Tactical Wisdom
Politics • News • Preparedness
On Resistance to Evil By Force Stdy
On Force & Evil
February 17, 2026
post photo preview

I know that I said we'd do two chapters, but Chapter 7, On Force and Evil, is so full of important points, that I felt we needed to delve into that one a little deeper.

It begins with the idea that most feel that the use of force on others is inherently evil because we are compelling someone rather than appealing to their will via clarity & love and doing so against their consent.  This doesn't actually make it evil though if it is done through the lens of spirituality and love (for example, because it is the right thing to do).

Some people, according to Ilyin, affirm their independence by pursuing evil deeds and possess a dead soul.  Love is dyting inside these people, despite their claims.  We aren't fighting spirituality when we resist such people (as Tolstoy and modern Christian Pastors say), but actually ANTI-SPIRITUALITY.  We're counteracting malice, not love.  That's the key difference.

If we don't physically resist them first, our appeals from clarity and love will only irritate them and drive them further into a frenzy.  I want to unpack this in light of yesterday's shooting in Rhode Island, because that was truly evil.  The left, and the trans movement, demands that we not only accept, but SUPPORT the evil idea that God makes mistakes.  When this man came out to his family as trans, he DEMANDED that they abandon their beliefs and become supportive of him.  When they didn't, and then they ATTEMPTED TO APPEAL TO HIM FROM LOVE AND CLARITY, it drove him into such a frenzy that he tried to kill them all.  This case from yesterday validates EXACTLY what Ilyin said in this paragraph 100 years ago.  You need to understand that trying to convince these people that they are wrong will only push them to more violence.  I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but I am saying you need to be ready for the physical consequences of it.

The bigger point Ilyin makes, and it's just as valid today, is that they cannot see past their instant gratification and anger towards any who would interfere with it until they are physically compelled to stop.  A guy robbing you isn't listening to you.  A trans shooter firing at random people in the mall doesn't care about Scripture quotes.

A great point Ilyin makes that we could all benefit from is that thinking that you can appeal to these people with facts and logic is both spiritually and psychologically naive.  People will not listen to facts that discount their worldview.  If you don't believe me, talk to a Q fan or climate changer about objective reality for like 2 minutes (or a sad ham about the reality that even the FCC doesn't care).  Stop thinking that memes and a clever Twitter reply game is going change hearts and minds (or souls).

The villain expresses his dissent with fury.  Not resisting him forcefully from the outset only makes it worse.  He will be more furious the next time.

Ilyin does an interesting exercise here about body language.  We use body language during conversations to convey sympathy and show that we are kind.  Therefore, the opposite attitudes can also be expressed through body language.  You can immediately tell if someone is intending violence or hate, by their body language.  Ilyin was out there dispensing Tactical Wisdom before it was cool.

On that same note, the villians use their bodeis to do evil, and we can use our bodies, through physical resistance to that evil, to express our disapproval and rejection.  It is a sign of our "resolute, wilful resistance to forbidden behavior".  Ilyin had a great way with words.

Failing to physically resist an evil physical act (an assault, shove, violence) is silent encouragment and complicity.  This is us turning "silence is violence" back on them.  If you allow someone to harm an innocent in front of you, it becomes easier for others to decide to harm innocents.  Instead, if every time a thug pushed an old lady on a train they got knocked out by a righteous protector, people would think twice before shoving others.

Here's a great Ilyin quote on this that I am thinking of having made into a wall hanging here at the Camp: "...And seeing the futility of Spiritual and verbal compulsion, he cannot, dares not, should not refrain from external suppression" (use of physical force).

Followed by: "For if the body of man is not above a man's soul and not more sacred than his spirit, it is not at all an inviolable sanctuary for malice or an unapproachable refuge for vicious passions".  BANGER.

He also points out that to failing to resist is moral prejudice ("we are above that"), spiritual cowardice ("I don't want to go to jail/be sued"), weakness, and sentimental superstition ("the Church says we cannot be violent because Jesus said turn the other cheek").  All of these attitudes lead to the non-resistance of evil.  Ilyin calls this spiritual desertion, betrayal, collaboration, and self-defilement.  He's right.

