The Power is, and always will be, yours

Transferring your Power to government is always the wrong move.

People who believe in The State are guilty of this, and they impose it on you as well so they don't look as weak and stupid by comparison. They call for things like "making crime illegal again", "border control", "government efficiency", etc.-- pretending these are the "adult" positions. They aren't. 

They are trying to impose a State "fix" to a problem caused by the State. You can't solve problems caused by too much government with more government. Especially not with "more efficient" government. That's the path to destruction.

Those who grow tired of living with the consequences of crime, and with criminals emboldened by being protected from their victims by government, call for "making crime illegal again". What a stupid thing to say. 

This is a way of transferring your Power-- your obligation-- to defend yourself, others, and property from violators to someone neither able nor inclined to defend any of these things from freelance criminals unless it cuts into their own crime scheme too much. Transferring your Power and responsibility to government like a foolish child might want to do.

You have the natural human right to defend yourself from anyone committing crime whether their crime is illegal or not. Nothing can change this, although doing what you have a right to do will always carry some risk from The State. There's nothing so quickly punished as showing government to be unnecessary and harmful.

"Border control" is more of the same, but worse. Not only does it transfer your Power to defend your property from trespassers to The State, but it denies you have any property rights at all. It transfers your property to The State, denies you the ability to act on your responsibility to defend your property, then pretends the State should control everyone's property (and property that belongs to no one). It's state communism. If that's what you want, be honest about it and stop making excuses.

None of that garbage would even look necessary (or smart) if people would stop letting government take away their Power and stop pretending these things are not individual responsibilities. You can't really transfer your responsibilities to The State. It's going to fail every time because The State isn't a real thing-- it's a superstition. A superstition can't carry out your responsibilities on your behalf; neither can people acting on that superstitious belief, no matter how strongly they believe. Their incentives are messed up.

Government is never on your side. It subjugates you in order to steal your Power and it denies your responsibilities. It instead substitutes artificial "responsibilities" like obeying its orders.

Pretending otherwise doesn't do anything good for anyone.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Deniers of liberty on wrong side

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 12, 2025)

No one wants to be on the wrong side with the bad guys. At least, that's what people claim. Many of them don't seem to understand which side is wrong. As strange as it seems, it must be explained to them...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate your support.

Real crimes need individual victims

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 8, 2024)

President Biden was right to pardon his son, Hunter, after his conviction on gun and drug charges. Where President Biden went wrong was when he then failed to pardon everyone else who has been convicted on similar charges. People are sitting in prison today for the same acts. All such charges are bogus, regardless of who is facing them.

Everyone entangled in the justice system because of similar charges is a political prisoner. America is apparently trying to beat the old Soviet Union in the number of political prisoners.

Real crimes require a real, individual victim. The state and society are not capable of being victimized. If there is no individual victim, there is no crime.

If you use a gun to rob or murder an innocent person, you've committed a crime.

If you ignore a criminal federal agency's unconstitutional rules concerning purchasing, owning, or carrying a firearm, you haven't harmed anyone and have not committed a crime. No matter what government employees may claim.

You may still be kidnapped or killed by legislation enforcers for breaking their rules; like Little Rock, Arkansas airport executive Bryan Malinowski, recently killed by armed government agents. The enforcers are the criminals, not their victims. The criminals wore badges.

The same goes for those convicted of ignoring drug prohibition. Regardless of police state fearmongering, it's rare for anyone to force another to abuse drugs-- which would be a real crime. It's nearly always a choice.

If someone drugs your food or drink, this is an actual crime. As is misrepresenting a product you sell. If someone sells you a product you want to buy, and it kills you because you abuse it, that's on you. If there's a crime at all, it's a crime against yourself. Punishing the victims is cruel and unethical.

Crooked prosecutors will use drug or weapon charges to imprison someone when it's easier than finding a real crime. If they can't convict someone of a real crime, they should let them go. Even in the Twenty-first Century, it's still better for a hundred (or more) guilty people to go free than to imprison even one innocent person. Jailing one innocent person is inexcusable.

If Hunter Biden committed any real crimes by violating someone's life, liberty, or property, he owes restitution. That's between him and his victim; government has no part in it. The same as with any other crime committed by anyone.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Politickey Bear

When you mix anything with politics, the original thing-- even if it was well-intentioned-- is destroyed and you are left with only politics.

