(My Clovis News Journal column for April 28 (?), 2016 )
George Washington may have once said something along the lines of "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force. Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
Actually, he probably didn't say it. With quotes, though, it doesn't matter who said it as long as it's true.
So, is it true?
No. It most definitely is not true.
When anyone claims government is a servant, they are lying in order to get you to accept the unacceptable. Government-- or more accurately, The State-- is never a servant. If it were, you could fire it and hire a replacement, or choose to do away with the position altogether. If a fire becomes a threat to your life, liberty, and property, you douse it. If you, individually, can't fire government and eliminate it from your life, it's not a servant.
Which leaves us with something admittedly dangerous, and not a servant. A dangerous, fearful master.
Once you learn what goes into making certain foods, you can't unlearn it. Maybe you don't care, or maybe you can get past it, but you'll always know.
It's the same with government. Once you learn what makes a group a "government" you can either ignore it or not let it bother you, but you can't forget.
Cooperation, such as pooling money and labor, mutual defense, and protection of the weak, is good. The moment you add theft and aggression-- the defining characteristics of government-- all the good is gone.
Force and taxation changes governance into government. It poisons everything it touches. It turns restrooms into battlegrounds of "must" and "must not", where everything not prohibited is mandatory. It eliminates private property and self ownership. It turns personal choices into crimes.
Government leaves no room for morality or ethics.
Statists are those who believe governing others is a legitimate activity. To this end they try to confuse you. They know you recognize governance can be good and necessary, so they substitute the degraded form, government, and hope you don't notice their sleight of hand.
Governance includes self control, but self control is never externally imposed. It doesn't enslave. Government, in the form of The State, is always evil. Always harmful. Always a net negative to society.
It's long past time to stop tolerating the dangerous, fearful master others want to impose on your life. Reject government in favor of liberty. Once you use the blunt instrument of government to have your way, you have failed. Why not win instead?
.
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
My struggle with Rightful Liberty
(Previously posted to Patreon. See what you've been missing? Subscribe today!)
No, it isn't always easy. Sometimes it is a bit of a struggle.
Sometimes I want to punish people. Sometimes I get mad and want to strike out. Sometimes I want to give up. Sometimes I feel the pull of my personal opinions and morals trying to convince me that violating someone else would be OK "just this one time".
When people around me do things I disagree with, things I think might reflect poorly on me, I feel the desire to force them to do what I think is right- but I realize that would be just as wrong as what they are doing. Perhaps even more wrong. Because I know better and they, apparently, don't.
In some ways liberty is so easy. The rules are simple and few: don't initiate force and don't violate the private property of anyone. A child can do it- and most already know the rules.
It takes years of indoctrination to make people forget the rules or believe they don't apply in certain cases. Overcoming that indoctrination, once it has taken hold, it not easy. That may be where all the difficulty lies.
Peer pressure is a powerful force. "Everyone else does it" (justifies aggression and property violation). It would be so simple to fall in line and do the same. No one would blink an eye or judge.
But I know it wouldn't be right. Not for me. For me it is harder to live with myself if I'm doing what I know isn't right than it is living without the approval of statists around me.
However, the Zero Aggression Principle isn't like a law. It doesn't give me excuses to beat you; it is a promise I make to you, telling you what to expect of me. Telling you that if I choose to violate my promise, I know you are justified defending yourself from me.
If you want "easy", maybe life isn't for you after all.
(If you know someone who might like [or hate with a white-hot seething passion] these posts, please share with them and encourage them to subscribe one way or another.)
.
No, it isn't always easy. Sometimes it is a bit of a struggle.
Sometimes I want to punish people. Sometimes I get mad and want to strike out. Sometimes I want to give up. Sometimes I feel the pull of my personal opinions and morals trying to convince me that violating someone else would be OK "just this one time".
When people around me do things I disagree with, things I think might reflect poorly on me, I feel the desire to force them to do what I think is right- but I realize that would be just as wrong as what they are doing. Perhaps even more wrong. Because I know better and they, apparently, don't.
In some ways liberty is so easy. The rules are simple and few: don't initiate force and don't violate the private property of anyone. A child can do it- and most already know the rules.
It takes years of indoctrination to make people forget the rules or believe they don't apply in certain cases. Overcoming that indoctrination, once it has taken hold, it not easy. That may be where all the difficulty lies.
Peer pressure is a powerful force. "Everyone else does it" (justifies aggression and property violation). It would be so simple to fall in line and do the same. No one would blink an eye or judge.
But I know it wouldn't be right. Not for me. For me it is harder to live with myself if I'm doing what I know isn't right than it is living without the approval of statists around me.
However, the Zero Aggression Principle isn't like a law. It doesn't give me excuses to beat you; it is a promise I make to you, telling you what to expect of me. Telling you that if I choose to violate my promise, I know you are justified defending yourself from me.
If you want "easy", maybe life isn't for you after all.
...........................
(If you know someone who might like [or hate with a white-hot seething passion] these posts, please share with them and encourage them to subscribe one way or another.)
.
Monday, May 30, 2016
Reply to a candidate
A candidate for a local office, whom I have met and supported in his brushes with anti-gun "laws", took offense when I said of all the candidates: "...they all believe government should force peaceful people, at gunpoint if necessary, to live the way they think they should."
He responded: "I have no special interests i work for and want goverment [sic] to really start taking care of all the people that have to pay taxes not just a select group. I think the people should be letting the goverment know what they want and need so your represenitives [sic] we elect can work on those problems."
Challenge accepted.
OK. Here is what I want and need from government:
I don't want government to "work for me" or to "take care of" me. I don't need it and certainly don't want it. This is like pretending that the mafia (or the Crips or any other cowardly gang of parasites) will work for me and take care of me, while ignoring that it is based upon theft and aggression- exactly like government is. Nothing good can come of that.
I want there to be no "taxation" committed against anyone. If anyone wants to donate money to government because they think government can spend it better than they can, I have no problem with that. Just don't force your neighbors to fund something that is morally or ethically reprehensible to them.
I want government to leave me (and anyone else who hasn't fallen for the superstitious belief in "authority") alone. I choose to opt out of government's protection racket. I would choose to opt out of its "services" as well- if government didn't enforce its monopoly with the threat of violence.
Don't enforce any "laws" on my behalf and certainly never impose a new one. There are only two kinds of "laws": the unnecessary and the harmful.
I don't need to be represented. And even if I did, it isn't possible for one person to honestly represent multiple others. A politician never represents those who didn't specifically v*te for him- those who v*ted for the other candidate or chose to abstain from v*ting. And most of the time he does things that those who did v*te for him don't want him to do. Representation is fiction.
Government can't solve problems. It can make them worse, shuffle them around, or it can get out of the way. I've never seen politicians choose to get out of the way.
And those things are never on the ballot. No matter who you v*te for (or against) you are propping up the myth that governing others is a legitimate activity.
I have no doubt that you and some others have the best of intentions when they seek to become part of government- I've been there myself. However, a good person changing government from the inside is about as likely as a good person changing the KKK from the inside. Which is more likely to be changed, the good person or the evil organization? I wouldn't ever v*te for someone I thought was a good person because I wouldn't condemn him or her to that fate.
It took me years to figure this out, so I don't expect anyone to read this and suddenly "get it". But really consider these things I've said.
He responded: "I have no special interests i work for and want goverment [sic] to really start taking care of all the people that have to pay taxes not just a select group. I think the people should be letting the goverment know what they want and need so your represenitives [sic] we elect can work on those problems."
Challenge accepted.
OK. Here is what I want and need from government:
I don't want government to "work for me" or to "take care of" me. I don't need it and certainly don't want it. This is like pretending that the mafia (or the Crips or any other cowardly gang of parasites) will work for me and take care of me, while ignoring that it is based upon theft and aggression- exactly like government is. Nothing good can come of that.
I want there to be no "taxation" committed against anyone. If anyone wants to donate money to government because they think government can spend it better than they can, I have no problem with that. Just don't force your neighbors to fund something that is morally or ethically reprehensible to them.
I want government to leave me (and anyone else who hasn't fallen for the superstitious belief in "authority") alone. I choose to opt out of government's protection racket. I would choose to opt out of its "services" as well- if government didn't enforce its monopoly with the threat of violence.
Don't enforce any "laws" on my behalf and certainly never impose a new one. There are only two kinds of "laws": the unnecessary and the harmful.
I don't need to be represented. And even if I did, it isn't possible for one person to honestly represent multiple others. A politician never represents those who didn't specifically v*te for him- those who v*ted for the other candidate or chose to abstain from v*ting. And most of the time he does things that those who did v*te for him don't want him to do. Representation is fiction.
Government can't solve problems. It can make them worse, shuffle them around, or it can get out of the way. I've never seen politicians choose to get out of the way.
And those things are never on the ballot. No matter who you v*te for (or against) you are propping up the myth that governing others is a legitimate activity.