Here's a great illustration by him from the bottom of page 47 and top of page 48: "He is right who pushes the first-time explorer away from a cliff's edge, who will rip poison from the clutches of a hardened suicidal, who will strike the hands of the aiming revolutionary in time, who will knock down the arsonist at the last minute, who will expel blasphemous & disgraceful people from the temple, who will rush with arms at a crowd of soldiers raping a girl, who will bind the deranged and tame the possessed villain."  The reference to the revolutionary was about an attempt on the life the Tsar, but applies equally here.  Oh, and the one about the temple - that is 100% what should have happened inside that Minnesota church.

Ilyin has a pair of great quotes about the use of force to resist evil:

  1. "Acts which faithfully and courageously manifest a spiritual separation between the villain and non-villain."
  2. "Are they a betrayal of God's work on Earth? No, but faithful and dedicated service to Him."

The modern church could learn from #2, because that is an argument I get alot.

Here's a great quote on the motivation of those who use force for good versus those who do so for evil: "But he seems to say to the compelled: 'behold, you control yourself inattentively, erroneously, insufficiently, badly, and stand on the eve of a fatal precipice from which there is no turning back', or: 'you humiliate yourself, you rave madly, you trample on your spirituality, you are possessed by the breath of evil, ruin, and death, - stop, for here is the limit!".  I love "for here is the limit".

Here's a few more banger quotes to illustrate the case for force against evil:

  1. "The attacker attacks, the suppressor deflects."
  2. "The attacker demands obedience to himself, whereas he who compels requires obedience to the spirit and it's laws."

Physical compulsion against a bad guy and malicious violence against an innocent are not the same. They should not be confused as the same.

Ilyin pointed out that to gain a root, evil puts on a mask and pretends to be virtue, much like in our modern society.  "Evil finds entry to the soul much easier when it creeps and pilfers than when it attacks or destroys; it is more appropriate for evil to wear a mask than to reveal it's hideousness at the outset."  This is the LGBTQ movement and Drag Queen story hour.  They didn't start with "we're coming for your kids" - they started with "love is love" and "we just want to be equal".  The evil came later, after it was already entrenched.  As Ilyin put it they "praise evil,  reproach good, lie, slander, flatter, propagandize, and agitate."  Does any of that sound familiar?

Ilyin points out that once they are in charge, they immediately begin to issue orders and prohibitions, exile enemies, compel people by threats, offer goodies to their faithful, and appeal to everyone's bad instincts (envy/greed).

Friends, this is where you are TODAY.  This chapter was incredibly thought provoking.

Let me know your thoughts.

community logo
Join the Tactical Wisdom Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
5
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
BattlBox Mission 134 Unboxing

Here's my unboxing of BattlBox Mission 134: Every Day Carry. I highly recommned BattlBox.

Link to BattlBox: https://classic.avantlink.com/click.php?tool_type=ml&merchant_link_id=18d5f0dc-a5d5-4617-8d89-3672fa873181&website_id=b54d42a2-3e73-4f03-ac0d-a3e7b99eed53

00:14:14
Hoplite M10 Review

My video review of the Hoplite M10 Reusable Flashbang. It's a great tool available at: https://www.hoplitegear.com/product-page/m10-havoc

00:06:46
Timeline Cleanse

Time for a timeline Cleanse before WW3 kicks off.

00:00:10
INTEL BRIEF - LIVONIA MICHIGAN

Livonia Police responded to a call about an explosion at a house. When they arrived, police almost immediately shot someone, and no other information has been released.

The Michigan State Police are investigating.

INTEL BRIEF - IRAN

Iran struck a merchant vessel in the Strait of Hormuz. This lead to US Strikes against many Iranian sites. Iran has now struck a US base in Bahrain.

What a fantastic peace agreement.

INTEL BRIEF - IRAQ

IRAQI Security forces appear to be moving into the Green Zone. There are reports of potential mass arrests of politicians. Potentially a coup underway.

post photo preview
On Resistance to Evil by Force Study
Chapter 14: On the Subject of Love

Link to buy book: On Resistance to Evil by Force

Another great chapter, but a little shorter and a bit easier to read, mostly because I already understood this concept and knew all the Scripture he referenced.

Resisting evil is ONLY meaningful if it is done on behalf of good.  In other words, only the virtuous can recognize the evil and resist it from a stance of wanting to do good.  When evil happens to oppose some other evil, it is usually in service of it's own evil ideas, rather than a desire to do good.  At best, it is a collision of evil intentions between two others.  This means that us, as the virtuous, have to fight evil on two fronts, rather than just one.  This gives lie to the idea that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"; no, he is still your enemy and you'll have to fight him too, as soon as your paths diverge from the current same direction.  As Ilyin quoted in the book, if one snake eats the other snake, there is still a snake to deal with.

