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.

-

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.