What path will you follow

Samuel and John Adams.
Cousins, both seeking a new form of government away from what they saw as the tyranny of Great Britain. Both active in the politics of Massachusetts. Both active in the Declaration of Independence. Both considered "Founding Fathers". However, they had different approaches to achieving their 'goals'.
Let's put aside that John was a bit of a big central government person. While relevant to him overall, it's not pertinent to this post.
John was a lawyer by trade and spent most of his effort in the fight for independence arguing. It's what lawyers do. All of his efforts were for a 'peaceful' separation from Great Britain. He believed that independence could be achieved through petition.
Sam, if you will, was a politician, but also an activist. Not content with simple petitions and procedure, he argued, publicly and privately for a resistance to the tyranny. While it's unclear how much of a role he had inside the Sons of Liberty, he certainly advocated for their actions and was a leader in the infamous "Tea Party".

Today, there are similar voices, taking similar tracks.

People like Kerodin, of the III Percent Patriots, are calling for action, of sorts. Active resistance is probably the best term for it. While not calling for people to attack government, the call is to resist with whatever force is necessary, whichever form that takes.
We then have Glenn Beck, who is calling for resistance through the ballot box. Believing that resorting to violence is not the way, he calls for calm and to fight through the redress of grievance; voting, marching, etc...
Like Sam and John, two approaches towards a similar goal of freedom and liberty.

However, also like Sam and John, I fear both will be needed in order to change the course of things.

Yes, to use the age old phrase, violence begets violence. The question you have to ask is, "Who threw the first punch?"
The State has become more and more oppressive. While I'm sure the increase in the availability of news from around the US has contributed to it, there's not a day that goes by without hearing of another LEO who has arrested/beaten/tased/maced/shot/killed someone who did nothing wrong other than not submit to the will of The State. The phrases "Stop resisting!" and "I felt my life was threatened" have become so common place that to not see them in a story of LEO abuse is surprising. And yet people react with almost glee when put into a state of near martial law saying "Whatever it takes to protect us." "Police work is a dangerous job and they worry about going home at night".
The State has actively targeted people who disagree with it. It's not a matter of political party, but a matter of liberty or statism. If you oppose statism, you are thus deemed an Enemy Of The State and your life will become hell. How many individuals have suddenly been up for an IRS audit because they spoke out against government? How many whistleblowers have had their lives ruined with false charges because they spoke out about injustice? And the sheep call for more government to protect them.
Every attempt is being made to restrict the access to arms and armament. The natural right protected (not granted) by the Second Amendment of the Constitution was to allow a citizenry to resist the advancement of tyranny; whether personal or governmental. Like all tyranny that's effective, it starts slowly and 'legally'. Remember, the Nazi's rose to power through voting and they justified all actions taken against their state enemies through the law. But remember, "nobody needs an assault weapon". "It's for the children."

I abhor violence. Sometimes it's the only action that can be taken, but if it can be avoided, all the better. But like The Revolution, there comes a time to determine which path you will take.
In the struggle for independence, it's said that 1/3 were for independence, 1/3 were loyal to The Crown, and 1/3 didn't care. In total, 3% of the citizenry of the colonies actually fought for independence. So using rough numbers, 30% of the people of the American Colonies wanted independence, but didn't believe in violent action.

So, are you part of the 3%, part of the 30%, or part of the 66%? Simple question to ask yourself.

Yeah... it's gonna be like that

LONG TIME since I posted last.
Funny what happens when life gets in the way. But recently, had a few family things happened that have given me insomnia, so wonderfully I'm typing in the wee-hours of the night.

Nice looking collapse, huh? Coming soon to a country near you.
You shouldn't be surprised by it. It's been in the mail for a while. The problem is, you didn't want to admit it. You wanted to believe it would all work out. Some politician (or group there of) would remove their cranium from their rectum and fix things. In early 2010, I was out grabbing a bite to eat in my Gadsden sweatshirt. A nice older couple came up to me and said, "Thank for keeping up the fight." Nice of them to say.
We chatted a bit and the elections that year came up. I said plainly, "This is the last year we have a chance to turn it around." They were more optimistic and thought 2012 would be critical. But I disagreed, we said out goodbye's and that was that. But I knew I was right. Not because I'm some smug prick who walks around believing their shit doesn't stink, but I knew 2012 would be worthless.
The Republican party HAD to run the next guy in line. In 2008 it was McCain's turn. No one else stood a chance. Right after the election, I knew in my hear Romney would be the next one. Knew it. And in the years heading up to it, before any announcement, you could see it. The business background, his speaking style, "He's going to mop the floor with King Barry I". Yeah, right... I don't need to rehash that business, do I?
2010 was the last year to make a change. And what happened? A couple decent candidates made it through, but in general, more party establishment types got in, along with a few snakes (Renee Elmers, anyone?) who pulled the typical political move of lying through her meat curtains and then buddying up to the establishment. And why did this happen? Because you believed the hype. These people were going to be serious now! Yeah! They had the House! They controlled the purse strings! King Barry I wasn't going to push them around!
Pussies.
They "caved". Where are the spending cuts? Where's the return to fiscal responsibility? Where's the resistance to King Barry I? Oh yeah, this is politics, not some novel. The bad guys wear white AND black.

Government is about control. How much control they have is up to the will of the people who elect those into positions of government. Once people stop exercising that will, the path to totalitarianism has been started.
It usually starts with a problem of some sort. Some reason to let government take power it doesn't have. And it was in the midst of the founders that it started. In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court bestowed upon itself the right to review the Constitution and any laws passed by Congress and the President. Define for me in Article III where they have this right? I'll cut to the chase, they don't. But they took this "right" and instead of impeaching the court, which because the justices serve only"...in good standing..." was the right power for the Congress and President, they let it slide. Now 9 men and women in black robes determine what is and is not law. Not the 536 people duly elected. 9 people, hand picked by those in seats of power. If that's not the basis for an authoritarian government, I don't know what is.
Since then, Presidents and Congresses have bestowed upon themselves powers which were either rightfully those of the other branch or the states OR the people of the states.

Because of this collection of power into the hands of 545 people and their hand-picked subordinates, this country is now destined to collapse in on itself.
The debt is no longer worth mentioning. We talk only of deficits now. "Hey, it's less than a $1trillion, so that's a good thing!"
Spying is fine as long as its done on the people, not The Elites. But each group of Elites can spy on each other, as long as us mere citizens don't get involved.
Police enforce the law, not keep the peace. And that enforcement could mean being beaten (to death if they choose), tased (also to death if they choose), chemical sprayed (once again to death if they feel up to it) or shot. They will not be held accountable for their actions. Qualified Immunity is a term you better get used to. Sounds good until you realize you are powerless to stop them because you've already given them the power to override your choices.
We involve our military in engagements around the globe that we have no businesses going near. But it's alright because "We're a global force for good." Say it enough times and maybe you'll believe it. 2+2=5, right?

I don't know what comes next. Or when it'll all finally self-destruct. It can't be turned back at this point, I'm fairly confident of that. No one has the guts to do it. Everyone wants what others have and doesn't want to work for it. "I'm owed..." "I should have..." "It should be free..." "You're just trying to deny me..." "Racist!" "Greedy!" "Fair share!" and the slogans go on and on.
The problem isn't government. It's society. The "American Spirit" has truly become a spirit and it passed without so much as Taps being blown.

Sad when you think about it.