Smokey Bear is responsible for more devastating wildfires than DEI and AGCC ("climate change") combined.

Humans, even when they try, aren't good at clearing out the underbrush and combustible detritus that collects in most dry-ish ecosystems. That takes nature and natural frequent fires. Let the stuff burn out frequently and the fires can't get hot enough to get through the bark and kill mature trees.

Let that stuff build up because you are "preventing forest fires/wildfires" and when a fire does occur-- and it will-- the fire will burn hotter and longer and mature trees will burn and create more heat and more will be destroyed.

It's understood science. Smokey Bear's message is mostly anti-science and anti-nature. Yes, it sounds nice and helpful, but it's not. I want to like him and his message, but I can't. I see the damage this campaign has done and continues to do,

Even controlled burns are better than nothing, but are usually carried out when it's already too late.

Nature is as subject to being ruined when mixed with politics as everything else. Cities, too. Politics ruins everything it touches. Will the residents (and former residents) of Los Angeles learn? I doubt it. Once people have their minds destroyed by politics, they rarely get them back.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Don't make deals with government

Government never keeps its end of any agreement. Not if breaking it is more convenient for its purposes.

It has broken the Constitution, treaties with the natives, and deals with other governments. It broke the deal that got the gullible to agree to the "income tax" and to "social security". 

Government lies.

Don't ever make an agreement with government, unless you have a good plan to use it against government. But I warn you: you aren't as crooked, evil, and sneaky as government. Not even close.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

The "conservative" misunderstanding

A "conservative" made the following claim: "Our constitution (unique in the world) specifies what our government is allowed to do. Everything else is forbidden unless our government receives the consent of the governed (that’s us)."

Really? "forbidden unless our government receives the consent of the governed"? Where does the Constitution say that? 

Ignoring the disgusting "our government" brainwasher's phrase, if that were true, then America truly is a democracy, and might (through superior numbers) makes "right". Anything is on the table as long as enough people consent to allow government to do it. Ban religion? Confiscate guns? Establish a new slave trade? Sure, if enough of the "governed" consent, the Constitution would allow it. 

There would be nothing that's automatically beyond the power of the state if it can fool enough people to beg for it. Or make it look as though people are begging for it.

This is why "conservatives" are not on the side of liberty. They rarely understand it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Who needs Mondays anyway?

Another person has weighed in on why they want to impose Government Wrong Time permanently: "I want daylight when I come home from work."

OK.

That is the most common "reason" given.

I want a lot of things, too.

I want to live well into the 22nd Century, so let's just "spring forward" the calendar to the year 2099. That makes exactly as much sense, since numbering years is a human construct, anyway. Just like clock settings.

Or, let's eliminate Mondays from the week since they seem to be unpopular with most people and lasagna-eating cats. Six days seems like enough to call "a week". 

Then let's make a year officially 50 weeks, to keep things nice and neat. "Summer" will slide around the year so that people who want snow in July won't have to go to the Southern Hemisphere or climb K2-- just wait a few years. Seasons, and what we call them, are a human construct, too. Right?

I don't care. You do you. But don't try to force me to go along with dumb things. That's when I care. And calling me "legitimately retarded" doesn't have the desired effect. 

DST advocates say they could re-set their personal clocks (why, though?) but their employer wouldn't re-set the business clocks without government telling them to. Thus they are cheated out of the "extra hour of daylight". That's dumb. Sorry, but it just is. 

If, as almost all DST advocates claim, "everyone" prefers DST, it should be easy to convince businesses to open and close an hour earlier. Either just during the summer, or all year long. If "everyone" wants this, managers will be thrilled you gave them the idea. No need to fake the clock setting.

I've found about 75% of the people with a strong opinion on the matter have the two settings mixed up anyway, thinking we are now on DST rather than on Standard Time. Which complicates reasonable discussion.

(I've been sick with a nasty cold since New Year's Eve. It's wearing me down and my tolerance for BS is exceptionally low.)

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

The Big Divide

The biggest divide between myself and many self-proclaimed libertarians is over borders and "immigration".

