A couple of days ago, I let the b$%*#rds "get to me". Not a shining moment.
No, I didn't really get nasty with them, but my face got hot with rage and I was shaking. I should have taken that as a clue to just walk away.
On a local FB page, someone had posted a meme begging people not to publicize upcoming police "checkpoints", saying something like "what if someone's child dies because you helped a drunk avoid the checkpoint?".
I stated that I would rather risk a few drunk drivers than armed highwaymen shaking down travelers for their "papers". You and I both know "drunk driving" is just the excuse used because the Blue Line Gang knows people are cowardly and will accept the molestation for "safety". The copsuckers (yes, and I use that word in the most negative way possible) on the page are apparently still ignorant of that fact.
I didn't appreciate the replies directed at me.
I censored myself when I replied, and let it be known I was censoring myself because I knew they were speaking from a position of ignorance over what I've been through. But I told them that you can justify any police state tactics with "what ifs" and "safety", and that, if they like having armed goons shaking down travelers for their "papers" so much, perhaps they'd be happier in North Korea, where I hear liberty isn't very popular, but at least the people are "safe".
And then I left the group.
There are some good people in the group, but the copsuckers make it not worth the trouble. Those people foul spacetime with what passes for thought in their tiny minds. I don't know why I am still amazed at what copsuckers will accept if their Blue Gods tell them it's for their own good, but I am. However, I need to cut the worst of them from my life, for my own health.
To be quite honest, I see zero ethical difference between defending and supporting cops and defending and supporting child molesters or actual, swastika-wearing Nazis. No, I'm not saying all cops are child molesters or Nazis, I am saying cops are as ethically indefensible as those groups. To me. That is what I see when I see a cop, and when I see people defending them, I see people trying to defend the indefensible. Siding with the bad guys.
I'll stick with the cat groups on FB. They are better for me.
I think I am going to start killing statists as a hobby. ...just randomly pick out someone who votes or target cops and judges and representatives, other employees and people with whatever key roles.
ReplyDeleteWhy not? They claim me and my people/family/stuff as their property and fuck with me and everyone however they like because they like to, ..therefore it is fair to claim them and their families and stuff as my property and fuck with them any way I see fit
If a nigger/pig/cop gives me a ticket, I pay it off with the profits from his daughter's hymen or his wife's mouth or his son's asshole, or the the same goes for the chief who ordered him to do it or the judges and representatives that told them to do it.
Once it is paid off, kill them all anyway, just because they are my property now and I don't need them. They shall be discarded with the same level of concern as toilet tissue.
What in the world is wrong with people. It's a matter of consistency, and not "Kent." If it is wrong to initiate force, it is wrong for all individuals and all groups no matter the size or the color of the uniform. If it is wrong, it is wrong in all circumstances. I would say it's initiating force to wear a uniform of any color (red, green, or blue) and FORCE people to stop their traveling and FORCE people to produce their license and FORCE people to submit to a test to see if they meet your standard of impaired... and if they say "I just choose not to participate" then FORCE them to either pay a fine or go to jail. ALL of that is FORCE and force is wrong. Yep, even if we were defending our country or ourselves, we don't go over there and "start the fight" or we are the aggressors. If they come here...heck yes, defend ourselves. If they are in their own country then let them do what they want with their own country.
ReplyDeleteKent--I doubt it will ever be easy to be a libertarian with the small "l"...a lover of liberty by philosophy, not by another party name. Keep on speaking the truth though and just ignore the words. They are only puffs of hot air across vocal cords. Hot air...nothing more.
>>> Why not? They claim me and my people/family/stuff as their property and fuck with me and everyone however they like because they like to, ..therefore it is fair to claim them and their families and stuff as my property and fuck with them any way I see fit <<<
ReplyDeleteThat was funny, using the traits of those you hate to make your own choices. Sounds like an express route to self-hate, to me. Meanwhile Kent wrote...
>>> To be quite honest, I see zero ethical difference between defending and supporting cops and defending and supporting child molesters or actual, swastika-wearing Nazis <<<
That's because you're looking at reality. With regard to the attribute "ethical," there is no difference between those. In ALL social contexts, ethical means by consent and not by thuggery.
So okay, I guess swastika-wearing Nazis aren't necessarily socially unethical. Only the ones who do anything because of it, are that.
Great post, Kent---good ends, good means.
What is the value of life? What are rights?
DeleteWhat is violence? What is force? What is rightful?
What is offense/defense?
What is necessary use of force?
If you are minding your own business being a peaceful human, and an belligerent army of people organize to claim your natural home and you and your family and property as their subjects, demanding you pay and obey a long list of edicts, or be punished with everything from being thrown into a dungeon to you/family being murdered, you have a right to seek restitution and/or kill it by whatever means necessary or available.
It matters not whether it is a gang of a few or of many. Defense still applies, regardless of their reasons.
FYI, targeting statists as a hobby is me being provocative, a mirroring technique of sorts, as you so correctly called me on.
DeleteIf we are to apply their reasoning for violating everyone as statists, it is "violate because we want to". If we apply rightful necessary use of force in defense, it is "use force because it is just and rightful defense".
Either way it works out to kill statists.
So what is the alternative? Anyone?
Right. It is ALWAYS about force. Force has been defined as the default means of resolution by the appropriate 'authority'. Everything they do is a threat.
ReplyDeleteThat is why its okay to snipe pigs at roadblocks, or wherever they may lurk in your community.
I mean, try turning your garage into a church/capitol building, dressing it up with all kinds of ceremonial paraphernalia then say magic words and write a bunch of rules and prescribed reality for a claimed territory, then hire someone to dress up in a super hero costume and threaten people and beat them up or cage or kill them if they don't comply.
They call that violent extremism and terrorism, organized crime, extortion, etc. That is EXACTLY what the state does.
Most statist, I find, are too stupid and brainwashed and greedy and selfish. They demand force and only force. They are, by definition, belligerent.
The right to defense, what is necessary force, is wholly justified and rightful against any statist actively organizing and claiming your life/property as 'jurisdiction' of their gang.
But I would argue that it is probably the right thing to do to at least tell them they are being violent, at least make a genuine honest effort to appeal to peaceful reasonable resolution. If they refuse to listen or cooperate or cease with their violence, then you have absolved yourself from ethical responsibility and are rightful in your use of force.