I have no doubt that you and some others have the best of intentions when they seek to become part of government- I've been there myself. However, a good person changing government from the inside is about as likely as a good person changing the KKK from the inside. Which is more likely to be changed, the good person or the evil organization? I wouldn't ever v*te for someone I thought was a good person because I wouldn't condemn him or her to that fate.
It took me years to figure this out, so I don't expect anyone to read this and suddenly "get it". But really consider these things I've said.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Sunday, May 29, 2016
Teeth and dentists
If anyone can help, and wants to help, with my medical bills and especially with the dental work I am needing now, please either donate or share this with people who might. It's my GoFundMe page.
Added: I get more of any contributions if they come through Paypal (PayPal.Me/Dullhawk).
.
Added: I get more of any contributions if they come through Paypal (PayPal.Me/Dullhawk).
.
When we disagree, somebody is wrong (it might be me)
If I don't agree with you, I'm going to think you are wrong. That's pretty much what not agreeing with you means.
If I thought I was wrong, I wouldn't disagree with you- not for long. I'd change my mind and then I'd agree with you.
So, yeah, obviously if we disagree I pretty much have to believe you are the one who is wrong. That's just the only way that can work.
So, yeah, obviously if we disagree I pretty much have to believe you are the one who is wrong. That's just the only way that can work.
If it matters that I think you are wrong, use reason to change my mind and get me to agree with you, or use reason to see that you were wrong and change your mind. (Here's a hint, though: not all opinions are equally valid, even if we really want to believe them).
Don't appeal to your feelings or emotion, because that may make me feel bad, but it will do nothing to make me think you are right.
Getting angry about any of this is pointless. Don't get angry, get convincing.
Don't appeal to your feelings or emotion, because that may make me feel bad, but it will do nothing to make me think you are right.
Getting angry about any of this is pointless. Don't get angry, get convincing.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
Saturday, May 28, 2016
At times like this...
... I suspect I took the wrong path.
I should have dedicated myself to making money above all else. Because at times like this, money seems to be all that matters. I screwed up.
I need to fix it.
I could stop giving away any of my writing for free, and put it all on Patreon or by subscription only, but I suspect that those who would pay to read what I write, already do. I may try it though, because I've got to do something.
Household income dropped to almost nothing for about four months, and due to Unfortunate Truth #3, even that amount was cut substantially.
I have two critical things that I need vast amounts of money for in the immediate future, one dental and one house-related, and GoFundMe just isn't working (apparently you need to be an injured "hero" like a veteran or cop, or a dying child, for GoFundMe to work- I'm none of those, nor would I want to be). I have past medical bills that have been sent to collection agencies, and I have more expenses (such as car repairs) that I know are coming. The money just isn't there.
I see how "easy" the money comes for all my family who work in government, and I understand why they refuse to see that working for The State in any capacity is unethical. When you have a choice between being in my financial position and being in theirs, I can see how ethics can be an inconvenient annoyance to be ignored at all cost, and how morals can be plastic and molded to fit the situation. I sometimes wish it were that easy for me. I realize that not everyone who is doing well financially has a government, or otherwise unethical, job. Just the majority of the ones I know personally.
Asking readers to pay for writing doesn't seem to work. The same people keep being the ones who pony up, and even mentioning money in a blog post- as I often end up doing- makes me feel sick. And from comments I have received, I know I'm not the only one who feels that way.
I know I am not the only one having this trouble. I see so many friends on the edge of financial disaster, and more fall over that edge every day. That only makes me wish I had even more money, because I desperately want to help them- and I know they would do the same for me if only their situation were better. But here we are.
I have obligations that prevent me from taking most "normal" jobs. I need to be able to continue taking care of my daughter, after all. I won't relegate her to "latchkey kid" status. But "taking care" of her also requires money, not just my physical presence and support. Finding some way to bring in more money, while being able to do what I have to do, seems hopeless. I won't do "MLM", and I lose money as a salesman every time I get myself into that sort of thing. I certainly can't afford that again.
If I try anything in the Black Market (or even the Gray Market), I will not have support of anyone in my house. It could easily result in me not even having a house.
I'm about at the end of my rope, though.
A few years ago I had a friend who made money with everything he touched. He never could understand why some people (such as myself) had trouble making money. He said it was so easy... but he could never explain it. He said the way to make money is "you just make money". I did notice that he started out every new venture with a lot of money, put it to work, and then made lots more, and I wonder how he would have done starting from nothing, without the connections he had. But, being nice, I never questioned him about that, nor would I have wanted to see him in that position if it would have meant him failing. I am not one of those people who wants to see others fail just because I do.
I apologize for the negative tone of this post. I couldn't sleep with all this weighing on me and got up to write this. It was probably yet another mistake. But now you know.
.
I should have dedicated myself to making money above all else. Because at times like this, money seems to be all that matters. I screwed up.
I need to fix it.
I could stop giving away any of my writing for free, and put it all on Patreon or by subscription only, but I suspect that those who would pay to read what I write, already do. I may try it though, because I've got to do something.
Household income dropped to almost nothing for about four months, and due to Unfortunate Truth #3, even that amount was cut substantially.
I have two critical things that I need vast amounts of money for in the immediate future, one dental and one house-related, and GoFundMe just isn't working (apparently you need to be an injured "hero" like a veteran or cop, or a dying child, for GoFundMe to work- I'm none of those, nor would I want to be). I have past medical bills that have been sent to collection agencies, and I have more expenses (such as car repairs) that I know are coming. The money just isn't there.
I see how "easy" the money comes for all my family who work in government, and I understand why they refuse to see that working for The State in any capacity is unethical. When you have a choice between being in my financial position and being in theirs, I can see how ethics can be an inconvenient annoyance to be ignored at all cost, and how morals can be plastic and molded to fit the situation. I sometimes wish it were that easy for me. I realize that not everyone who is doing well financially has a government, or otherwise unethical, job. Just the majority of the ones I know personally.
Asking readers to pay for writing doesn't seem to work. The same people keep being the ones who pony up, and even mentioning money in a blog post- as I often end up doing- makes me feel sick. And from comments I have received, I know I'm not the only one who feels that way.
I know I am not the only one having this trouble. I see so many friends on the edge of financial disaster, and more fall over that edge every day. That only makes me wish I had even more money, because I desperately want to help them- and I know they would do the same for me if only their situation were better. But here we are.
I have obligations that prevent me from taking most "normal" jobs. I need to be able to continue taking care of my daughter, after all. I won't relegate her to "latchkey kid" status. But "taking care" of her also requires money, not just my physical presence and support. Finding some way to bring in more money, while being able to do what I have to do, seems hopeless. I won't do "MLM", and I lose money as a salesman every time I get myself into that sort of thing. I certainly can't afford that again.
If I try anything in the Black Market (or even the Gray Market), I will not have support of anyone in my house. It could easily result in me not even having a house.
I'm about at the end of my rope, though.
A few years ago I had a friend who made money with everything he touched. He never could understand why some people (such as myself) had trouble making money. He said it was so easy... but he could never explain it. He said the way to make money is "you just make money". I did notice that he started out every new venture with a lot of money, put it to work, and then made lots more, and I wonder how he would have done starting from nothing, without the connections he had. But, being nice, I never questioned him about that, nor would I have wanted to see him in that position if it would have meant him failing. I am not one of those people who wants to see others fail just because I do.
I apologize for the negative tone of this post. I couldn't sleep with all this weighing on me and got up to write this. It was probably yet another mistake. But now you know.
.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
An upsetting truth
It happened again. And therein lies a lesson: If you say something someone doesn't want to hear, they will get upset.
It doesn't matter if it's the truth, an opinion, or a lie. All that matters is that they don't want to hear it.
Of course, often the truth will make them strike out the worst, because a flawed opinion or a lie can easily be countered with truth, but the only thing a person upset by the truth can do is... well, something crazy.
If the truth is that your heroes are individuals committing deeply evil acts, you need to let go of your heroes, not get upset at the truth. And that truth is upsetting to many people.
It doesn't matter if it's the truth, an opinion, or a lie. All that matters is that they don't want to hear it.
Of course, often the truth will make them strike out the worst, because a flawed opinion or a lie can easily be countered with truth, but the only thing a person upset by the truth can do is... well, something crazy.
If the truth is that your heroes are individuals committing deeply evil acts, you need to let go of your heroes, not get upset at the truth. And that truth is upsetting to many people.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Choosing your designated mugger
(A Patreon/subscriber-only post)
If you were to think of "the town drunk", you probably have someone in mind. If that person died, would you want to help choose the next one? Or might you think the position is expendable?
What about those who do real harm? There are all sorts of violators in your town- you probably know some of their names. Does the individual violator's identity matter, or is their aggression or property violation the critical part? What if you were asked to help choose the town mugger, or rapist, or murderer, or child molester? (Subscribe to read the rest)
If you were to think of "the town drunk", you probably have someone in mind. If that person died, would you want to help choose the next one? Or might you think the position is expendable?
