Write a new post in response to today’s one-word prompt. 


Well now, here’s an interesting word.  I was pretty sure of the definition, but I looked it up just so I wouldn’t look stupid.  I had it, which made me feel good.  And of course, I always look up the etymology as well.  This one has a Latin root, incohare, which means to begin. 

So the word has come to mean anything that is in the beginning stages, rudimentary, not fully formed.  For example, an inchoate language would be one that has very few words, like “Me Tarzan, you Jane.”  I suppose  that’s all they really needed for some time 🙂


Many people believe, and I tend to agree, that we are living in an inchoate anarchy here in America. And no, it’s not Trump’s fault. You have to understand that the only things the media publish about him are the faux pas he tends to make. They aren’t saying much about the booming economy.  It doesn’t fit their agenda.

In any event, anarchy is a total lack of rule by law.  The “Resist” movement insists on doing away with laws they don’t like, and allowing the ignoring of laws that won’t go away.   They want to repeal the Second Amendment, for instance.  That would be a sad day indeed.  And please, I’m not looking for debates or arguments here.  In fact, I most likely  won’t respond to them

Historically, anarchy leads to dictatorship.  Consider Russia prior to WWI.  The Bolshevik Revolution dethroned the Russian monarchy and killed off as many of the ruling class as possible, much like the French Revolution of the late 1700’s. The problem with both those revolutions, of course, is that those who replaced the monarchs were just as corrupt and just as above the law, and the world saw the rise of Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, Gorbachev, and now Putin.  None of them could be called benevolent. Putin is deliberately and forcefully trying to reestablish the old USSR, and many will die because of his efforts.

When anarchy develops,  military force is just about the only thing that can stop it. And if the military operates outside of the rule of law, then the military becomes part of the dictatorship. Which is why, by the way, the anti-gun folks want your weapons. Without them, you have no way to protect yourself against the misuse of the military.

The second amendment was not meant just to allow people to hunt, but to be able to protect themselves from the threat of dictatorship.  When one segment of society wants to shut down the free speech of another, take away their weapons,  control their health care, it is often done under the guise of “helping The People.”  The truth is, when we lose these hard-won freedoms we will also lose our liberty in many other ways, as well. Capitalism will be replaced by government-controlled financial  operations, and we will become a nation run by those who will enrich themselves at our expense. “We the People”  will cease to have any say in much of anything, and poverty will become so widespread that we will become just another Third-World nation.

Well, see what can come from just one simple word?

Read your history, folks.  What is happening in America is tragic, but it is nothing new. We CAN stop it, but only if we educate ourselves outside the “Hate America” philosophies that are being poured into our children and college students, along with “There is no God,” and all-sex-any-sex-all-the-time and the government should pay for your birth control.  Don’t tell me what to do with my body, just pay for my birth control and/or abortions.

Good grief.  We’ve lost our minds.





16 thoughts on “Incomplete

  1. I enjoyed reading your thoughts and agree with most, though I obviously won’t agree with all of them. From what we (hopefully unbiased Canadians) hear and read, Trump has actually accomplished some good in, and for, the US in spite of constant slamming by the media. Seems for once you have a leader who’s willing to stand up to challenges and take the flak. And he’s definitely getting it!

    You’ve got me started thinking about the US ideal or theory that civilians having guns would be a way of preventing an oppressive dictatorship. I see some major holes in that theory but will post my thoughts on my own blog sometime.

    I will leave one historical example: After WWI, when the Germans invaded France via the Franco-German border, the French built a series of forts they called “the Maginot Line.” In theory this would prevent German invaders ever after. In WWII Hitler sent his troops into France via Belgium…and France fell again. This is the biggest lesson of human history: we think we’ve got it; our defense is secure. But our schemes fall short and the enemy slips in another way.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, they simply went around it. Not very good planning.

