Allan Feifer

(Note: This essay is not a call for armed resistance. Instead, it examines historical situations that justify such resistance, as well as the non-violent values and actions conservatives can immediately use to prevent the need for armed resistance from arising.) Throughout history, free societies have wrestled with an uncomfortable question: Is there ever a time when citizens have a moral duty to resist their own government? The question matters because America is not immune from decline.

The Berlin Wall’s fall is one of history’s most recognizable examples of a rapid, largely unforeseen cascading failure. On November 9, 1989, East German spokesman Günter Schabowski mistakenly announced that new travel rules would take effect “immediately.” Crowds rushed the checkpoints, overwhelmed confused border guards, and within hours the wall that had divided Germany for twenty-eight years had effectively fallen.

Humans require meaningful struggle, sometimes intensive struggle, to achieve their potential. When societies attempt to eliminate the essential struggle for survival, people must voluntarily assume responsibility, something they’re frequently unwilling to do. If they don’t, they invent artificial alternative struggles. Governments too often accelerate that process by subsidizing dependency and insulating people from the consequences of their actions.