I completely understand their concerns and their point, and I even sympathize somewhat, but you don't solve a problem created by government with a bigger, more powerful government. It's just not going to happen. Not ever.

Yes, I agree with them that "you can't have an open border and a welfare state". It's irrelevant. It's not my fault that they can't entertain the idea of abolishing the welfare state- which is the right thing to do regardless. Letting government decide where people can live is wrong, just like letting government redistribute confiscated property (to anyone) is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Nor do two rights make a wrong. The right thing is to take those powers away from the state entirely.

Yes, I agree that some newcomers are committing crimes-- just like some who were born here. The solution is to stop making defense a crime! It's true: I condone violence when that violence is defensive. I can't even comprehend any other position.

I don't want governments bringing "immigrants" or refugees here. I also don't want it to keep them out. I don't want it giving anyone handouts, or shielding them from the consequences of violating someone's life, liberty, or property. 

I do support forcing government to stop creating new refugees. I know, that's too radical a position.

The idea that the "country" is yours to control is a communist idea. If you like communism, just admit it and stop making bad excuses. Your property rights end at your property lines, and you don't have any ownership of someone else's property or of any "public" [sic] property. To insist this means I'm OK with leaving my doors unlocked and letting anyone move into my house is a way to admit you don't understand property rights at all. One is mine; the other is not.

This is entirely a government-created and a government-exacerbated problem. One that government uses to trick you into allowing it to have more power to smash your liberty. Stop siding with more government just because you hate "immigrants", "illegal" or not, more than you hate the state.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Free-thinking vs Brittle-tude

Even "liberal" young people are beginning to distance themselves from the "blue hair and pronouns" crowd. Their words, not mine.

I can tell you the blue hair isn't the issue.

Pronouns are generally either obvious or obviously wrong. You can waste energy fighting against that (in either direction) or you can laugh it off.

When I was young, a "blue hair" was a little old woman who couldn't see over her steering wheel. Some of them had a tendency to color their hair blue to hide the gray. Sometimes, although it was rare, they chose pink. There were several who did this in the church I attended as a teen.

There were some younger free-thinkers (who tended to be actual liberals) who also colored their hair colors of the rainbow. They weren't the narrow-minded fascists we see today with the creative hair coloring.

It's sad that the two things have become correlated. I appreciate creative hair colors and hate to see the style taken over by people so filled with hate, anxiety, and anger that you have to tiptoe through eggshells if you're within miles of them.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Time to stop respecting political authority

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 5, 2025)

If you're concerned about America's direction, there's a way to think about it that helps. It's also true.

America is the people, the natural wonders and resources, and the spirit of innovation. America is liberty...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate your support.

Politics just justification for stealing

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 1, 2024)

Once again, I've been told, by someone who is very serious, that every human interaction is inherently political. Few approaches to life are more tragic than this one. If you believe every interaction between people involves a political element, you're doing it wrong.

Politics is cheating. It's what you resort to when you can't persuade others to cooperate. It's the method of the mugger, not the person offering products or services. It's the use of force, coercion, aggression, threats, and lies instead of good arguments, consent, and mutual benefit. It's the choice of the freelance criminal and politician rather than the good neighbor.

If you believe every interaction is political it's because you've made it that way. This is the path of the loser and the tyrant. If this is what you put out into the world, don't be surprised when others feel forced to use politics in defense.

Politics is when you fund something through theft-- taxation-- rather than by collecting voluntary contributions. If you can't convince others to fund something, you need to let it go until enough people want it so much they're willing to contribute to it. Voluntarily, with consent. Nothing is so important it justifies stealing to get it done. Nothing.

Politics is when you pass legislation to get what you want instead of having a good argument to convince others to do things your way. You can't use the existence of criminals as your justification since they won't hesitate to break whatever laws you make up; all legislation only hurts honest people.

Politics is when you use threats of force to scare people into obeying you. You might be an abusive parent, a sexual attacker, a toxic boss, a police officer, or a schoolyard bully, but the method is the same. Those who use politics have more in common with each other than they'll admit; the only thing that matters.

The only time politics is necessary is in response to someone using politics against you. A mugger isn't likely to be talked out of stealing your money at gunpoint. A politician believes it's her job to boss you around and violate your natural human rights. Both are doing something no one has a right to do. You need to defend yourself.

There are ethical ways to get things done; trade and cooperation. Politics is the antisocial rejection of ethical ways. It's the worst choice.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Taxing taxes

All taxes are unethical-- whether you call them theft, extortion, or ransom. They take your property from you (mainly in order to keep you from having it) and they give it to your Ancestral Enemy: government. 

But it gets worse.

As long as there’s an “income tax”, all other taxes are taxes on already-taxed property. The tax is stolen from your paycheck, then every cent you spend of what's left gets taxed again and again. Each dollar gets taxed multiple times. That’s evil compounded on evil.

You know it, I know it, and taxers also know it, but they don’t care because evil is their "job."

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

Making government sound nicer

Sometimes those who want to justify government claim that governing is the same thing as managing.

No, governing is not the same as managing, not when you're discussing political governance, anyway. You can manage something without governing it. Yes, the definitions are probably the same (or have a lot of overlap) in order to make governing seem less toxic, but in practice, they are very different.

Most managers can't kill you-- with impunity-- for not immediately allowing them to tie you up and throw you in a cage. Or for not handing over your property at their demand. If a manager tried to act like government you could kill him/her in self-defense.

If a manager acted like government he would lose his "job" quickly. He would probably be sued into poverty. Only the veil of illusory legitimacy surrounding government protects those bad actors from facing the same fate. Or worse.

If you can't manage something without acting like government, you're doing it wrong. Governing is embracing failure.

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

Making evil losers safe from you

An evil loser plows a vehicle into a crowd at a German Christmas market.

An evil loser burns a woman to death.
An evil loser shoves a man onto subway tracks.
An evil loser kills a bunch of people in New Orleans.

Once again, it's not about the weapons evil losers use to harm and kill people (nor is it about where these evil losers were born); it's about the individual evil losers who intend to harm and kill people.

Only children, idiots, and political criminals focus on the weapons used in these attacks. 
In doing so, they make it safer to be an evil loser intent on harming and killing people.

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

2025

Welcome to 2025. I hope it's a good year for all of us.

Can you believe we are a quarter of the way into this century?

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

New explosion of racism

Racism is disgusting.

After years of living with the disgusting racism (and other varieties of bigotry) of "the Left", I see "the Right" decided to spend some time being disgusting racists, too. I guess they were feeling left out.

When racists are so racist they can't even read the words you write because they are too busy trying to make an entirely different (and still wrong) point, it becomes pointless to engage. I experienced this during the racist meltdown of the past few days.

Racists are some of the dumbest statists out there- right on par with the anti-gun bigots, the taxation apologists, and the copsuckers. But, then again, if statists were smarter they wouldn't continue being statists.

If you want to have a conversation about the relative worth of cultures, that's fine. Some cultures are just better than others. Any culture that respects life, liberty, and property is superior to any other culture, no matter what "race" the individuals in that culture may be. Those people are "my people". People who value theft, governing others, and other forms of archation are not my people. They are not my tribe, regardless of geography or anything else.

Once you understand that, the other things stop mattering.

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

Government makes people bad

Modern life makes people weak. Physically, mentally, ethically, and emotionally. There's not much selection pressure to be strong anymore. 

There is selection pressure to be bad, and I salute those who resist it. Much of that selection pressure comes from government.

Government protects bad people-- as well as stupid people and weak people-- at the expense of the others. Government rewards bad people and bad behavior-- not all bad people and bad behaviors, but too much.

Government provides a place for bad people to work. It provides cover and justifications for bad people to do bad things. It protects bad people-- government employees and freelancers-- from the consequences of their actions; consequences they would naturally face were government not shielding them.

Government is making humans weaker. It is making them worse.

Government turns normal people into bad people.

With all the other weakening pressures of modern life, government is too destructive to allow it to exist.

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

Keep reaching for a little more liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 29, 2024)

The year is winding down. I hope yours has been good and your next year will be even better.

I enjoy the week between Christmas and New Year. It might be one of my favorite parts of the holidays; it feels like a cozy nook to rest in and read a book. For me, it's a more relaxed time. The hustle and pressure of the holiday have calmed down, but the family holiday fun often lingers a while longer. So do the leftovers. It's a time to enjoy the present, reflect on the past year, and think about what I can do with the raw material of a new year. The future is what you make of it...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Please consider supporting KentForLiberty.

A kind of cancer: political government

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for November 24, 2024)

Should you try to make the world better or give up because it's hard? Judging by how those trying to make things better are treated, most people want you to give up.

When I say "better", I mean safer for life, liberty, and property. Those who are too weak or confused to live in the real world, or who benefit from ruling you, would have a different definition. Most of them believe keeping you like a zoo animal is better for them, and they'll work to make you imagine it's better for you. It's not.

Changing things for the better makes waves; most people don't want you to make waves and will try to thwart you. They'll fight to prevent you from making things better for them, personally. Weird, right?

Utopia is not an option, but Dystopia isn't inevitable.

You can accept "This is the world we live in" while knowing it could be better. You can work to change it. You can continue to point out the problems and what could be improved. This isn't being Utopian or living in a fantasy. It's a real-world acceptance of your obligation to refuse to accept bad things which may not have to be the way they are. Things you might be able to influence in a good way.

If this weren't the case, no one would be working to cure cancer. No one would do anything helpful and work to change "the way things are".

Some of us are working to cure another kind of cancer: political government. You can't cure it by making it more efficient or by rearranging the chairs on the deck. You can't cut out 80% of the tumor and pat yourself on the back for curing the patient. You can't even remove it and put something else rotten in its place.

Management consultant, educator, and author Peter Drucker famously observed, “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.” Since no one has a right to govern other people, trying to do so anyway is something which should not be done at all. Add it to the list of crimes humans commonly commit. Stop excusing it and trying to justify it.

Maybe I don't have the cure, but no one can try to fix the problem until people like me point it out. I can at least do this much. So could you.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

All "force" is equal?

Of all the bad justifications for the variety of theft called "taxation" I've ever run across, the one I just encountered has to be the worst:

"Keeping private property requires force and taxation requires force, so if private property isn't theft, then taxation can't be theft."

This is obviously someone who can't do logic, doesn't understand the difference between defensive force and aggression, and doesn't respect consent.

This was in the context of advocating for "free health care" for all. This is the quality of thought that goes into such positions.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

Does evil "work"?

The main argument I see in support of statism is that it "works"-- and often that the statist can't see how anything else would work. I don't even care if it's true. It's irrelevant to the discussion. 

Yes, committing evil "works"-- or appears to do so. It is often pragmatic. But it's still evil.

I don't care how well governing others has worked (if it has worked) for the past 5000 years or so. No one has a right to do it. This means if you do it anyway, I'm going to see you as the bad guy and no argument to the contrary will convince me otherwise.

Ethical people govern themselves, never others.

I'm not angry over the claim, just like I don't get angry over flat-earthers' claims. Frustrated, yes. They are immune to reason and ethics. They are scared of liberty and will embrace any excuse they can make up to keep from having to face it.

But they are still deeply wrong, even if their way "works", and even if they ignore all the evidence that it doesn't work nearly as well as they insist it does.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

Sending love

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Don't sleep in dangerous public places

Situational awareness doesn't mean being paranoid. It means Living in High Definition. Being aware of the sights, sounds, colors, and people around you. It increases your pleasure at the same time it can protect you from danger- it's a two-sided coin.

Most people aren't interested in the HD Life, and I can't figure out why.

I feel awful about the woman who was murdered on the subway by being burned to death. My first thought was wondering how could she have let a stranger-- one who probably acted unstable-- get that close to her. Then I read that she was sleeping. Sleeping?!?

Don't sleep in public. No matter how bored or tired you are, find a safe spot before you nap. Hidden, if possible. It's why animals don't sleep out in the open unless they are with their tribe. Strangers in a subway station are not your tribe. You are at the lowest level of situational awareness when you're asleep. If you're asleep in a dangerous place, it's the worst possible situation.

Subways are known for their dangers. Unstable people congregate in cities, and in cities' subway systems. People know this. It's not a secret.

The murderer is 100% at fault here. 

And imagine being as utterly useless as the cop who strolled past and did nothing as she burned and as her murderer watched. 