What about those who do real harm? There are all sorts of violators in your town- you probably know some of their names. Does the individual violator's identity matter, or is their aggression or property violation the critical part? What if you were asked to help choose the town mugger, or rapist, or murderer, or child molester? (Subscribe to read the rest)
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Arbitrary rules
Arbitrary rules are OK for games, but destructive for life.
I mean, really, there is no rational reason to "Pass Go- collect $200". It makes the game work in a consistent way, but the rule, at its foundation, is arbitrary. And no one will force you to play if you don't like the rules.
"Speed limit- 60 MPH" is also an arbitrary rule. A rule you might be murdered for ignoring. Traveling at 59 MPH is in no way more ethical than traveling at 61 MPH. It isn't wrong to simply "speed". The rule is arbitrary in every way. However, you really have no ability to opt out, since the bullies who claim the roads are going to steal from you to pay for the roads and to hire their highwaymen to patrol and rob travelers whether you consent or not.
Saying alcohol is "legal" (sort of, under certain circumstances) and Cannabis is "illegal" is completely arbitrary. You can also be murdered for breaking that counterfeit rule.
I don't mind arbitrary rules that I can opt out of. But I despise ridiculous arbitrary rules it's possible to be murdered over. And, of course, all "laws" are enforced by death. The State's arbitrary rules are evil. Enforcing them is always wrong.
I mean, really, there is no rational reason to "Pass Go- collect $200". It makes the game work in a consistent way, but the rule, at its foundation, is arbitrary. And no one will force you to play if you don't like the rules.
"Speed limit- 60 MPH" is also an arbitrary rule. A rule you might be murdered for ignoring. Traveling at 59 MPH is in no way more ethical than traveling at 61 MPH. It isn't wrong to simply "speed". The rule is arbitrary in every way. However, you really have no ability to opt out, since the bullies who claim the roads are going to steal from you to pay for the roads and to hire their highwaymen to patrol and rob travelers whether you consent or not.
Saying alcohol is "legal" (sort of, under certain circumstances) and Cannabis is "illegal" is completely arbitrary. You can also be murdered for breaking that counterfeit rule.
I don't mind arbitrary rules that I can opt out of. But I despise ridiculous arbitrary rules it's possible to be murdered over. And, of course, all "laws" are enforced by death. The State's arbitrary rules are evil. Enforcing them is always wrong.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Making laws much like littering
(My Clovis News Journal column for April 22, 2016)
I always try to leave my surroundings a little better than I find them. If I see a problem needing to be fixed, I do my best to fix it.
Sometimes leaving the world better means picking up litter, or hooking a loose seat back on a swing for the kids.
Other times there's not much I can personally do and I have to be content pointing out the mess so others can help. Such as when encouraging people to stop littering the world with "laws".
I see laws the same way I see other litter: as clear evidence irresponsible people have been here and left their mark. They toss their trash on everyone else without the slightest hint of awareness of what they have done. Or, in the case of laws, even suffering the delusion they are doing something useful.
While it's easy to walk around and pick up paper and plastic litter, it is harder to put "laws" in their place. Too many people want to leave them where they lie, and get offended if you suggest there's a problem with an obvious solution.
Since I can't physically pick up a law and toss it in the burn barrel, what can I do? I can point out the mess to others so they won't step in it; I don't comfort those who pollute the world with laws, and I don't support those who insist on enforcing them. This helpfulness comes with risk.
Of course, I have cut myself on other forms of litter too. Anything worth doing carries risk.
One thing I haven't experienced yet is having someone see me picking up litter, then running up to knock the trash out of my hand and attack me for what I am doing. This is very different than the reaction when you become aware and concerned about law pollution. Stockholm Syndrome is deeply rooted where laws are concerned.
If you make up a law which must be enforced, you can be sure it isn't a real law. No law is necessary to give you the right to defend yourself or others from attackers or thieves, nor to demand restitution. But, without a law backing them, few would get away with stopping travelers for going a little faster than some arbitrary rule allows, and taking money from them. There are only two kinds of laws; the harmful and the unnecessary. Which of those do you pollute our world with?
I always try to leave my surroundings a little better than I find them. If I see a problem needing to be fixed, I do my best to fix it.
Sometimes leaving the world better means picking up litter, or hooking a loose seat back on a swing for the kids.
Other times there's not much I can personally do and I have to be content pointing out the mess so others can help. Such as when encouraging people to stop littering the world with "laws".
I see laws the same way I see other litter: as clear evidence irresponsible people have been here and left their mark. They toss their trash on everyone else without the slightest hint of awareness of what they have done. Or, in the case of laws, even suffering the delusion they are doing something useful.
While it's easy to walk around and pick up paper and plastic litter, it is harder to put "laws" in their place. Too many people want to leave them where they lie, and get offended if you suggest there's a problem with an obvious solution.
Since I can't physically pick up a law and toss it in the burn barrel, what can I do? I can point out the mess to others so they won't step in it; I don't comfort those who pollute the world with laws, and I don't support those who insist on enforcing them. This helpfulness comes with risk.
Of course, I have cut myself on other forms of litter too. Anything worth doing carries risk.
One thing I haven't experienced yet is having someone see me picking up litter, then running up to knock the trash out of my hand and attack me for what I am doing. This is very different than the reaction when you become aware and concerned about law pollution. Stockholm Syndrome is deeply rooted where laws are concerned.
If you make up a law which must be enforced, you can be sure it isn't a real law. No law is necessary to give you the right to defend yourself or others from attackers or thieves, nor to demand restitution. But, without a law backing them, few would get away with stopping travelers for going a little faster than some arbitrary rule allows, and taking money from them. There are only two kinds of laws; the harmful and the unnecessary. Which of those do you pollute our world with?
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
No time like the present (PINNED- new posts below this one)
If you have never supported this blog financially, this would be a great time to start. Or to make a one-time offering.
There have been lots of unfortunate financial things going on in recent months- I'll spare you the details.
Please check out the options for support over to the right
, and if you feel this blog has been of any value to you, please consider trading value for value.
.
There have been lots of unfortunate financial things going on in recent months- I'll spare you the details.
Please check out the options for support over to the right
, and if you feel this blog has been of any value to you, please consider trading value for value..
Get the message? This is what they are saying
 |
| This IS what they are telling you. |
This is all I see, just about everywhere I go. Except that often there is no image, just an poster-sized page of small print citing the Texas law that justifies and legalizes their anti-social behavior.
And it is like a slap in my face.
I am almost tempted to have a bunch of stickers like this printed up and stick them over every anti-liberty bigot's "no guns" sign I see. No, I won't because of property rights, but I am so sick of not being welcome anywhere in this region, it is seriously disgusting.
There is now one exception, which I have been rewarding with my business since they quietly removed their "no liberty allowed" signage a while back. Too bad they are so expensive and don't stock everything I need.
Apparently, from what others have told me, other stores owned by the same companies in other places welcome guns... but not around here. Nope. Almost every door you approach has a anti-rights sign posted.
On the other hand, this is something I'd like to see, but have about given up on, in this extremely anti-gun area of Texas/New Mexico:
 |
| Wouldn't it be nice to matter? |
-
Monday, May 23, 2016
Restroom dramatists
This is how I see the "issue".
Yes, your opinion may differ. That's your business. Make a video laying out your position and link to it in the comments if you feel strongly about it.
Yes, your opinion may differ. That's your business. Make a video laying out your position and link to it in the comments if you feel strongly about it.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
The Endorsement
I am proud to make my official endorsement for 2016.
Drum roll, please...
I endorse....
You.
Who were you expecting?
Only YOU can run your own life. Even if you are an incompetent idiot, you will still do a better job running your own life than some government employee. Only YOU really have your own best interests at heart (even if you screw up), and only YOU know the circumstances of your life and the situation you find yourself in.
I whole-heartedly, without reservation, endorse you.
And there you have it.
So, make it count.
Drum roll, please...
I endorse....
You.
Who were you expecting?
Only YOU can run your own life. Even if you are an incompetent idiot, you will still do a better job running your own life than some government employee. Only YOU really have your own best interests at heart (even if you screw up), and only YOU know the circumstances of your life and the situation you find yourself in.
I whole-heartedly, without reservation, endorse you.
And there you have it.
So, make it count.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Sunday, May 22, 2016
Clash of the Lowly things
Believe it or not, sometimes a cop shoots a person who deserves to be shot. That isn't the majority of the cases, but it does happen.
Am I supposed to get worked up about it, one way or another?
When a cop shoots a freelance bad guy- a thief caught in the act or an aggressor during an attack- I don't necessarily feel the good guys "won". I feel the same way I feel when a freelance bad guy shoots a cop. It's just a clash of vermin. Bad guy vs. bad guy. Not my circus, not my monkeys.
For all I care they can wipe each other off the face of the planet; the rest of us would be better off. I just always hope no innocent people get hurt in the crossfire between the warring vermin. There are some people you are simply better off staying far away from. Cops are among them.
#CopsAreScum
Am I supposed to get worked up about it, one way or another?
When a cop shoots a freelance bad guy- a thief caught in the act or an aggressor during an attack- I don't necessarily feel the good guys "won". I feel the same way I feel when a freelance bad guy shoots a cop. It's just a clash of vermin. Bad guy vs. bad guy. Not my circus, not my monkeys.
For all I care they can wipe each other off the face of the planet; the rest of us would be better off. I just always hope no innocent people get hurt in the crossfire between the warring vermin. There are some people you are simply better off staying far away from. Cops are among them.
#CopsAreScum
-
And don't forget to check back tomorrow to see who I am endorsing in 2016.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Saturday, May 21, 2016
My endorsement coming soon
I know you've been holding your breath!
Watch for a major announcement on this blog Monday, as I make my official 2016 endorsement.
Watch for a major announcement on this blog Monday, as I make my official 2016 endorsement.
-
Please consider: If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
Friday, May 20, 2016
Feel the freedom?
Had to take a non-elective trip to the Big City for medical stuff today, and I don't think I have ever seen so many ScumCars on the highway in my life.
There was a state trooper every few miles- half of them stopped and committing acts of enforcement against people. In one case a couple of them had ganged up on one traveler and were on the phone, probably seeking more molesters to come for back up.
Boy, I feel so protected I need to scrape the freedom off my skin with a cheese grater.
#CopsAreScum
There was a state trooper every few miles- half of them stopped and committing acts of enforcement against people. In one case a couple of them had ganged up on one traveler and were on the phone, probably seeking more molesters to come for back up.
Boy, I feel so protected I need to scrape the freedom off my skin with a cheese grater.
#CopsAreScum
-
Please: If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Thursday, May 19, 2016
Acquire skills!
If you have the right skills you can survive naked in the wilderness, at least until you can make your own clothes and tools to make things easier.
I do not yet have enough skills. I'm not even sure how to define "enough" when it comes to skills.
But every skill you learn will make it easier. Every skill will also make some "thing" unnecessary.
I love looking through "sportsman's" catalogs, especially at their camping gear. But so often I look at things and think "why would anyone buy that when it's so unnecessary".
It's usually because they are missing skills that would make it unnecessary.
It doesn't mean you have to then stop using tools you can buy. Nothing makes you value modern firemaking tools more than learning the skills to do without them. And the same goes for the value of a good knife, and shoes.
Learn skills to make as much unnecessary as possible. Then you can still get the stuff you want, but you won't need it.
I do not yet have enough skills. I'm not even sure how to define "enough" when it comes to skills.
But every skill you learn will make it easier. Every skill will also make some "thing" unnecessary.
I love looking through "sportsman's" catalogs, especially at their camping gear. But so often I look at things and think "why would anyone buy that when it's so unnecessary".
It's usually because they are missing skills that would make it unnecessary.
It doesn't mean you have to then stop using tools you can buy. Nothing makes you value modern firemaking tools more than learning the skills to do without them. And the same goes for the value of a good knife, and shoes.
Learn skills to make as much unnecessary as possible. Then you can still get the stuff you want, but you won't need it.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Scum shirt
In case you still believe I'm crazy when I state that cops are scum, just look at this shirt:
It is a cop shirt. It is said to be a very popular design.
I suppose police state enthusiasts may believe it is funny. They apparently believe everyone violated by cops "deserves it".
I see no humor in it. In fact, to me it is about as funny as a shirt showing a Nazi concentration camp with the words "May I interest you in a shower?" emblazoned on the image.
It is certainly NOT the shirt of a good guy, but that of a cowardly bully with delusions of "authority".
I suppose police state enthusiasts may believe it is funny. They apparently believe everyone violated by cops "deserves it".
I see no humor in it. In fact, to me it is about as funny as a shirt showing a Nazi concentration camp with the words "May I interest you in a shower?" emblazoned on the image.
It is certainly NOT the shirt of a good guy, but that of a cowardly bully with delusions of "authority".
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Theft by any other name still theft
(My Clovis News Journal column for April 15, 2016)
What do you call the act of taking property under threat of doing something unpleasant to any victim who refuses to comply? Obviously it is theft.
What do most people call an identical act when committed by government employees? Taxation.
Why the hypocrisy? Giving an act a new name doesn't change its nature. Taxation is theft.
Of course, I have heard some taxation apologists claim your money isn't yours at all- it all belongs to government and you should be grateful they allow you to keep any of it. What couldn't be justified under such an absurd belief system?
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. got it backwards when he asserted taxation is the price we pay for a civilized society. In truth a civilized society is what we often manage to create in spite of taxation. Allowing taxation to continue limits how civilized a society can be.
Some people eventually come to terms with the truth that taxation is theft, but still find ways to excuse it. They believe society can't function without taxation.
If you want something not popular enough to be voluntarily funded, you need to let it go. If your idea is good, why would you need to force people to go along, threatening them with prison- or worse- if they'd rather opt out?
If something is wanted or needed, it will happen without robbing your neighbors. It is wrong to force people to pay for things they won't fund voluntarily, and it is evil to force them to finance things they oppose. Things like war, prohibition, government schools, abortions, welfare, and government agencies such as the BATFE which are criminal by their very existence.
Is a parking lot mugging justified if the mugger promises to spend a portion of the money on things you need? Or if he is using the plunder to feed orphans and widows? What if the mugger promises to hire strongmen to patrol the neighborhood to prevent any other muggers from operating in his territory?
If you keep money safely hidden from the mugger in your shoe, have you committed mugging evasion? Do you owe the mugger?
Theft is theft even if you really want to use the money for something good. Taxation is theft even if it pays your salary. Theft doesn't magically become OK if you give a percentage of it back to your victims. And taxation is theft even if you can't imagine living without it.
This would be an excellent time to subscribe or donate; income in this household is way down and expenses the past couple of months are way up. Of course, you take care of you and yours first. Only donate or subscribe if you can afford it, and IF you believe you get value from my scribblings and occasional videos. Follow the arrow to the options.
.
What do you call the act of taking property under threat of doing something unpleasant to any victim who refuses to comply? Obviously it is theft.
What do most people call an identical act when committed by government employees? Taxation.
Why the hypocrisy? Giving an act a new name doesn't change its nature. Taxation is theft.
Of course, I have heard some taxation apologists claim your money isn't yours at all- it all belongs to government and you should be grateful they allow you to keep any of it. What couldn't be justified under such an absurd belief system?
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. got it backwards when he asserted taxation is the price we pay for a civilized society. In truth a civilized society is what we often manage to create in spite of taxation. Allowing taxation to continue limits how civilized a society can be.
Some people eventually come to terms with the truth that taxation is theft, but still find ways to excuse it. They believe society can't function without taxation.
If you want something not popular enough to be voluntarily funded, you need to let it go. If your idea is good, why would you need to force people to go along, threatening them with prison- or worse- if they'd rather opt out?
If something is wanted or needed, it will happen without robbing your neighbors. It is wrong to force people to pay for things they won't fund voluntarily, and it is evil to force them to finance things they oppose. Things like war, prohibition, government schools, abortions, welfare, and government agencies such as the BATFE which are criminal by their very existence.
Is a parking lot mugging justified if the mugger promises to spend a portion of the money on things you need? Or if he is using the plunder to feed orphans and widows? What if the mugger promises to hire strongmen to patrol the neighborhood to prevent any other muggers from operating in his territory?
If you keep money safely hidden from the mugger in your shoe, have you committed mugging evasion? Do you owe the mugger?
Theft is theft even if you really want to use the money for something good. Taxation is theft even if it pays your salary. Theft doesn't magically become OK if you give a percentage of it back to your victims. And taxation is theft even if you can't imagine living without it.
-
This would be an excellent time to subscribe or donate; income in this household is way down and expenses the past couple of months are way up. Of course, you take care of you and yours first. Only donate or subscribe if you can afford it, and IF you believe you get value from my scribblings and occasional videos. Follow the arrow to the options.
.
Being nice to violators
How nice should you be to murderers, rapists, and thieves? How nice should you be to their friends and family who support and approve of their nasty deeds? What if they have all been carefully brainwashed for a lifetime to not see their acts as murder, rape, or theft?
Does this excuse them and obligate you to overlook what they do? To be nice to them?
This is the exact situation with those who work for government.
It doesn't matter if you are talking about a kindergarten teacher, the janitor who mops the courthouse, or the cop who murders a jaywalker who he claims appeared to have a gun.
If you work for government in any capacity, you are doing wrong. You are harming rightful liberty. Do you still expect your victims to be nice about it?
I understand those who say they are undermining the State from the inside. And maybe this occasionally does some good. I also understand they need to not be noticed as infiltrators so as to not be kicked out. But if you put on the uniform and hang out with the bad guys, you must expect to be shot as an enemy. It's a hazard you knew and accepted when you chose that path, and it's no one else's responsibility to coddle bad guys just because you may be in their midst of your own free will.
I'm not talking about "collateral damage", but someone actively taking part in living undercover as a bad guy, even if you are trying to destroy them. If this is what you are really doing, and you can live this life without doing any harm, I hope you avoid getting caught up in it. And, I'm just talking about whether people should be nice to the bad guys, not about defense.
If you are one of the bad guys, I'm probably not going to be nice to you. Nor should you expect me to. You can whine or make up "laws" to try to force me to act like you want, but that just shows how bad and weak you really are. Good luck with that.
-
If you have never supported this blog financially, this would be a great time to start. Or to make a one-time offering. There have been lots of unfortunate financial things going on in recent months- I'll spare you the details- but I am in need.
Please check out the options for support over to the right, and if you feel this blog has been of any value to you, please consider trading value for value.
Monday, May 16, 2016
The feds are not the biggest danger to your guns
The right to own and to carry weapons- including, but not limited to, guns- is a natural human right. It exists everywhere at all times, in spite of what governments may say, just because you were born human. There is no legitimate or ethical way to restrict or ration this right. None at all.
This means the Second Amendment couldn't have created that right. It will still exist even if the Second Amendment is abolished. The right existed long before the first government was dreamed up, and it will still exist millennia after the last government has collapsed in upon itself.
People worry a lot about the feds making up new anti-gun "laws", but almost all those laws end up being enforced by their accomplices in local law enforcement. Law enforcement is always breaking the law by doing so.
"Just doing my job" and "I don't make the laws, I just enforce them" doesn't cut it. Those excuses didn't work in Nuremberg and they won't work in America.
Every time you read in the sheriff's report about someone being arrested on "illegal weapon" or "illegal carry" charges you are seeing how evil the local law enforcers are. I realize it may be an easy way to arrest someone who couldn't easily be arrested otherwise. It is still wrong. It is committing a wrong openly and then announcing it. It is arrogant and disgusting.
Who needs to worry about the feds with local bullies doing their dirty work for them?
I don't "believe in" the Constitution. It either created the problem we now live in or did nothing to prevent it. But many of those who recognize the evil of anti-gun "laws" still claim to support the Constitution, while also supporting those who violate it.
Enforcing any anti-gun law is a serious crime, if the Constitution means anything. It is a serious violation of natural human rights even if the Constitution is irrelevant. There is no justification for it. You can tell how much a person cares about liberty (and how much they respect the Constitution) by how supportive he is of those individuals who enforce gun laws. There's a term for those who enforce anti-gun "laws": domestic enemies.
The really awful thing is that while private property owners have the right to tell visitors to not bring guns onto their property (even if it exposes them as cowardly vermin), government has no such right, and is in fact specifically prohibited from doing so, by the document they point to as giving them the "authority" to exist. Yes, this means the "no guns" sign at the post office or at the government "public" school is a serious crime; not the rightful act of ignoring that sign.
But statists want to try to have it both ways. It never works like that and never will.
.
This means the Second Amendment couldn't have created that right. It will still exist even if the Second Amendment is abolished. The right existed long before the first government was dreamed up, and it will still exist millennia after the last government has collapsed in upon itself.
People worry a lot about the feds making up new anti-gun "laws", but almost all those laws end up being enforced by their accomplices in local law enforcement. Law enforcement is always breaking the law by doing so.
"Just doing my job" and "I don't make the laws, I just enforce them" doesn't cut it. Those excuses didn't work in Nuremberg and they won't work in America.
Every time you read in the sheriff's report about someone being arrested on "illegal weapon" or "illegal carry" charges you are seeing how evil the local law enforcers are. I realize it may be an easy way to arrest someone who couldn't easily be arrested otherwise. It is still wrong. It is committing a wrong openly and then announcing it. It is arrogant and disgusting.
Who needs to worry about the feds with local bullies doing their dirty work for them?
I don't "believe in" the Constitution. It either created the problem we now live in or did nothing to prevent it. But many of those who recognize the evil of anti-gun "laws" still claim to support the Constitution, while also supporting those who violate it.
Enforcing any anti-gun law is a serious crime, if the Constitution means anything. It is a serious violation of natural human rights even if the Constitution is irrelevant. There is no justification for it. You can tell how much a person cares about liberty (and how much they respect the Constitution) by how supportive he is of those individuals who enforce gun laws. There's a term for those who enforce anti-gun "laws": domestic enemies.
The really awful thing is that while private property owners have the right to tell visitors to not bring guns onto their property (even if it exposes them as cowardly vermin), government has no such right, and is in fact specifically prohibited from doing so, by the document they point to as giving them the "authority" to exist. Yes, this means the "no guns" sign at the post office or at the government "public" school is a serious crime; not the rightful act of ignoring that sign.
But statists want to try to have it both ways. It never works like that and never will.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
Sunday, May 15, 2016
You will be violated. Your move.
People are going to do things to you they have no right to do. They will violate you. It's just life.
A few of these bad guys won't even bother trying to justify their acts, but most will.
Most of the justifiers will claim they possess a magical quality they'll call "authority", and will claim this quality can turn evil into good when they use it.
They are liars, of course.
But most people will buy it, because in their minds "authority" is permission to do bad things. Things they know they shouldn't do, but will somehow believe are OK as long as you have "authority". Yes, it is just that dumb.
All that stuff is beside the point. The point is, what are you going to do about it? What will you let the violators get away with?
A few of these bad guys won't even bother trying to justify their acts, but most will.
Most of the justifiers will claim they possess a magical quality they'll call "authority", and will claim this quality can turn evil into good when they use it.
They are liars, of course.
But most people will buy it, because in their minds "authority" is permission to do bad things. Things they know they shouldn't do, but will somehow believe are OK as long as you have "authority". Yes, it is just that dumb.
All that stuff is beside the point. The point is, what are you going to do about it? What will you let the violators get away with?
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Saturday, May 14, 2016
Government is always at war with Liberty
Government is a perpetual War on Rightful Liberty. That's its entire justification and purpose.
Oh sure, its supporters lie and say its there to "protect your rights", or to be the final arbiter in disputes, but those are provably false.
In fact, when government is claimed to "protect your rights", what happens to those rights? If they aren't completely violated and made "crimes", they are at least made subject to permission and license... which in reality is still just violating them.
And what good is a final arbiter when he is one of the parties in the dispute? Less than no good at all, is what. If you have a problem with me stealing from you or molesting your daughter, do you really want the final say on the matter to be mine? Then why allow government to have the final say in matters of "taxation" or "weapons violations" or anything else that wouldn't even be an issue except for counterfeit government rules?
In all cases government is only there to violate your rights and to fight its war on your Rightful Liberty. You don't need that kind of abuse- there are enough freelance bad guys out there to deal with, and having to expend energy on keeping yourself safe from the "help" does nothing but empower all the bad guys.
The thing is, the bad guys of The State vastly outnumber the freelance bad guys they claim to be protecting you from- probably at least hundreds to one.
I have been violated by freelance bad guys so few times in my life I could probably count the times on my fingers.
But every single day I am violated multiple times by employees of The State. Whether it is every time I am forced to pay a "tax", or every time I am not allowed to use my property as I wish, or every time I am prohibited from carrying a gun where and how I want, or when I am forced to pay attention to my speed rather than paying attention to traffic and road conditions, or whatever. Sure, you might say most of those are minor- and they are- but they are still violations of rightful liberty. And one violation is too many.
Oh sure, its supporters lie and say its there to "protect your rights", or to be the final arbiter in disputes, but those are provably false.
In fact, when government is claimed to "protect your rights", what happens to those rights? If they aren't completely violated and made "crimes", they are at least made subject to permission and license... which in reality is still just violating them.
And what good is a final arbiter when he is one of the parties in the dispute? Less than no good at all, is what. If you have a problem with me stealing from you or molesting your daughter, do you really want the final say on the matter to be mine? Then why allow government to have the final say in matters of "taxation" or "weapons violations" or anything else that wouldn't even be an issue except for counterfeit government rules?
In all cases government is only there to violate your rights and to fight its war on your Rightful Liberty. You don't need that kind of abuse- there are enough freelance bad guys out there to deal with, and having to expend energy on keeping yourself safe from the "help" does nothing but empower all the bad guys.
The thing is, the bad guys of The State vastly outnumber the freelance bad guys they claim to be protecting you from- probably at least hundreds to one.
I have been violated by freelance bad guys so few times in my life I could probably count the times on my fingers.
But every single day I am violated multiple times by employees of The State. Whether it is every time I am forced to pay a "tax", or every time I am not allowed to use my property as I wish, or every time I am prohibited from carrying a gun where and how I want, or when I am forced to pay attention to my speed rather than paying attention to traffic and road conditions, or whatever. Sure, you might say most of those are minor- and they are- but they are still violations of rightful liberty. And one violation is too many.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Thursday, May 12, 2016
Charged with 'Possession of...'
Possession of anything, no matter what it is, can never be a real crime.
