prohibited from possessing guns, committing even more crimes because they’re still out on the street without sufficient consequence.

At some level he knows that, but recognizing it would mean taking another huge step backwards from his liberal comfort zone and familiars. I suspect he’ll get there.

teratos · Nov 27, 2021

No doubt Trump woke them up. We can’t expect them to get it all at once. It’s a start.

dleary13115 · Nov 27, 2021

Small Point of Contention

Jus wanted to point out that he is incorrect in asserting that the U.S. Revolution was "won by men with muskets." While it is true that the flintlock rifle was the predominate small arm of the war, the war was not won exclusively by men with these arms. Rather, the war was also won by the Continental Navy at sea with commissioned and privately owned and ships, ships that disrupted commerce and even took the fight to the British mainland a la John Paul Jones.

The reason I make this distinction is because for many years before/during/after the founding of our Nation, private individuals could own war ships ("privateers"). This would be the equivalent of a modern American owning a strategic-level weapon (a guided missile cruiser, a strike fighter, etc). So it really bothers me when liberals claim that the founders could not have seen a world in which private citizens are able to own "weapons of war."

ToolAA · Nov 27, 2021

dleary13115 said:
The reason I make this distinction is because for many years before/during/after the founding of our Nation, private individuals could own war ships ("privateers"). This would be the equivalent of a modern American owning a strategic-level weapon (a guided missile cruiser, a strike fighter, etc). So it really bothers me when liberals claim that the founders could not have seen a world in which private citizens are able to own "weapons of war."

This is a good point. I think it’s so easy to get wrapped up in thinking of firearms as “The Only Arms” that we should be fighting to protect. I’ve said here that there will come a day when drones and robotic devices will be very effective human force multipliers. Maybe a day where when personal energy weapons will be a reality, or personal shielding devices. We probably are not that far away from a totally light weight full body armor. When those times come, our beloved “Scary Black Rifles” won’t be so scary. So we should be fighting now to make sure the arms of the future are considered necessary to the security of a free State.

Muleskinner · Nov 27, 2021

I can't get past how a democrat can say "I own a gun" while voting for the party that wants to violate his right to own it. To me it's a mental illness..

ToolAA · Nov 27, 2021

Muleskinner said:
I can't get past how a democrat can say "I own a gun" while voting for the party that wants to violate his right to own it. To me it's a mental illness..

You should learn how to get past those issues. Democrats are not a monolithic group that we often profess them to be. Neither are republicans. The more that “Wake Up” and embrace the necessity of the right to bear arms, and participate in making that preference known at the voting booth the better we all are IMO.

Also don’t forget that 20% of REPUBLICANS would take away the second amendment in a heartbeat if they could get away with it without political ramifications.

FrankOceanXray · Nov 27, 2021

Bret and his brother have been on Joe Rogan Podcast, also. Please enjoy those, too. Incredible men.

slsc98 · Nov 27, 2021

ToolAA said:
I was introduced to Bret Weinstein’s podcast through one of the discussion threads here. I find some of his topics quite interesting. For those who have never listened or read his work, he is an evolutionary biologist and former professor at Evergreen State College. His career there was abruptly ended a few years ago as he was targeted by the Woke Cancel Culture, even though he is for all
Intents an purposes a self identified Liberal. However Bret is also a symbol of the great divide that is now occurring on the left as extreme progressivism and wokeness push to purge the democrat party of traditional liberals and free-thinkers.

While I have listened to many podcasts I haven’t ever heard any mention of firearms or the 2nd amendment within any of those discussion topics. So I was a bit surprised when I found this OpEd article he just posted. It’s his story of how a liberal became a 2nd Amendment supporter and now advocates for it’s value and preservation.

https://unherd.com/2021/11/the-liberal-case-for-gun-ownership/?s=09

Read it yourself if you like. Here is a quote from the article.

[/i]

Most def thanks for sharing this. One of my closest friends here in WNC tipped me to The Great Divide occurring on & within The Left as he has immersed himself for the last 6 to 9 months in reading everything he can get his hands on by liberal intellectuals who are questioning the GroupThink occurring on the Left, many of whom have also been “outed” and “cancelled” by that same and quite intolerant Left.

Kicken Wing · Nov 27, 2021

I am have been familiar with him for several years. I learned his name through books that I have read which touched on the Evergreen State incident. He was launched into the spotlight by that single event. You worded it perfectly when you said that he is part of the great divide on the original post. Thanks for posting this. Out of the interviews and podcasts that I have watched, I have not encountered any 2A opinions from him. Thanks or the link.

smokey · Nov 27, 2021

It's worth it to note in here that leftists are extremely pro gun... but not for good reasons. There is a great chasm between leftists that are marching towards communism and liberals. The 2a community needs to be a little careful about how excited we get at the premise of those "on the left" supporting guns. There's leftists that specifically want the guns for violent bloody revolution against us.

Bret is more of the classical liberal type, which is why his support of the 2a is somewhat novel.

ToolAA · Nov 27, 2021

smokey0118 said:
It's worth it to note in here that leftists are extremely pro gun... but not for good reasons. There is a great chasm between leftists that are marching towards communism and liberals. The 2a community needs to be a little careful about how excited we get at the premise of those "on the left" supporting guns. There's leftists that specifically want the guns for violent bloody revolution against us.

Bret is more of the classical liberal type, which is why his support of the 2a is somewhat novel.

Terrorist want guns too. How much privacy did we give up to fight terrorism in the aftermath of 9/11. I agree that true leftist could one day use those guns to infringe on my rights. However, this line if thinking is the same line that enacted many of the gun control measures instituted after the civil war and throughout the 20th century, to keep blacks and other minorities from obtaining firearms. The fight against communists is a cultural war first and foremost to be won or lost in the social media sphere. If we have to fight that battle with firearms someday, we’ve likely already lost the propaganda war.

boss281 · Nov 28, 2021

Thanks for this. I read it twice. Interesting mindset but the conclusion/outcome is encouraging.

"But if the dynamism of the West, the productivity, the ingenuity, and the quest for fairness can only be protected from tyrants at the point of a gun, then so be it."

Regardless of how one reaches this conclusion, I think the conversation is at least an important early step in the dialogue.

As noted, the woke culture, the willingness to allow violent civil unrest, hindering law enforcement's ability to contain it, etc., hasn't gone unnoticed by these "classic liberals" (I love that descriptor). A few years ago, before the worst of this bulls4!t, I worked in a gun shop after retiring and was surprised by the number of applicants volunteering "I know you are probably a conservative and I'm a liberal, but what's coming is too much to ignore".

The undercurrent of tyranny has been festering for decades and the Dems are making a bold attempt to invoke it nationally. It's not gone unnoticed across the aisle.

Side by side, if I believe the 2nd is my constitutional right, no questions asks, and another is reaching gun ownership from a different perspective, but in the end, desires the same outcome, then so be it. It's the start of a conversation.

Like the man says, "at the point of a gun, then so be it." Yeah, man...

A liberal case for Gun Ownership by Bret Weinstein

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

My hair is amazing

Head'n for the hills

Still learnin'

Habitual Testifier

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

My hair is amazing

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Snakes and Sparklers

2A TEACHER

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics