What Good is ‘Preaching to the Choir’?
A comment posted under a recent Oath Keepers article admonished us to essentially keep quiet about issues of vital interest and threats to freedom. The argument went:
- We’re preaching to the choir.
- Being informed is not enough. We need a plan that will be supported and acted upon.
- Otherwise, we could get in trouble for talking about it.
I disagree on several points. Here’s why.
First of all, not everyone is in the choir. The people in the pews — some not even paying attention — aren’t. The choir is comprised of activists, people who make and keep a regular commitment to practice, to improve, to work together and to perform. Appreciating (or not) the results of their efforts does not make one a member of the choir.
I do agree that simply being informed is not enough. No one intends for readers here to merely consume information and then do nothing else with it. That should go without saying, as should requests to share information with people we know that may otherwise only see what “gatekeeper media” wants them to. Ditto for writing to legislators.
In other words, there’s always something we can do with information if we want to.
When there are “projects” designed to elicit cooperation, Oath Keepers does that — all the time — from asking for volunteers, to helping fund educational projects, to providing humanitarian relief, to joining or re-upping membership. It’s on us whether we will heed those calls and pitch in, or ignore them.
The thing is, activism, even when joining with others, will always be an individual decision. And we don’t generally need group action. So if you see something like an ATF solicitation with a fast-approaching deadline up for public comment, we don’t need a consensus to act. If we’re serious about this, we ought to be involving ourselves without being asked.
If we see something else—something that does not solicit a specific action, like information on the Democrat budget shutdown, or oath-breaking generals joining forces with Gun-grabby Gabby, or domestic enemies embedded in high levels of government, why not share it, instead of complaining that learning of such things is “preaching to the choir” that will only get us in trouble if the wrong ears hear us talking about it?
On that last point, good grief. The day we fear speaking truth to power is the day we may as well surrender our guns, because we’ll have proven we won’t be needing them.
And since when is cutting off intel any kind of winning strategy?
If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work. You can donate HERE.
David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”