They say they oppose tyranny, but in fact they enjoy extreme – and dangerous – freedom – translated into Western terminology – democracy.
In recent weeks, the nation has been in an alarming state: angry people with machine guns are protesting against various state locks in response to the coronavirus pandemic. These demonstrations reached a terrible peak in Michigan in April – although the situation may worsen as the pandemic continues – when armed demonstrators broke into the capitol building and showed wild rage and intimidated people. They claimed to exercise their democratic rights to freedom of speech and possession of weapons. But there is something deeply undemocratic in this form of demonstration, as the media are now declaring.
Michigan lawmakers were understandably shocked when an armed mob broke into the atrium of the capital; some protesters wore body armor. Protesters shouted at the police, who tried to prevent them from entering the walls of the Senate. Many demonstrators wore uniforms and tactical equipment, as well as dark masks, which was more likely not a personal protective equipment, but something threatening.
The question immediately arises: why weapons? Is it needed for this protest? A quick look at modern history shows that some of the most effective demonstrations were strictly non-violent. Why did the protesters take assault rifles with them and what did they want to show in this way?
Although these armed demonstrators received their prize from the rule of law, they unwittingly undermined its foundations. Such a demonstration certainly looked lawless. When some doubt that the rule of law is still preserved, or act as if it does not exist, this helps to undermine the faith of others in the myth of security, which means that the Western world is preparing for chaos.