It doesn't matter how much you wish it were so.
That goes for drugs, guns, large amounts of cash, "open containers", or anything else.
For one thing, it is easy to plant some prohibited item on a person you want to find a reason to punish. Cops do it all the time, and if you believe they don't you might ought to consider a few thoughts.
Is it easy to plant something on someone? Is it likely you'd get caught doing so? Is the benefit of planting it outweighed by the small risk of being caught? Is it likely that anyone who voices the concern that the prohibited item was planted will be ostracized as siding with the "criminal"- and quite probably lumped in and accused of the same "crime" the supposed criminal was accused of?
The answers to all those questions, if one is honest, shows that planting prohibited items goes on all the time.
Sure, some people actually do have guns and use them aggressively. Some people do use and sell "drugs"- although making this "illegal" was one of the most evil acts of statism ever committed. Some people involved in things the government disapproves of do carry around big wads of cash. So what?
For a real crime, as opposed to a government "crime", to have been committed, an individual or their property has to have been violated individually by the individual person who is responsible. Possession of anything doesn't cut it. Not ever.
But, when the "authorities" can parade (or speak of) the prohibited things being found in the possession of a person they are seeking to punish, and when the general population cheers for the "bad guy" getting caught. it is just too convenient. Advocating these sorts of "laws", or supporting enforcement of them, plays right into the wrong hands.
Simple possession, of anything, can never be a crime, even if in some cases it might be ethically or morally wrong. Anything else is just too ripe for abuse by the real bad guys: the bullies who call themselves government.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Just a common cop
The other day I saw a cop and the thought came to me "He's just a common cop."
Yep. That's what they are: a common cop, or even a "common badge". Lowly scum, just like any other common criminal-type property-violating, aggressive scum.
These "people" need to be reviled just like other "common criminals" are. They are worse, in fact, since they seem to feel entitled to worship due to their vile position. Few burglars would expect to lead a parade or have people thank them for what they do. But, cops? All the time.
#CopsAreScum
Yep. That's what they are: a common cop, or even a "common badge". Lowly scum, just like any other common criminal-type property-violating, aggressive scum.
These "people" need to be reviled just like other "common criminals" are. They are worse, in fact, since they seem to feel entitled to worship due to their vile position. Few burglars would expect to lead a parade or have people thank them for what they do. But, cops? All the time.
#CopsAreScum
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
All have identical, equal rights
(My Clovis News Journal column for April 8, 2016)
I see politics as a flawed attempt to get along with people you don't like. Flawed, because using the violence of laws to try to make people do what you want leads them to pull the same stunt against you. It's the ultimate "an eye for an eye" opera, which never ends unless one side stops.
One sad thing I've noticed is people preemptively poking themselves in the eye-- doing their enemies' work for them-- without realizing what they are doing. They do this by supporting the political party "their people" have historically identified with regardless of how it actually treats them.
I wonder why people do these harmful things to themselves.
Why do most feminists, LGBTQs, and environmentalists support the Democratic Party, when it doesn't actually support them?
Why do most conservative Christians, gun owners, and entrepreneurs stand behind the Republican Party, when it betrays them whenever it gets the chance?
The mainstream parties are out for their own best interests, willing to use whoever they can dupe, as long as they find them convenient. As soon as the favors are due, they get amnesia about who gave them their power. And their supporters forgive and forget.
On all these matters libertarians-- even the Libertarian Party, if you still believe politics can solve anything-- are more welcoming to all the above than either of the mainstream parties.
The only thing anyone might miss in libertarianism is the lack of license to violate others or their property. If this is your desire, you're on your own. It doesn't matter what your excuse is, how bad you want to reserve the option, how "necessary" you believe it is, or who assures you it's OK.
Libertarians know beyond a shadow of a doubt, and are willing to put their lives where their mouths are, that every human on the planet has equal and identical rights. Whether the "powers that be" respect those rights or not. Regardless of what you own, who you love, where you were born, what language you speak, what you worship, how much melanin is in your skin, or which chromosomes you have.
Unfortunately, this eliminates any excuse to use laws to make anyone subservient to anyone else. No legal favoritism and no legal hindrances. Many people can't tolerate this equality.
This causes me to reach the sad conclusion that for most people it's not enough to experience liberty-- someone else must have their liberty violated, too. Which explains why we still suffer politics and governments.
I see politics as a flawed attempt to get along with people you don't like. Flawed, because using the violence of laws to try to make people do what you want leads them to pull the same stunt against you. It's the ultimate "an eye for an eye" opera, which never ends unless one side stops.
One sad thing I've noticed is people preemptively poking themselves in the eye-- doing their enemies' work for them-- without realizing what they are doing. They do this by supporting the political party "their people" have historically identified with regardless of how it actually treats them.
I wonder why people do these harmful things to themselves.
Why do most feminists, LGBTQs, and environmentalists support the Democratic Party, when it doesn't actually support them?
Why do most conservative Christians, gun owners, and entrepreneurs stand behind the Republican Party, when it betrays them whenever it gets the chance?
The mainstream parties are out for their own best interests, willing to use whoever they can dupe, as long as they find them convenient. As soon as the favors are due, they get amnesia about who gave them their power. And their supporters forgive and forget.
On all these matters libertarians-- even the Libertarian Party, if you still believe politics can solve anything-- are more welcoming to all the above than either of the mainstream parties.
The only thing anyone might miss in libertarianism is the lack of license to violate others or their property. If this is your desire, you're on your own. It doesn't matter what your excuse is, how bad you want to reserve the option, how "necessary" you believe it is, or who assures you it's OK.
Libertarians know beyond a shadow of a doubt, and are willing to put their lives where their mouths are, that every human on the planet has equal and identical rights. Whether the "powers that be" respect those rights or not. Regardless of what you own, who you love, where you were born, what language you speak, what you worship, how much melanin is in your skin, or which chromosomes you have.
Unfortunately, this eliminates any excuse to use laws to make anyone subservient to anyone else. No legal favoritism and no legal hindrances. Many people can't tolerate this equality.
This causes me to reach the sad conclusion that for most people it's not enough to experience liberty-- someone else must have their liberty violated, too. Which explains why we still suffer politics and governments.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Great and Fearful "Laws"
I'm not afraid of your "laws".
I don't honor or respect them, either.
Nor do I want or need them.
They are nothing to me. Less than nothing.
Laws never stop bad guys from hurting me, and if bad guys who use laws to violate others want to hurt me they don't need laws to help them do so.
Sure, the most cowardly bad guys hide behind "laws", but they'd hide behind something no matter what.
Respect for the law seems an empty thing to hold on to. A very silly thing.
I don't honor or respect them, either.
Nor do I want or need them.
They are nothing to me. Less than nothing.
Laws never stop bad guys from hurting me, and if bad guys who use laws to violate others want to hurt me they don't need laws to help them do so.
Sure, the most cowardly bad guys hide behind "laws", but they'd hide behind something no matter what.
Respect for the law seems an empty thing to hold on to. A very silly thing.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Monday, May 09, 2016
Statist Language Games
(Previously posted to Patreon)
Control the language and you control thought. Sometimes to the point that thoughts outside of the box aren't even possible. How can you think something when there are no words to express it? Or if the words have been redefined to the point they are meaningless?
Nowhere is this reality as obvious as in the use of "legal definitions".
Legal definitions are written by statists. Statists who believe in the State and in "laws" that create the State and prop it up. "Laws" which create "authority" and privileges and obligations... which have no foundation in reality.
Maybe in some cases they were halfway decent statists who wanted to promote liberty, but the very notion of a legal definition is statist.
When people focus on legal definitions they are being brainwashed into statism.
People who "study law" seem to get sucked into the superstition worse than people who don't. They begin to believe human-written "law" is legitimate. And "important". And somehow "truth".
At least I sure see a lot of evidence of that.
**Magical words will fix everything, if you just say them the right way.**
**Look at the words on this paper; they don't say what you believe they say, and if you know what they *really* mean, you can show this to the Rulers and they'll leave you alone.**
Stuff like that.
It's where you get the self-contradictory idea of the "sovereign citizen".
And those who fall for this the hardest get really angry at people who don't buy into their superstitions. I just had one (who was also posting links where he blamed everything on Jews, and demonstrated he doesn't have a clue what "libertarian" means) call me an idiot on Facebook. I count that as an endorsement.
But he seems to really believe that if a definition is the "legal definition", it means something more than what the word means, and it can be used to advance his agenda- whatever that may be.
Well, good luck playing a game that was rigged so that you can never really win. As for me, no thanks.
Control the language and you control thought. Sometimes to the point that thoughts outside of the box aren't even possible. How can you think something when there are no words to express it? Or if the words have been redefined to the point they are meaningless?
Nowhere is this reality as obvious as in the use of "legal definitions".
Legal definitions are written by statists. Statists who believe in the State and in "laws" that create the State and prop it up. "Laws" which create "authority" and privileges and obligations... which have no foundation in reality.