Ilyin points out that resisting evil is a net good and thus stems from spritual love.  

Love without a spiritual component is risky.  That leads to temptation and the potential to do evil under the guise of advancing love.  It becomes blind and self-defeating.  The spiritual component is what compels us to be willing to die for something other than ourselves.

Ilyin points out the truth in Matthew 22:38 (Jesus replied, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind - this the First and Greatest Commandment", you heathens).  We must love God first in order to love our neighbors and see them in a new light.  Only then can we truly "Love thy neighbor."  Loving God is required and is inseparable from loving your neighbor.  This means that you see the Holy Spirit in others, just as it is in you.  

The movie The Road comes to mind.  In it, the father keeps telling the boy that they are "carrying the fire".  When the father dies and the boy meets a new family, he first asks them if they are "carrying the fire".  I think this is the same idea.

According to Ilyin, you must be a Son (or Daughter) of God to see anyone else as a Son of God.  This loves gives you a feeling of connection to something bigger than yourself.  These include: God, Church, homeland, your leaders, the other people.  This connects you to a cause that you would be willing to die for.

Ilyin writes that those who lack spiritual love usually put usefulness and equality above divinity (sound familiar?).  They say that everyone is equal and the no one is right or wrong.  This is where "living their truth" comes from.  They see events as destined to happen or inevitable.  They believe that everyone's happiness is more important than anything else.

On the other hand, those with spiritual love generally put divinity and goodness above all else, especially over usefulness or happiness.  Spiritual love knows that all are not equal.  This is where Ilyin drops the BANGER quote of the day: There are those "who are better off being killed than allowed to do evil."  WOW.  This is truly loving thy neighbor.  It's saying I love you too much to let you destroy your soul with an evil act, so I will stop you.  In this section, we see Ilyin quote the three eyewitness accounts of Jesus laying it down with the millstone quote (Matthew 18:6, Mark 9:42, and Luke 17:1-2).  One with spiritual love also knows the danger of letting "happiness" be the standard, because most people are perfectly happy with sin.

Another great Ilyin quote is in the chapter's closing:

"Noble death is always better than shameful life."

SIde note, in this chapter Ilyin leaves a footnote that references Heraclitus, fragment 49:

"To me, one man is worth 10,000 if he is first rate."

This means that a man with wisdom and courage is better than 10,000 without.  Strive to be the one man.  Be worthy of each other.

Let me know your thoughts below.

Read full Article
post photo preview
On Resistance to Evil by Force
Chapter 13: Overall Framework

Sorry for the delays this month - Allen's passing has really taken a lot more time and energy than I anticipated.  Thank you for sticking with me.

Ilyin opens the chapter by pointing out that only the truly good and truly faithful get to have a say in this discussion.  The spiritually lukewarm "come as you are" Christians or the "Living My Truth" folks are not morally strong enough to have a say.  They always equivocate or rationalize rather than take a stand.

An interesting point that Ilyin makes in this chapter is that no one ever asks if the villain is justified or morally right in his actions, only the righteous defender or person who intervenes.  They know that the villain isn't but did it anyway.  It's far easier to make the virtuous person feel guilty than the villain.  We saw this in our current world with both the Rittenhouse and Penny cases.  No one disucssed the attackers, just the defenders.  Saint Floyd is yet another example of this.

According to the text, our purpose in intervention should flow from a will to do good and to turn others to good.  We must aim to strengthen & implement good in the soul.

The weak and fearful always equalize good and evil in order to justify their own inaction.  They claim that everyone has a reason for the things they do and that culture/class differences cause evil behavior (sound familiar?).  The truth is that evil and good ARE NOT equal and neither are people who act evil and those who act good.  Never fall into this trap.

Interestingly, Ilyin said that people in his time said that you can't fix humanity's problems with incarceration and capital punishment.  It is so crazy that 100 years later, we are hearing people say the exact same thing.

Ilyin points out that physical action by itself is not enough.  We need faithfully directed social education towards good.  Force itself is temporary, spiritual foundations are permanent.

He explains it in a good way next.  Good and evil are in the mind, but they work through our physical bodies via physical action.  In order to stop physical evil, we must sometimes use our bodies (physical force) to stop the evil actions of another body (physical resistance by force).

