When Swiss mountaineers vote, they always carry rifles and swords.  Not because they expect skirmishes with antifa mobs, but because they don’t.  The weapons are a symbol of how their freedom was attained and preserved.  Through defensive warfare.  Through responsible vigilance and participation.  Yes, the mountain terrain helps preserve the peace, but topography has not stopped invaders from trying to take Switzerland away from the Swiss.  But when enemies try, the Swiss crush the invaders. Every time. Mounted, armored cavalry?  Swiss mountain men crush them.  Nazis?  Too terrified to even try to invade.

Today the nation is a well-designed fortress, with hidden airfields, hidden artillery bunkers, and a well-trained militia who keep their guns in their homes.  The idea is that the entire nation protects the entire nation.  All men between the ages of 18 and 34 deemed "fit for service" are given a pistol or a rifle and trained.  After they've finished their service, the men can buy and keep their service weapons. Those who don’t might hear from the head of the Swiss army, Lieutenant-General André Blattmann. 

“The threat of terror is rising,” he says. “Hybrid wars are being fought around the globe … migration flows of displaced persons and refugees have assumed unforeseen dimensions. Those not already armed as part of the Swiss Army reserve [should] take steps to arm themselves.”
​
A recent vote proposed that conscription be ended. Over 73% of voters, who are still ready to defend their nation, voted against eliminating conscription. Imagine how they looked when they showed up to vote.

When General Robert Edward Lee trained military officers, he taught them about the enormous power they would someday wield, and he also told them about gentlemanly restraint.  He wrote, “The forbearing use of power does not only form a touchstone, but the manner in which an individual enjoys certain advantages over others is a test of a true gentleman.
“The power which the strong have over the weak, the employer over the employed, the educated over the unlettered, the experienced over the confiding, even the clever over the silly--the forbearing or inoffensive use of all this power or authority, or a total abstinence from it when the case admits it, will show the gentleman in a plain light.”

How is it that boys seem to know, instinctively, that the world is a battleground?  How do we know there are ruthless attackers out there in the world?  Partly because we are little barbarians ourselves, and we can imagine how dangerous conflict can be, how much we might enjoy the thrill of it, and how much we might like to think of ourselves as the heroic good guys in a fight to the death.
So when we play in our forts, the drama is high if the imaginary enemy is a highly worthy opponent: determined, clever, wicked and treacherous.  We organize ourselves to defend against this…to repel a life and death attack…and in so doing, we imagine our fitness for adult life in a dangerous world. 
At the height of our fictional battles, we’re also evaluating each other.  As we make up battle scenaria, we’re finding out what we know about evil. We’re comparing notes on how we would deal with it when it comes at us like a flood.  When the battle’s over, whom do we want for our friends in real life?  We want the brave aggressive guys.  The guys who can be depended on to keep the perimeter. 
As we grow older, we attempt to find the same brave sort of friend -- unless we vainly convince ourselves that there will never be any threat of any kind.  But in the 21st century, the threats grow by the day.  Writes Jack Donovan,
“When men evaluate each other as men, they still look for the same virtues that they’d need to keep the perimeter. Men respond to and admire the qualities that would make men useful and dependable in an emergency. Men have always had a role apart, and they still judge one another according to the demands of that role as a guardian in a gang struggling for survival against encroaching doom. Everything that is specifically about being a man—not merely a person—has to do with that role.” – The Way of Men

Did the US Military make a mistake when they thrust women onto the front lines of combat?  Of course they did.  Political correctness has forced the military to perpetuate a false narrative about women: women can easily handle all the horrors, stresses and demands of front-line combat with enemy males. 
Well, there’s some new data from the Military Health System Research Symposium.  More than 1,000 military women have experienced combat-related injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan.  More than half of the injuries happened during the woman’s first deployment.  Of the 1,012 women in the study [[2]], 40 percent were diagnosed with a mental health disorder within the first year. 
This was not supposed to happen.  Political dogma implies women are, in fact, supermen.  So, instead of rejecting a dangerous policy, women must be changed to fit the narrative. Women must be altered to be more man-like in the face of death, carnage, and physical abuse.  How will the military affect this change?  Researchers indicate that this will be attempted scientifically, with experimental drugs designed to make women “resilient” to the anxiety, depression and psychological trauma that comes with the injury, cruelty and death of real-world warfare.   In the meantime, how much more unnecessary harm will be done to American women?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sli7AbX2bEk
If you’ve seen the trailer for Tom Clancy’s Division 2, you’ve seen the urban desert, and what a city looks like with no running water. There may be puddles of bad water here and there, and these could save your life if you can filter it. Can you?  What’s your favorite filter?  Do you have one in your go-bag? 

Facebook’s controversial censors are doing nothing to remove the incendiary language of The Red Guards Austin who say they are a Marxist–Leninist–Maoist violent Antifa group and regularly call for other masked individuals to join their revolution to form a “Red Army.” They want armed militias of young social justice warriors who will cover their faces, identify as communists, agitate for social revolution and use violence to terrorize and then "annihilate" anyone with conservative, Western or American ideas. 
“…we encourage the formation of paramilitary organizations on two levels. The first being those who are mainly unarmed but are prepared and trained to carry out fist fighting or using blunt weapons like axe handles or flagpoles as well as shields and basic armoring. The second level is the more advanced embryo of a Red Army, which is trained militarily and operates as soldiers all the time, engaging in production and mass work among the proletariat and the oppressed nation’s people.”
“On the basis of our principled united front work, fascists and their collaborators can be drowned out, run out, routed, beaten bloody, and even annihilated. These are our principles and we aim to hold them to the very finish.”
Is facebook subsidizing the organization of these paramilitary groups?  And approving them?  If so, what exactly is facebook's position on firearms?

 "Tomorrow's battle is won during today's practice."  - Samurai maxim