Maybe, though, his victim would still be alive if she'd stayed awake and aware. I wish she had embraced the HD Life.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

Choosing sides

Those who violate life, liberty, or property are not on my side. 

It doesn't matter where they were born.
It doesn't matter if they do it for religious reasons or political reasons (that's redundant).
It doesn't matter if they believe they are the good guys, or if those they are aiming their archation against are really and truly bad guys. too.

It doesn't matter if they are terrorists, bureaucrats, murderers, presidents, muggers/tax collectors, rapists, cops, kidnappers, or any other variety of violator. They are not "my people". Neither are those who make excuses for any of these bad guys.

They could correct their behavior by stopping what they are doing, quitting any job that requires them to do it, admitting and renouncing their archation, and paying restitution to all they've harmed. This would start to put them on my side. If they choose instead to make excuses or call me names, that only puts the nail in the coffin.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

Personal responsibility better than government

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 22, 2024)

Have you unhitched your wagon from the dying mule of government? If not, why not? It's not helping you, in spite of the claims of its public relations team, but is holding you back. You could be better without it getting in your way and siphoning off the labor of your hands to benefit itself. More liberty, more wealth, more health, more self-respect...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

America safest in government gridlock

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for November 17, 2024)

After the election results were in, did you start crying, shaking, and screaming? Did you start threatening those who didn't support your preferred candidate? Did you announce to the world that you are leaving America to escape? Perhaps posting videos of your emotional crisis, whichever form it took, on TikTok?

If you're reading this, probably not.

If you did, though, it's a sign you take politics too seriously and may be allowing a handful of biased national media corporations to make you mentally unwell with their barrage of hoaxes and brainwashing. It's just a suspicion.

Some people say "everything is political", but if that's true, it's only because they make everything political. It's unnecessary and harmful.

I'm neither on the political right nor left, and I only agree with those sides when they are correct, but I've seen how the hyperpolitical left has recently become completely unhinged from reality. Anyone not in complete agreement with their most delusional positions is called "far-right". Apparently, most of those who bothered to cast a ballot in the recent election also noticed.

The political right has its own problems with reality. Tariffs, mass deportation, and dangerous "government efficiency" come to mind. Their bad ideas will give me plenty of fodder over the next four or more years.

When the 2020 election was called for Joe Biden, those on the right didn't post videos showcasing their mental illness. They did something else equally pointless-- they went to Washington DC and protested, trying to preserve "our democracy". Those on the left lied and called it an insurrection, then based years of lawfare on the hoax; ruining people's lives for doing things the Constitution protects their right to do, on property they are supposed to own. There are still "January 6" political prisoners being held.

This is simply more evidence of the problems the left has. Mainly, no independent critical thought is allowed. This has consequences; not owning up to it will only help the other side.

Since I'm a libertarian, I'm accustomed to being called "far-right" by the left and "leftist" by the right. It's a normal day for me. Recently, a wide swath of the political middle found themselves called "far-right fascists", or worse, by the left, too. I would be surprised if this doesn't affect elections.

But don't listen to me. I'm just someone who knows America is safest when a divided government results in gridlock.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Funding inexcusable evil

Hiding “good” ways to spend stolen money in a giant government budget bill doesn’t make you the good guy. Doing the same in a smaller government funding bill isn't any better. Vivek Ramaswami demonstrated you could continue to fund the feral government with a one-page bill. If you were crooked (or dumb) enough to want to do such a thing. There's no good argument for doing so.

First, you can’t do good things through bad methods like taxation or government. The inherent bad cancels out any intended good.

Second, sneaking something like funding for childhood cancer research into a huge spending increase bill just means you’re using kids as hostages or human shields. That makes you a monster who is trying to hide behind sick kids. 

It's not a good reason to continue funding government for even one more day.

Shut it down. Shut it all down.

Government “shutdown”? Make it real and permanent and don’t look back.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

They aren't statists because of their powerful intellect

It's interesting to me that statists can't seem to understand the simplest concepts. Or won't.

If you say the government of India has no right to block the internet, and that using the excuse of "drugs" and "terrorists" doesn't change anything, some lovely statist will tell you that you're "woke" for believing terrorists have rights. 

If you make clear that only someone who is w0ke would believe rights are given, or can be taken away or lost, and that anyone who violates the life, liberty, or property of another is the bad guy, "even if" they call themselves a government, they'll say you blame the victims of 9/11 for their own deaths.

They have nothing but straw men and mindreading. That's what serves their purpose best. Not rational thought or ethics; just Cathy Newmanesque "so what you're saying is..." nonsense.

Yes, I'm used to it, but it still amazes me that they try this hard to avoid understanding or thinking.

(illustration by Grok- me as a Star Wars character. With, apparently, a donut snake.)

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

Why did his mind go there?

I saw a video where two women were in public, along a street, shooting "at" each other. More like spraying bullets kinda, sorta, possibly in the general direction of the other woman. The shooter recording the video would say a phrase, then repeat it multiple times before moving on to another phrase and getting stuck in another verbal loop. The stupidity on display was ridiculous.

Someone asked, "Why is there an incessant need for them to repeat things OVER and OVER?"

My response was "When you have a vocabulary of only a few dozen words you run through the list pretty quickly and have to start repeating them."

This comment got me labeled a racist and a bigot. It caused at least two commenters to believe they could read my mind and know what I was thinking but didn't express.

One person said, "Why do you have to be racist just say the s**t is stupid and move on your f***ing inbred".

Me: "Has nothing to do with 'race' and everything to do with someone stupid enough to spray bullets indiscriminately. Why did your mind immediately go to 'race'? That’s weird."

Him: "Don’t act slow dips**t you know exactly what you ment [sic] when you said that KENT"

Me: "I said nothing about 'race' nor did it ever cross my mind. Look at everything I post on here and find anything that would disprove that. Do you think smart people spray bullets randomly in public? Really? Would you?
https://kentmcmanigal.blogspot.com/p/kentforliberty_24.html"

He declined to comment further, as far as I can tell.

And, no. I wasn't saying anything about the "race" of the woman making the video. But I am saying something about her intelligence: it was apparently incredibly low. 

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.

"Notable", according to Grok

I asked Grok to describe me. This is what it said:

Kent McManigal is a notable figure known primarily for his advocacy of libertarianism, specifically anarcho-capitalist or voluntaryist principles. Here are some key points about him:

• Libertarian Activism: McManigal describes himself as an anarchist, a Voluntaryist, and an abolitionist, focusing on spreading the ideology of radical libertarianism. He emphasizes the importance of individual freedom without the interference of government or coercive laws. His views advocate for a society based on voluntary interactions rather than state enforcement.
• Writing and Blogging: He maintains a blog titled "Kent's Hooligan Libertarian Website," where he regularly posts content discussing liberty, independence from government control, and critiques of political systems. His writing often touches on the concept of liberty from a post-political perspective, suggesting that politics itself is a form of organized coercion.
• Publications: McManigal has authored works like "Kent's Liberty Primer," which serves as an introduction to libertarian anarchism. This book delves into concepts like the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP), negative and positive rights, and critiques of governmental systems, providing insights into how one can live a life of liberty in a world often dominated by state control.
• Public Presence: He has been active in sharing his views through various platforms beyond blogging, including columns in local newspapers like "The Eastern New Mexico News," where he discusses political topics from a libertarian viewpoint. He also engages with audiences on social media, particularly YouTube, focusing on liberty, independence, and nature.
• Personal Philosophy: His philosophy includes a strong disdain for politics, viewing it as manipulative and coercive. He advocates for individuals to take personal responsibility for their lives, promoting a culture of non-aggression and voluntary cooperation rather than reliance on or submission to political structures.

Kent McManigal's work is aimed at encouraging individuals to think critically about liberty and government, advocating for a world where personal freedoms are paramount and state intervention is minimal or nonexistent.

--

I asked Perplexity the same question and it gave me this answer:

Kent McManigal is a freelance writer known for his work on liberty, libertarian, and anarchist issues. He shares his thoughts primarily through his blog, KentForLiberty. McManigal describes himself as an explorer and creator of innovative solutions, and he is the creator of the Time’s Up flag. He prefers not to be labeled as a political writer, as he finds it hurtful when his work is described as such.

--

Of course, Grok warns, "Grok can make mistakes. Verify its outputs." So, what do you think? Did Grok do a good job? Did Perplexity?

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate any support.