A common theme reiterated in the various (and often semi political) gun spheres and communities is that America contains a culture of militancy, specifically concerning a history of an armed civilian population that bred a nation in the gore of rebellion. Topics like these boil the blood of gun owners, as we Americans love the idea that we as a sovereign people are fundamentally different than the majority of our neighbors. While foreigners are content to pass on into obscure weakness, there will always be a subset of Americans that adhere to the hoplite spirit of militant personal philosophy. Or so it is said. However, with each passing year, an objective examination of the American gun realm (particularly the tactical preparedness aisle) seems to indicate an increasing trend of silence concerning our culture, or even a lack of that culture completely apart from hobby-ism.
The Oxford dictionary defines the word "culture" as follows: "the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively."
Implicit in this description is the presence of distinct characteristics that observably set the group apart. The availability of life styles that inform the decisions of members of the group in ways that are never considered by outsiders. This is what we would expect of members of the "gun community" if the "gun culture" were lively and active. Generally, that's not the case. More and more, anything to do with firearms and the related activities and life style choices are segregated to a realm of silence, away from day to day life. For many "members" (or "practicioners?"), the adherence to a militant philosophy is entirely invisible.
There is even a large subgroup of our own who have intentionally decided to eliminate all visible semblance of the militant philosophy from their person in the public eye. These people are known as "Greymen", and unless you've been living under a rock for the past decade, you know that the greyman philosophy was developed as a way to blend in to a population (generally urbanite) and appear as nonthreatening as possible. If you are, say, an operative in a foreign country at the risk of being detained by a hostile foreign government, this completely makes sense. It may even make sense if you are traveling with firearms through a state with radical anti-gun policies. However, this mentality has been extrapolated by many of our ranks to encompass everyday life. When the biggest threat you fear is getting into an argument with some Karen on the street because they think you look too scary, or someone wants to call the cops on you because you're wearing a military style jacket, then we have a logical disconnect occurring. There are men that choose their wardrobes specifically to look nonthreatening and harmless in public. That is an issue. They denounce the idea of wearing laced boots, work pants with side pockets, any shirt with a violence- or weapon related design, or (God forbid) anything either military issued/surplus or in a camouflage pattern. This does not seem to be an issue with rural gun owners, thankfully.
The Greyman philosophy became popular perhaps a decade or so ago, and is the answer to an issue with which many of us are too familiar. American civilian society has lost its way, become fat on its times of plenty and weak from the constant shelter of safety. Mention to any American urbanite the reality that violent disorder is very present on planet earth and you will get the admission, "Not here, this is America!"
By no fault of its own, gun owners and possessors of the civilian militant philosophy have come under the hate and animosity of the ultra-progressive degenerate social movement. The issue is mainly the choice that our "community" has collectively chosen to make - to accept the hate and pacify accordingly. Largely, gun owners have decided to retain all semblances of militant lifestyle to the shooting range and locked behind the door to the gun safe.
So, what's my point? My point is mainly this - the militant philosophy is what makes us American and keeps us that way. We are effectively the last group of sovereign people that considers civilian armament to be a viable way of life and a destructive force with which to be reckoned. But we are conceding our ground with every inch that we relinquish. I am challenging members of our group to contest the will of our enemies, and to rekindle the fire of our culture. Allow more of your decisions to be influenced by this mentality. Speak more freely concerning it (but for the sake of your peers, do practice opsec concerning their identities). Don't feel so pressured to neuter yourself when it comes to clothing and everyday gear. Bring more of what you have obtained in the world of firearms and militancy back into real life. Instead of worrying about what effeminate Karens may think about your appearance or demeanor, be more selective with the folk you involve in your life, walk with a head high and resilient against criticism, and maintain proper situational awareness for threats that may seek you as a first target. The fact that men turned to the greyman philosophy as a way to decrease the need for these things proves that its adoption as an all-encompassing method was a cope all along. At the end of the day, we may be challenged on our stances, but our freedom and culture is diminished more by our inaction. Have the courage to embrace the militant aesthetic that must be the companion of our culture. No more silence.