While force is sometimes needed and perfectly permissible, it's use should be limited and a last resort.  Mental/spiritual complusion and reason should be used first, whenever possible, as it provides more lasting change than physical restraint does.  For this same reason, we must object to things like excessive force and torture.  While they might get compliance, it isn't spiritual compliance.  These things also breed contempt.

Ilyin notes that you cannot use force to compel love.

According to Ilyin, the use of force should not deprive the other person for the chance to use free will to change their behavior.  As long as reasoning works, it should be used and force avoided.  Phyiscal force, according to Ilyin, is permissible only when psychospiritual action (reasoning/appeals to humanity) is insufficient, invalid, or unfeasible.  Other factors to consider when deciding to use force include the time available (is an attack in progress or imminent), the intelligence or maturity level of the subject, the morality or culture of the subject, crowd behavior, and war considerations (not much reasoning during battle).

Ilyin makes another great point: We must always strive to comprehend the nature of evil and always be finding ways and means to overcome it.

Ilyin closes this chapter with 5 rules for the use of physical force in resistance to evil:

  1. We must be vigilant to recognize evil and to distinguish it from things that look similar (stupidity can look a lot like evil).
  2. We must learn how to prevent the growth of evil and to cultivate good.
  3. The one who resists must begin with spiritual measures whenever possible and understand that force is not independent of spiritual means.  They must be used together.
  4. We must understand when to stop using force and compulsion.
  5. We must keep tabs on our own motives to prevent evil from growing in us as we fight evil.

I loved this chapter.  Let me know your thoughts below.

Read full Article
post photo preview
On Resistance to Evil by Force Study
Chapter 12: On the World-Rejecting Religion

Ilyin begins fiery in this chapter, calling the "moralists" vague and inconsistent, and he's right.  We see this exact same behavior today with people who refuse to see the world as it is and attribute good morals and motivations to folks who just don't have any or to excuse behavior as a "quirk" or "being different".  Ilyin also points out that these people are 100% self-absorbed so their delusion rarely impacts their internal world in any meaningful way, and since they don't truly care what happens to others, they don't have an emotional reaction when a bad thing happens (it didn't imapct me, so why should I care?).

Ilyin points out the hypocrisy of Tolstoy and his followers believing both that the natural world has no violence in it and also that everything done against anyone else's wishes is violence.  He points out that the moralists decried seeking wealth and property as evil (socialism) and that they insisted that before any one has a child, all other children must be provided for first (again, socialism).  This is yet another parallel to our modern society where child-bearing is shunned and treated as unnecessary.  Ironically, no other creature in creation does this to their own species.

The list of things that the moralists (Tolstoy's followers and "Red Russians") wanted or were opposed to could be pulled from our struggles today, 100 years later.  He lists: Only physical labor is work and the benefit of someone else's labor is sinful, the need to abolish land ownership, they wanted to abolish hiring employees and paying rent, abolish laws and the military, limit factory production, eliminate the idea of money, and they wanted to abolish hunting and the eating of meat.  Weird, isn't it?

Tolstoy, in his writings, said that even if confronted with a man holding a knife to a victim while he himself had a revolver, he could not intervene.  Tolstoy said "I don't know if the man will strike the victim with the knife, but I know that my bullet will kill him.".  Tolstoy's position is that God's Will is what determines whether or not the victim is killed and we cannot interfere with that.  Of course, that is ludicrous on it's face and Ilyin spends a few paragraphs pointing that out.  In my mind, perhaps God put me there specifically to save one life and potentially more down the road by ending this one evil soul.

The moralists, and today's leftists, hide from the struggle between good and evil by blurring the lines nad saying that no one can judge another's morals and that intervening in their actions (even robbery or assault) is against the will of God.  Saying that, according to Ilyin, is a dodge meant to absolve them of anything in the world that doesn't directly impact them.

Tolstoy's people took it a step further, declaring that stopping someone from harming another (even a child) is immoral and blasphemy, because you are interrupting God's Will.  To believe this, Ilyin rightly points out, we'd have to beleive that God wants the innocent to be killed by the wicked and children abused.  That is just ridiculous on it's face, but we hear the same argument today, 100 years later.

This idea leads to victimhood and victim worship, while offers absolutely no deterrence to the offender.  The offender has literally no reason to stop, as no one will attach any consequence.  Ilyin points out the hypocrisy of pretending to love nad have sympathy while also allowing crime to go on undeterred.

Ilyin closes by reminding us that Tolstoy's moralist have a religious lack of will and a spiritual indifference, neither of which come from God.

Let me know your thoughts below.

 

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals