zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » Joyner and the coup

Joyner and the coup

[ by Charles Cameron — a bit disconcerted by what I see looming in the futuristic mist — your view may of course differ ]

Okay, let’s begin this little tour with a recent news flash, to keep us grounded. This comes to you from Indiana:

Indiana guardsman stopped for speeding in Madison County had 48 bombs, prosecutor says

An Indiana National Guardsman was arrested outside Columbus on New Year’s Day after a state trooper found nearly 50 bombs and the blueprints for a Navy SEAL training facility inside his car, the Madison County prosecutor said yesterday.

Targeting the SEALs, hunh? Not, I’d imagine, a soft target.


I guess there’s something like a buzz or ripple going on, and it concerns me. It crops up in various forms in various places, in fact it’s very various indeed, and varied, and variegated too no doubt. Let’s see…

There are calls in certain circles for a coup of some kind in the US of A. Here’s the televangelist pastor Rick Joyner

One of Joyner’s closest military friends is Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin — ex Delta Force, Mogadishu guy, also ex Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence — seen here talking with Joyner:


Joyner is one of the more prominent pastors associated with C Peter Wagner‘s New Apostolic Reformation, so it’s worth noting that Wagner doesn’t limit his ambitions to “Christendom” but is working for Christian dominion over the entire world, much as certain trends in the Islamic world look for global Islamic dominion:

My favorite term is “dominion eschatology.” Why? Because Jesus did not give His Great Commission in vain.

The battle will be ferocious, and we will suffer some casualties along the way. However, we will continue to push Satan back and disciple whole nations.

We are aggressively retaking dominion, and the rate at which this is happening will soon become exponential. The day will come when “‘The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever’” (Rev. 11:15, NKJV)!

So that’s one part of the context for Messers. Joyner and Boykin, and Joyner’s thoughts about a coup — also for Boykin’s proffered scenarios for foreign policy, which I addressed in a recent post.


Then there are the Oathkeepers

Oath Keepers is instructing its 30,000 members nation-wide to form up special teams and sub-teams in each Oath Keepers chapter, at the town and county level, modeled loosely on the Special Forces “A Team” (Operational Detachment A ) model, and for a similar purpose: to be both a potential operational unit for community security and support during crisis, but also, as mission #1, to serve as training and leadership cadre, to assist in organizing neighborhood watches, organizing veterans halls to provide community civil defense, forming County Sheriff Posses, strengthening existing CERT, volunteer fire, search-and-rescue, reserve deputy systems, etc., and eventually to assist in forming and training town and county militias (established by official act of town and county elected representatives). We want our chapters to organize themselves as a working model that we can then take to other veterans organizations, such as the VFW, American Legion, Marine Corps League, etc. in each town and help them establish such teams within their already existing veterans halls. And likewise, to serve as a model and training cadre to help churches, neighborhood watches, and any other civic organization organize.

These guys are more about resisting government oppression than endorsing a coup, eh? — but there’s morphing potential between one and the other.

What I’m up to here, y’see, is not about presenting a coherent argument starting from a premise and arriving at a conclusion, but creating a mini-topography, manpping a landscape if you will, by identifying certain features, with the suggestion that they are somehow related.

Somehow, I said.

I am not defining the relationships, which may be quite varied, and also subject to individual interpretation. I am suggesting they may be, very likely are, all features of a common terrain — and worth considering as such.


Picking up on the theological side of things, we have many people, including legislators like Rep. Michelle Bachmann, who view current events at home and abroad as fulfilling one of the various “end times” scnarios now current in both Christian and Islamic circles:

People who hold such beliefs tend to take them very seriously, as sanctioned by the supreme authority — and may therefore be strongly influenced by them when making policy decisions. But is Bachmann’s eschatology right, or Netanyahu’s, or Khamenei’s perhaps? Or one of the secular eschatologies, global warming, nuclear winter, heat death of the universe?

My most recent post on the foreign side of things, A Clash of Messianisms: now let me get this straight, fits in here somewhere, too.

Policies driven by an erroneous eschatology might make an unstable situation even worse, no?

Caveat emptor.


Let’s move from preachers and pols to regular folks like, well, Josie the Outlaw. What does she have to say for herself — and us all?

This (above) was quite a hit with some of my liberal friends… who mostly didn’t notice the Gadsden Flag on its brief appearance…

They were in some cases less happy with this one…


And then of course, it has indeed been said that…

whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security…

The question then arising of how much prudence — prudence, the virtue — is in evidence in this day and age?


This is where I should really soar, with a short yet powerful invocation af all those virtues one might wish for. We’ve almost forgotten their names. Humility? Is that something to do with humiliation? Sure sounds like it. Prudence? I think I have a great aunt Pru…

Joyner and Boykin — if you believe we’re in the end times, then wait up — no need to go all guns and MRE on us — fast and pray, will you please, and wait for the new heaven and the new earth?