Maybe in some cases they were halfway decent statists who wanted to promote liberty, but the very notion of a legal definition is statist.
When people focus on legal definitions they are being brainwashed into statism.
People who "study law" seem to get sucked into the superstition worse than people who don't. They begin to believe human-written "law" is legitimate. And "important". And somehow "truth".
At least I sure see a lot of evidence of that.
**Magical words will fix everything, if you just say them the right way.**
**Look at the words on this paper; they don't say what you believe they say, and if you know what they *really* mean, you can show this to the Rulers and they'll leave you alone.**
Stuff like that.
It's where you get the self-contradictory idea of the "sovereign citizen".
And those who fall for this the hardest get really angry at people who don't buy into their superstitions. I just had one (who was also posting links where he blamed everything on Jews, and demonstrated he doesn't have a clue what "libertarian" means) call me an idiot on Facebook. I count that as an endorsement.
But he seems to really believe that if a definition is the "legal definition", it means something more than what the word means, and it can be used to advance his agenda- whatever that may be.
Well, good luck playing a game that was rigged so that you can never really win. As for me, no thanks.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Magical acts of statism: destroying guns
Very few statist acts are as stupid and full of delusional magical-thinking as the act of destroying guns. Either individually, or on an industrial scale. Well, perhaps the statist act of destroying ivory and rhino horns is equally stupid and delusional.
But, really. You have tools that you fear. Instead of fearing (or defending yourself from) the few bad guys who use the tools, you allow a huge gang of the worst of the worst to steal the tools, and then destroy them to "keep them out of the wrong hands".
If you are destroying guns for the State, you are the wrongest of hands.
Do you somehow believe that destroying valuable tools will change the hearts and minds of those who would violate others? You say you hate gun manufacturers, but you help keep the price of their products artificially high.
You believe that destroying historical objects is a good thing to do, just because you are too cowardly to take responsibility for yourself?
Do you believe a gun used in a crime has somehow been possessed by an evil spirit and needs to be melted down to ... what?.. burn the demon, or release it back into the wild? How dumb are you, really?
Yes, destroying guns is stupid. It is magical thinking. And yet, many of those responsible know how stupid those who cheer their destruction are, because they know what I just pointed out. They simply count of you being too stupid to see it.
Don't be their tool.
But, really. You have tools that you fear. Instead of fearing (or defending yourself from) the few bad guys who use the tools, you allow a huge gang of the worst of the worst to steal the tools, and then destroy them to "keep them out of the wrong hands".
If you are destroying guns for the State, you are the wrongest of hands.
Do you somehow believe that destroying valuable tools will change the hearts and minds of those who would violate others? You say you hate gun manufacturers, but you help keep the price of their products artificially high.
You believe that destroying historical objects is a good thing to do, just because you are too cowardly to take responsibility for yourself?
Do you believe a gun used in a crime has somehow been possessed by an evil spirit and needs to be melted down to ... what?.. burn the demon, or release it back into the wild? How dumb are you, really?
Yes, destroying guns is stupid. It is magical thinking. And yet, many of those responsible know how stupid those who cheer their destruction are, because they know what I just pointed out. They simply count of you being too stupid to see it.
Don't be their tool.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Sunday, May 08, 2016
All the world is a stage Act on it.
Everything good happens against a backdrop of liberty. Or, inside a matrix of liberty, if you prefer thinking in higher dimensions.
Nothing truly good violates liberty, and nothing evil is liberty compliant. (Liberty has room for plenty of ethically neutral acts, though.)
Even when evil people like cops or freelance thugs choose to do something good-- something which they have a right to do and which violates no other person or their property, and which benefits someone other than themselves-- liberty allows them the choice. It gives them the space in which they act.
When they choose to do wrong, that's not liberty. It is a violation of liberty.
Nothing truly good violates liberty, and nothing evil is liberty compliant. (Liberty has room for plenty of ethically neutral acts, though.)
Even when evil people like cops or freelance thugs choose to do something good-- something which they have a right to do and which violates no other person or their property, and which benefits someone other than themselves-- liberty allows them the choice. It gives them the space in which they act.
When they choose to do wrong, that's not liberty. It is a violation of liberty.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Saturday, May 07, 2016
Hurting the bad guys' feelings
I am not an angry person.
But, I'm not gonna coddle statists, and they often see this as anger. The truth is "mean". It hurts their feelings. Well too bad. But I get it. No one wants to see that they are wrong.
What seems really odd to me is when other liberty lovers mistake truth and a lack of coddling for anger.
Maybe you want me to hold their hands and tell them "Now, now. You're not so bad. You just have a different opinion. It's OK". This might work in a few cases, but some people need to be snapped out of it, and this touchy-feely stuff won't work for them. They need to be shown exactly how horrible they are being. Yeah, they may dig in their heels, but it's still right to warn them that beliefs- especially horrible false beliefs- have consequences.
But, really, you believe telling them what they advocate is wrong isn't nice? Are you missing what they are doing to you? Would you comfort a rapist from all the mean old people who tell him he is evil? Would you get upset at the person who shoots him in self defense? Would you say we should just reason him out of his behavior, and if he doesn't want to change, "Oh well"?
Then why coddle statists?
Maybe you don't understand exactly what it is they are supporting. They don't care that they support sacrificing your property to their beliefs. If you get in the way, they support putting you in a cage. You liberty scares them, and they want bullies to control you. And if you resist any of this, they're fine with you being murdered. That is what government-- The State-- is. It is ALL it is. Aggression and theft on a grand scale. "Too big to change."
Well, it's still wrong to support The State. In every circumstance. If you're going to support evil, but you don't want anyone to call you out on it, you are going to be disappointed. Time to grow up.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online..
Thursday, May 05, 2016
Reading hieroglyphs
When you see a "no guns" sign do you know how to interpret that particular modern hieroglyph?
I do.
The above symbol means "The management of this establishment is so terrified of self-responsible humans that in case one of them ignores this deplorable sign and enters you'll find said manager crying like a baby, soaking in pants soiled with his own filth, under the nearest chair."
A picture is worth a thousand whimpers.
Or, maybe it really means something else altogether. You never know with anti-liberty bigot cowards.
.
I do.
A picture is worth a thousand whimpers.
Or, maybe it really means something else altogether. You never know with anti-liberty bigot cowards.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online..
Wednesday, May 04, 2016
Statist drama overload
I get it. I'm different.
If you are going to engage in statist drama- v*ting, "criminal justice", punishment, prohibition, imprisonment, "borders" and "immigrants", and all the rest- just leave me out of it.
I am not in your cult and I don't want to be involved in your aggressive and destructive rituals. I hate them and I hate your cult.
Even if you claim it is for my own good- perhaps especially then- none of it is done on my behalf.
.
If you are going to engage in statist drama- v*ting, "criminal justice", punishment, prohibition, imprisonment, "borders" and "immigrants", and all the rest- just leave me out of it.
I am not in your cult and I don't want to be involved in your aggressive and destructive rituals. I hate them and I hate your cult.
Even if you claim it is for my own good- perhaps especially then- none of it is done on my behalf.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online..
Tuesday, May 03, 2016
Liberty much like buffet choices
(My Clovis News Journal column for April 1, 2016)
Buffets are nice. You get to choose what you like from all the glorious possibilities offered, picking and choosing your favorites. If you see something you find disgusting, skip it and move on to the next item. No single buffet can possibly offer everything, but no one can tell the buffets what to offer. Consider them all together and your dining choices are practically unlimited.
Some people think of liberty as a buffet, but they want to be in control of what's offered so as to limit the choices others can make. They want to pick and choose between the things they personally like while claiming everything they don't like is off-limits for everyone. This is the opposite of liberty.
With liberty you can choose anything which doesn't violate another person or their private property. The popular, the offensive, the wise, and the foolish- they are all there. Things you love and things you hate. The only thing not available is the authority to tell others which selections they can't choose. Neither are you allowed to slap the choices you disapprove of from anyone's tray.
No one will force you to take part in things you don't like, but they are there if you ever change your mind. Your power lies in making the choices for yourself, not for anyone else.
In other words, you don't get to decide what is on the buffet, even as you decide which parts to enjoy.
Be warned: this liberty buffet has many choices which may offend you. Some of the offerings may even offend the majority of people. But as long as one doesn't use private property against the wishes of the owner, nor use violence against those who are not being violent nor violating someone else's property, it's simply none of your business. Being offended is your personal problem, not a license to push others around.
This is hard for a lot of people, even some who claim to support liberty. People react strongly to those things which offend or disgust them, forgetting that things they see as normal probably disgust and offend someone else.
It's painful to see someone who says they love liberty trying to limit other people's choices on the grounds that those choices are disgusting.
Respecting liberty doesn't mean you approve of everything others might do, it means you recognize where the limits of your power lie. It's an issue of boundaries.
Some people think of liberty as a buffet, but they want to be in control of what's offered so as to limit the choices others can make. They want to pick and choose between the things they personally like while claiming everything they don't like is off-limits for everyone. This is the opposite of liberty.