      As for our second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, it really was intended that there be a civilian militia that could fend off the British if the need arose. The principle has remained in place all these years, but of course the Left doesn’t like it that ordinary citizens have such means to protect themselves, for instance, against illegal search and seizure. And they’re using every (more and more frequent) mass shooting to stir up a “repeal the second amendment” movement. The problem with taking away guns and the right to own them, or at least one of the problems, is that we are then left at the mercy of the criminals who will always find ways to get guns, not matter how many anti-gun laws are passed. If you’ll notice, every single mass shooting has taken place in a “no gun zone.” For instance, a couple of years ago, the guy who shot up the Pulse Bar in Florida and killed several people had originally targeted Disney World, but changed his mind when he got there and observed all the security, including armed officers. He checked another bar, decided against it, and ended up at the Pulse. Many have said it was an anti-gay shooting, but the evidence shows that the shooter’s only goal was to kill as many people as possible, and looked for “no gun” zones as the best targets.

      There was an attempted mass shooting up north recently, but it was stopped before it did any serious damage because a guard had a gun, and I don’t remember if he killed the shooter, but I’m pretty sure he shot him. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. This has been my understanding from the news; for all the armed people in the US no one could get a handle on defense measures fast enough to prevent the crime. Oh, my! Disney World would have really been a disaster!

        I can see a trained guard as a lot more useful creature than just anyone packing a gun and blasting away when they see something that seems suspicious. Training and, a cool head, and accuracy are important — especially in a crowd. Even if I’d shoot at a crook — and I never would — I’d likely miss!

        As for criminals, they’re usually prepared for resistance; in most cases pulling a gun on a crook is sure to get you shot. We have petty crime here in Canada, too, but rarely do victims get shot. Knifed more likely. 😦

        I understand the Amendment being formulated back in the day, with the idea of preventing King George’s Redcoats. The US now has an organized, trained army, air force, navy, marines, National Guard — and over 200 million people. The playing field is so much different. At this point in time “superior military power” is going to invade you. 🙂

        Are you sure it’s the Left that’s behind the anti-gun movement? I’ve been reading a lot of posts on this lately and it seems a lot of people, including high school kids, are just sick of the mass murders. They’re wanting military assault rifles and such inaccessible to civilians.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yes, I’m sure. That is not to say that no one on the Right approves of gun control (which, by the way, we already have laws that simply aren’t being enforced, so I’m not convinced that more laws is the answer). One of the other strong influences on our kids is that generally educators have been trained and are very prejudiced against the Right; agains Christianity; against limited government. You can have groups in school that meet to talk about Islam, but not about Christianity. And that’s not even scratching the surface of what’s going on down here.


      3. I’d also mention that one of our gun laws includes weapons training before a license is issued. That training includes not just popping people because you don’t like their looks. The anti-gun people are insisting that all gun owners are irresponsible. Ridiculous, but I think they must believe it.


      4. I’m going to check this out more. Many news articles and bloggers have written about how easy it is to buy a gun in the US and I don’t want to be misinformed. It’s probably like everything else; locks keep out the law-abiding. I gather a lot of the problem lies in the storing of guns in homes, too, or how do teens get access to several military assault rifles?

        One blogger, writing about the flood of guns in inner cities, had a really interesting article suggesting the authorities look the other way when it comes to ghetto teen gun purchasers. A “Let them fight it out and kill themselves,” mind-set. I don’t say he’s right, but he’s convinced. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      5. There are so many factors that contribute to gun violence. When I was in high school, we lived in a small farm town. It was perfectly normal for the guys to guns in the gun racks or trunks of their vehicles. Every kid knew how to use a gun, because dads taught their kids gun use and gun safety. And even with all that, there was never a mass school shooting that I remember from those years. This is not just about guns. It’s about leaving God out of school and education; it’s about poor parenting; it’s about bullying, both physical and cyber; it’s about the inordinate degree of hatred the media fuels against the present administration. And there are many other factors that play into it. Many.

        I’m not an expert on gun laws in regard to purchasing and licensing, but I’m pretty sure you can’t just walk into the Walmart and buy one like you would a carton of milk.


    1. I tried to look at the link but it was too tiny for my old eyes 🙂 I believe the word is infrequently used because most of us hear it so rarely, and we’re not sure how to pronounce it. I didn’t see the scolding in the definition I used.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s