And the rest of you — call your great aunt, we need her STAT!!

9 Responses to “Joyner and the coup”

  1. Lexington Green Says:

    Why Good People Should Be Armed is excellent.  I am sure it would be a perfect litmus test for political views on most things.  If you love this video I know how you think on almost everything else, and if you hate it, I know you think the opposite on almost everything.  

  2. larrydunbar Says:

    How about if you feel some form of embarrassment for the woman in the video? Doesn’t she know the only assets of revolutionaries are bodies?

  3. Lexington Green Says:

    Contempt counts as a diluted form of hatred Larry, making you one of THEM.  

  4. Grurray Says:

    “These guys are more about resisting government oppression than endorsing a coup, eh? — but there’s morphing potential between one and the other. What I’m up to here, y’see, is not about presenting a coherent argument starting from a premise and arriving at a conclusion, but creating a mini-topography, manpping a landscape if you will, by identifying certain features, with the suggestion that they are somehow related.”
    A new and different division of the union has been suggested from many different sources lately for a variety of different reasons, including Lex in his book.
    This is the best configuration I’ve seen yet:
    Sheds new light on the recent secession movement in Colorado and Nebraska.
    Prudence and patience may indeed be in order as you suggest since the natural course (as the original cultural and language divisions surely were) always seems to win out in the end
    or as Aristotle said – If one way be better than another, that you may be sure it is nature’s way.

  5. Charles Cameron Says:

    You crack me up, Lex!
    In Britain when I grew up, cops didn’t carry guns, criminals didn’t carry guns, and addicts didn’t have to pay much at all to get their daily fix.  In today’s America, the reverses are true. I have to say I prefer the old British way to the contemporary American one, but I doubt you can get there from here.
    Life, she is a crazy wild animal. I’ll admit I love her.  
    I am coming more and more to the position that war and peace cannot be fully understood without two other factors being taken into consideration — justice (which includes a mandate for freedom) and interiority.

  6. Charles Cameron Says:

    I love it. I looked up Sacramento to see what I could find about the ethos of my current home, and lo and behold:

    The people of the Sacramento Valley did not actually live in tribes. They lived in kinship groups of extended family. We often hear tribal names such as Miwok, Maidu, or Nisenan, but these are artificial names applied by anthropologists Alfred Kroeber, Julian Steward, Robert Heizer and others in the early twentieth century. The names were based on linguistic similarities of the languages spoken by the different groups obtained through ethnographic interviews. Before the Gold Rush, the native population lived in hundreds of villages or rancherias all over the valley. Some of the villages contained a few hundred individuals and some were as small as twenty to thirty people, but all were aligned along kinship lines. This naturally meant that something was needed to maintain genetic diversity within the groups. The “something” was the exchange of women and children among the different groups through trade and barter. Or, occasionally, women and children were stolen, and this led to conflict. The conflict was not all out war but rather a meeting of champions. War and killing were not intrinsic to the Valley culture. Unlike other North American natives who honored bravery or death in battle, such as the Sioux and Apache, to the people of the Valley there was no concept of military bravery, and death was simply being dead.

    What a concept:

    and death was simply being dead…

    And we still haven’t reached the best bit:

    The conflicts were affairs that involved each side squaring off with a lot of bonfires and music and dancing and screaming. The winner of the battle was decided by who put on the best show. This type of fighting is called “posturing,” and it was important in the success of John Sutter’s dealings with the natives. 

    That’s quite a way to fight!

  7. Charles Cameron Says:

    Also, Grurray:
    I begin to like Aristotle better. 

  8. Grurray Says:

    That’s quite a way to fight!”
     I agree. It reminds me of the story of Pizarro and the Incas where the Incan king first sent out a contingent of musicians and dancers to meet the conquistadors instead of soldiers. Must be west coast thing?
    Speaking of posturing
    I tend to agree w that last video. Especially importance of firearm training, safety, and – should have been added – security. I would not be opposed to teaching this type of thing in schools. It would solve a lot of problems and prevent many others.
    The one part where she goes over the top is assault rifles. 
    This one bugs me because I have otherwise reasonable, intelligent, and successful friends who hold on to these conspiracy theories.
    All the protection needs of a typical citizen can be satisfied with a handgun.
    Even if her block was under assault, heavier weapons sacrifice the advantage of internal maneuvering.
    If you like shooting an AR-15, go for it (at a shooting range or other safe, designated area of course). 
    But the federal government isn’t going to invade your neighborhood, at least not militarily, so stop justifying it that way. Plus it diverts away from the passive and subtle yet more dangerous threats to liberty increasingly embedded in our modern system. 
    The real can of worms (that “morphing potential”) are those rifles aren’t for defense but for offense. They provide dispersal of power.
    As Zen pointed out in the other post, this becomes the far more complex far power / near power issue. 

  9. Charles Cameron Says:

    I’m obviously “west coast” myself… ; )

Switch to our mobile site