With liberty you can choose anything which doesn't violate another person or their private property. The popular, the offensive, the wise, and the foolish- they are all there. Things you love and things you hate. The only thing not available is the authority to tell others which selections they can't choose. Neither are you allowed to slap the choices you disapprove of from anyone's tray.
No one will force you to take part in things you don't like, but they are there if you ever change your mind. Your power lies in making the choices for yourself, not for anyone else.
In other words, you don't get to decide what is on the buffet, even as you decide which parts to enjoy.
Be warned: this liberty buffet has many choices which may offend you. Some of the offerings may even offend the majority of people. But as long as one doesn't use private property against the wishes of the owner, nor use violence against those who are not being violent nor violating someone else's property, it's simply none of your business. Being offended is your personal problem, not a license to push others around.
This is hard for a lot of people, even some who claim to support liberty. People react strongly to those things which offend or disgust them, forgetting that things they see as normal probably disgust and offend someone else.
It's painful to see someone who says they love liberty trying to limit other people's choices on the grounds that those choices are disgusting.
Respecting liberty doesn't mean you approve of everything others might do, it means you recognize where the limits of your power lie. It's an issue of boundaries.
-
Support?
Is "Cops are scum" collectivism?
(Previously posted to Patreon)
In spite of the well-meaning-- but misguided-- objections of some liberty lovers, "Cops are scum" is NOT a collectivist statement. It is a recognition of identity.
Frozen water is ice. It doesn't matter what form it takes; whether a snowflake, an icicle, or the surface of a hockey rink. It doesn't matter what contaminants it contains or any other conditions. If it is frozen water, it is ice.
If someone is a cop, that person is scum.
Only scum would lower itself to do the things a cop must do as a part of the job.
It doesn't matter how nice Cousin Bob the Cop is at the family picnics. If cousin Bob is a cop, then cousin Bob is required to be scum while he is on the clock. Can a person be part-time scum, or does it color everything he does? Can there be good serial killers?
Now, maybe you believe scum is a necessary component of society. That's a different question altogether. I believe you are wrong, but it's a question for another day.
Saying "cops are scum" is no more collectivist than saying "rapists are aggressors". "Policing" is what someone does, not who they are. A rapist might be the nicest person you ever met while they aren't raping. They might save little old ladies from violent death. But, still, as a rapist he is an aggressor-- not a "good person" at all, no matter what else he does. And, no matter what good a cop may do, as a cop he is scum.
Saying something like "Black people are criminals" is collectivist. No one chooses his or her "race". Being "Black" or "White" or "Asian" doesn't mean anything as to the character of the person. I know people of every "race" who could disprove any collectivist accusation anyone could dream up about them, good or bad.
But being a cop is a conscious choice. It is the choice to enforce counterfeit "laws" against people. It is the choice to be a thief and aggressor. Choosing to be a cop is choosing specific actions and behaviors. You can't make that choice and be a good person.
Every good thing a cop might do could just as easily be done by anyone. Every evil committed by a cop could only be committed and gotten away with by those operating under the safety net of being a cop. Cops are allowed to commit evil by "virtue" of their job. Things you or I would rightfully be shot for doing, cops do every single day.
So, when someone doesn't like the truth that "cops are scum" being shared, and tries to make the case that you are being as collectivist as racists, just remember: "Cop" is a behavior, not a "race". To deny that some behaviors are evil is denying reality.
#CopsAreScum
.
In spite of the well-meaning-- but misguided-- objections of some liberty lovers, "Cops are scum" is NOT a collectivist statement. It is a recognition of identity.
Frozen water is ice. It doesn't matter what form it takes; whether a snowflake, an icicle, or the surface of a hockey rink. It doesn't matter what contaminants it contains or any other conditions. If it is frozen water, it is ice.
If someone is a cop, that person is scum.
Only scum would lower itself to do the things a cop must do as a part of the job.
It doesn't matter how nice Cousin Bob the Cop is at the family picnics. If cousin Bob is a cop, then cousin Bob is required to be scum while he is on the clock. Can a person be part-time scum, or does it color everything he does? Can there be good serial killers?
Now, maybe you believe scum is a necessary component of society. That's a different question altogether. I believe you are wrong, but it's a question for another day.
Saying "cops are scum" is no more collectivist than saying "rapists are aggressors". "Policing" is what someone does, not who they are. A rapist might be the nicest person you ever met while they aren't raping. They might save little old ladies from violent death. But, still, as a rapist he is an aggressor-- not a "good person" at all, no matter what else he does. And, no matter what good a cop may do, as a cop he is scum.
Saying something like "Black people are criminals" is collectivist. No one chooses his or her "race". Being "Black" or "White" or "Asian" doesn't mean anything as to the character of the person. I know people of every "race" who could disprove any collectivist accusation anyone could dream up about them, good or bad.
But being a cop is a conscious choice. It is the choice to enforce counterfeit "laws" against people. It is the choice to be a thief and aggressor. Choosing to be a cop is choosing specific actions and behaviors. You can't make that choice and be a good person.
Every good thing a cop might do could just as easily be done by anyone. Every evil committed by a cop could only be committed and gotten away with by those operating under the safety net of being a cop. Cops are allowed to commit evil by "virtue" of their job. Things you or I would rightfully be shot for doing, cops do every single day.
So, when someone doesn't like the truth that "cops are scum" being shared, and tries to make the case that you are being as collectivist as racists, just remember: "Cop" is a behavior, not a "race". To deny that some behaviors are evil is denying reality.
#CopsAreScum
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online..
Letting "the law" control you
If you go out of your way to make an effort to break a "law" just because it's "illegal", you are just as much a slave to the "law" as those who go out of their way to obey.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Monday, May 02, 2016
Statists are crazy wrong
Statists are often somewhat right about the problem, but crazy wrong about the causes and the solutions.
Crime is a problem. Real crime, not victimless "crime". But it's not as large a problem as statists believe. If they were realistic about the amount of crime there is, it would eliminate a lot of their justifications for government/The State.
They see crime and are quick to blame "illegals", guns, drugs, and whatever else their particular bonnet bee happens to be, but don't notice that the root cause of actual wrongdoing is aggression, and the biggest advocate (or "normalizer") of aggression is the belief that it can sometimes be right. Particularly if done in the name of The State.
And their "solutions" inevitably revolve around giving The State more excuses to commit aggression and theft.
Yes, they are actually that crazy. That's why they are still statists. And why they continue to be so wrong about the causes and solutions for problems.
Crime is a problem. Real crime, not victimless "crime". But it's not as large a problem as statists believe. If they were realistic about the amount of crime there is, it would eliminate a lot of their justifications for government/The State.
They see crime and are quick to blame "illegals", guns, drugs, and whatever else their particular bonnet bee happens to be, but don't notice that the root cause of actual wrongdoing is aggression, and the biggest advocate (or "normalizer") of aggression is the belief that it can sometimes be right. Particularly if done in the name of The State.
And their "solutions" inevitably revolve around giving The State more excuses to commit aggression and theft.
Yes, they are actually that crazy. That's why they are still statists. And why they continue to be so wrong about the causes and solutions for problems.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Sunday, May 01, 2016
Punishment addiction
I understand where the base desire for punishment comes from- it comes from the same place the acceptance of theft and aggression comes from.
But it often causes more of what it is claimed to stop. Especially when imposed by The State.
I used to be a fan of punishment. Therefore I can still understand the attraction, even though I have moved on.
But, if you believe you can teach someone to not violate person or property by making them suffer through their own person or property at some future time, it seems to me you don't understand people very well.
People never believe they are going to get caught. They will be the exception. So, they don't fear punishment, because that only happens to people who get caught.
And things such as imprisonment create a culture you have forced them to join- as punishment- where they can learn more justifications to violate person and property, and more skills to carry it out. It's a stupid, self-defeating "solution", even if you can't think of anything better right now. Even if you believe doing anything else means they "got away with it".
I see people who are hung up on punishment as addicts. Nothing you can say will convince them they are shooting themselves in the foot. It's something they must see for themselves, if they are to ever see it.
.
But it often causes more of what it is claimed to stop. Especially when imposed by The State.
I used to be a fan of punishment. Therefore I can still understand the attraction, even though I have moved on.
But, if you believe you can teach someone to not violate person or property by making them suffer through their own person or property at some future time, it seems to me you don't understand people very well.
People never believe they are going to get caught. They will be the exception. So, they don't fear punishment, because that only happens to people who get caught.
And things such as imprisonment create a culture you have forced them to join- as punishment- where they can learn more justifications to violate person and property, and more skills to carry it out. It's a stupid, self-defeating "solution", even if you can't think of anything better right now. Even if you believe doing anything else means they "got away with it".
I see people who are hung up on punishment as addicts. Nothing you can say will convince them they are shooting themselves in the foot. It's something they must see for themselves, if they are to ever see it.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online..