Tuesday, August 31, 2021

Banned for not lying

Alex Berenson wrote, "It doesn't stop infection[1]. Or transmission[2]. Don't think of it as a vaccine[3].
Think of it - at best - as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy[4] and terrible side effect profile[5] that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS[6]. And we want to mandate it? Insanity."

There are no lies there. 

You could substitute food for the assumed topic of the tweet to remove the triggering issue.

1- One meal today won't stop you from starving to death a year from now. 
2- No matter how well-fed you are, someone near you could still starve to death, especially if you steal all their food. You could "transmit" starvation even if you are well-fed.

3- Don't think of food as a vaccine against starvation.

4- At best, it is a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy. If you eat once, the starvation is only held at bay for a while. You'll have to eat again to keep from starving. 

5- You can get food poisoning, you can choke on food, you can break a tooth, you can have a fatal allergic reaction. For those who suffer these mishaps (especially those who die), this constitutes a terrible side effect profile. No one says everyone will have this experience.

6- You also have to eat before you die of starvation for the food to do you any good.

But this doesn't mean food is useless. To ban someone for pointing out these facts is a terrible disservice to society.

Alex didn't even explicitly say which non-vaccine he was referring to-- although we can assume we know. 

Herr Twitler (or a minion) claims this tweet is misleading and he imposes the Twutter version of the Final Solution on Alex and those like him for saying these accurate things.

If Twutter is a "private company", Twitler has the right to ban anyone for any reason or for no reason at all. If. It's still an incredibly slimy thing to do.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Monday, August 30, 2021

One person's dystopia is another's Utopia. They'll fight to keep the dystopia that's killing you because it's their Utopia.

Is "long-haul Covid" confirmation bias?

Almost everyone in my family has had Covid. Of those, all recovered, including those with multiple serious co-morbidities, even though one developed "long-haul Covid". 

But here's the problem with that.

Her "long-haul" issues were in the same category of problems she's had for years. The only thing that makes it "long-haul Covid" is that she was diagnosed with Covid a couple of months before she the problem developed again. Before, it was just "You're not a particularly healthy person", but then it became "OMG! You've got long-haul Covid!

Hence, my skepticism.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Government won't save you from being conquered

Why is it that people who fear "we" are going to be taken over by the Chinese (or whoever) always seem to think government has the solution? That a stronger government will prevent such a thing, rather than to help it happen?

Government is the problem.

Want to take over another land? 

If it doesn't really have a central government you're looking at decades of fighting to conquer every individual who doesn't want your "help". Do you really want it that bad? Is your cannon fodder really that dedicated to getting you what you want?

But if that land has a government you only have to defeat those willing to support that government. Then you slide into the bureaucratic infrastructure (and don its veil of "authority") and continue business with barely a hiccup.

If you rely on government to save you from being taken over by someone else, you've hitched your wagon to the mule that will walk you right into the enemy camp and hand you over.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Sunday, August 29, 2021

Let rich give humanity new frontier

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 28, 2021)

After Sir Richard Branson and Jeff Bezos both went to space-- depending on how you define "space"-- within days of each other, in rockets built by their respective companies, outrage activists got upset.

Were people angry when Henry Ford first rode in a Ford automobile, or when Alexander Graham Bell made his first phone call?

It's not a matter of how wealthy Branson and Bezos are. It was their responsibility to ride their rockets.

When your company builds rockets, you, as the head of the company, need to put some skin in the game. How could you ask anyone else to ride if you're not willing?

I'm not envious of their wealth, anyway. Other things bother me more.

I'm not a fan when Elon Musk's SpaceX takes government payloads into space or seeks FAA permission to launch rockets or built a tower. When government hallucinates the authority to "allow" or "forbid" business, and backs it with threats of force, you do what you have to do. I still don't like it.

Don't suggest they pay more taxes, either. Only the economically ignorant want government to tax corporations more-- or at all. All corporate taxes are, and must be, paid by the customers, like every business expense. I can't afford to support government by paying more than necessary for things I want and need.

In space flight, as with anything else, the early users are going to be those who can afford the immense price. I'm not envious. Other people buy more expensive cars, bigger and better houses, and take nicer, longer vacations than I can afford. For me to envy anyone who can afford things I can't would be pointless.

In this case, they are also taking the greatest risks. By the time the cost of space travel has dropped to the point where people like me can afford a ride, most bugs should be worked out. I'm glad others are going first.

Building rockets to take people into space is essential for the future of our species, even if you don't want to go. NASA had its chance. Now others have stepped up to do what government failed to do.

The envious can't see that money spent on space travel is helping everyone on Earth. This money is better spent than most charitable donations, if you're looking at long-term benefits. Humanity needs a frontier more than most people realize. Let them give you one.

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Those who see details are more likely to also understand the Big Picture than "Big Picture people" are to grasp the importance of details-- which they are too busy to notice, anyway.

Hallucinate hard enough and government doesn't look like a failure

I asked a Right-statist what "not failing" would look like to him.

His main concern is the protection of everyone's property ("handling crime") and things "too big" for an individual to do on his own. And he wants it all to be done "efficiently". So, I guess, as long as a state does those things it is not failing in his view. 


The primary violator of everyone’s property is government; much worse than freelance criminals. More on that when we discuss crime below. Also, if political government exists, I want it to be as inefficient as possible. Efficient government would be a nightmare for the people, plus it can trick them into tolerating it longer. It's the worst-case scenario.

Roads: First, I'll say I don't know how things would work out in a free society, the best I can do is come up with voluntary solutions I can think of. The actual way it works out could be much different.

Who would build the roads? The same contractors who build them now. Who would pay the contractors? The same people who pay them now-- you and me. How would they be paid? Not through taxation.

One possibility-- businesses would want roads so you could get to their doors. Those roads would also have to pass by your house to be of any use to them. You'd pay for the roads when you use the business, so toll booths would be unnecessary.

The difference between "managing a project" and government is the same as between sex and rape: consent. The structure can be the same, but it's a totally different act.

As far as agreeing where the road should go. Keep the roads which already exist. But new ones? Often a new development will lay out and build the new roads, then hand them over to government when they're done. Just skip that last step.

If a big project is actually wanted, people will chip in. Those who don't value it don't have to. If they then decide to use it after it's finished, they'll have to pay a user fee or chip in as though they were there from the beginning. Any project that can't get enough voluntary funding to survive needs to die anyway.

Traffic lights (and other traffic signals) make travel more dangerous. Maybe a few informational signs would be good, but most of that stuff needs to go away.

And that's assuming roads would still be as necessary in a free society. They might not, since flying vehicles would become more common (and most likely, affordable).

Crime: Cops now steal more property than freelance thieves, and have for several years running. Even before you factor in fines or the taxation which funds police. And that's only one small piece of the whole. 

If "we" are paying government employees to deter crime, we are getting screwed.

Police don't protect or defend you or your property. Warren v. District of Columbia settled that question. 

When inmates are asked what they fear most, it is never the risk of being arrested-- it is armed intended targets. The job of defending yourself and your property has always been yours, even if you imagined you had hired someone else to do it instead. If you want to hire someone, I wouldn't stop you. Just don't make me pay for it on your behalf and if your employees harm an innocent during the commission of their "protection", let them be held fully accountable (and you, as well, because you are their employer).

I don't want government courts judging criminals. It's a conflict of interest any time government is one of the parties. Do they recuse themselves in that case? Nope. 

Justice isn't about punishment (revenge), it is about restitution. Incarceration prevents restitution and robs the victim again. Prison is a racket. My dad worked in prisons-- they are totally illegitimate and only serve to train criminals to view themselves as apart from society and give them more excuses to target "others". They also operate as Criminal University. If someone is too dangerous to be walking free, let his next intended victim (or a bystander) kill him and solve the problem. Prison only makes things worse.

Again, "Would each person [protect] their own property?" If you aren't already doing this you're failing your responsibility.

"Who guards my stuff when I want to go fishing or to play cards with friends?" Security systems, neighbors you've built a relationship with, etc. The cops don't do that now, why worry that they wouldn't be there to continue to not do it in the future?

If you'd rather have "pros" protect you, go ahead. Just leave the rest of us out of it. As long as I'm allowed to opt out and not pay for them on your behalf, what you do won't violate me.

Government is an automatic failure, from top to bottom, front to back, side to side, and beginning to end. A free society couldn't possibly fail any harder. At this point, clinging to The State because you can't think how the alternative would work is just a mental problem.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Saturday, August 28, 2021

For future reference, remember: a high "social credit score" is a sign of a rat-faced suck-up. No offense meant to actual rats, which are intelligent creatures, unlike those humans who will have high "social credit scores".

Reality is a bully

In a Quora answer, I mentioned that people have responsibility, whether they accept it or not. 

A political libertarian-- responding to the question, not my answer-- asked what "responsibility" means. I told him that everyone has the responsibility to not archate

He responded that he agrees, but refuses to have this responsibility "assigned" to him. That's weird. But I pointed out that responsibility just is, like gravity. Does he resist gravity being "assigned" to him?

He said "[I] don't want it assigned to me. If gravity had the audacity to tell me that I was to be subjected to it I would spend my life working on opposing it."

Antigravity, here we come! I assume he's been working on it his whole life. Right?


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Friday, August 27, 2021

Kitten update #5

Whiskers is a furry ball of dynamite. Full of energy, and so playful. He is really sweet (even though he looks vicious, killing my hand in the picture above).

The other cats are still less than impressed, but Ghost, the outcast cat, loves to wrestle with him. They get a little rough and I have to step in sometimes, but at least Ghost has someone to play with now.

We take Whiskers on adventures almost daily. He loves car rides-- more than the destination. He prefers paved paths over grass, but we're working on that.

His right eye hasn't changed in several days-- as far as I can tell. It is still cloudy, but the surface seems smooth. If he'd hold still long enough for me to get a better look it would be helpful. I think the ointment did the trick. I don't think a cloudy eye would need to be removed, so I'm hoping that surgery has been avoided.

We still have to deal with the hernia. Maybe we'll find out more about that next Thursday when he goes for his follow-up appointment. I'm hoping for good news on the eye, at least.

I've still got his GoFundMe up and running to cover the cost of the hernia surgery and follow-up vet appointments. Please share that link if you want to help. Thanks.


 A person would have to be a real festering pile of slimy feces to sign up to be an enforcer of legislation.

"He's stealing from the government!" is one of the least inspirational rallying cries I can imagine. The murderous Giga-Mega-thief is being pick-pocketed by a worthless punk. Yawn. It's not going to bring me to action.

What does "not failing" look like?

I've been thinking a lot about the "libertarianism fails in practice/in the real world" claim that I see so often.

I wonder what those who make that claim would see as "not failing".

To me, it doesn't matter what technological wonders you have, or how "safe" you feel, if you don't have full liberty, it's a failure. For this reason, I see the entire history of political government as one monumental failure from beginning to end. 

So, the disagreement must center around a difference of opinion as to what "failing" means.

This may also mean we want different things. Or, maybe we want the same things, but we disagree as to how they can be achieved.

I want relative peace. I want everyone's property to be secure. I want everyone to be free from molestation as long as they aren't violating the life, liberty, or property of another individual.

Sure, nothing can guarantee this, but the failure is built right into political government from top to bottom and side to side. That's unacceptable to me.

If the only way I can get what I want is to violate others with taxation, legislation, etc., it's not worth it. It's exactly the same as admitting that if the only way I can have sex is to commit rape, it's not worth it. Statists think violating others is "a necessary evil" if they consider it in any way negative. If it's necessary, it can't be evil, and if it's evil, it can't be necessary. And political government is evil.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Thursday, August 26, 2021

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce runaway slave "laws".

Be "that guy", but...

...keep in mind it's going to embarrass the Family. And we can't have that!

In the past, I've embarrassed them because I refuse to participate in National Socialist ritual pole quilt worship. I've embarrassed them on occasion by refusing to go into places with "We don't care if you die!" signage by the door. Now I embarrass them because I'm done with mask mandates.

Family doesn't want you to be that guy. They want you to go along obediently, with whatever "the Authorities" dictate. Don't embarrass them. Don't make a scene, even if you don't make a scene, by being different.

Well, I'm not a particularly obedient person. Especially when I see the harm in obeying.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Wednesday, August 25, 2021

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce anti-gun legislation.

Tuesday, August 24, 2021

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce mask mandates.

When you thought you had the opposition beaten...

The headline on Reddit said "Conservatives are turning school boards into a battleground for culture wars. Struggling to push their agenda in other arenas, conservatives are bringing their buffet of grievances to schools - turning board meetings into an endless parade of ignorance, misinformation and just plain hatred."

That is a lie.

School boards have always been a battleground in culture wars. Children's minds (and futures) are the casualty.

There should be no such thing as government ("public") schools. Especially not compulsory ones. That they exist means they are automatically political through and through-- they can't be otherwise as they are tied to government. 

Someone is going to use them to advance their political agenda-- it's just that the Left-Statists thought they had that control in the bag. In the cases where their Right-Statist opponents are pushing back, the Left-Statists are squealing.

No statist faction has a monopoly on "ignorance, misinformation, and just plain hatred.". That describes Critical Race Conspiracy Theory to a "T", but the Left-Statists are happy to promote it.

The solution to toxic indoctrination isn't to let someone else indoctrinate your kids.

Abolish kinderprison. Education over indoctrination.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Monday, August 23, 2021

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce taxation.

The constant companion

Whatever paths I travel down or explore, libertarianism (or, if you prefer: abolitionism, Voluntaryism, or anarchism) goes with me. It's part of the journey. 

I can't leave it behind. I can't embrace the life of an archator no matter what I'm doing. Whether it is writing on completely unrelated topics, rescuing a kitten, socializing, or shopping. 

It is part of me so it's part of all I do.

It would be just as difficult for me to leave that behind-- to believe anyone has the "right" to archate-- as it would be for me to pretend to believe in leprechauns. I would be only pretending either way.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Sunday, August 22, 2021

More in common than you think

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 21, 2021)

Even when we seem to disagree, we have more in common than you might think. I probably want many of the same things you want.

I have no respect for those who violate private property. Even less, if possible, for those who harm the innocent. Wouldn't you agree?

Then why would you and I ever be on the opposite sides of an issue?

Perhaps you tolerate methods of getting what you want that I can't tolerate. I don't believe politics or legislation is ever the right way to do anything.

If I want a car-- or even desperately need one in order to survive-- I know I have no right to steal yours. Hiring a professional thief to steal one for me doesn't make it moral.

No matter what I need, or how badly I need it, having a politician impose a tax or entitlement to benefit me at your expense is wrong. I can't have any right to ask them for this favor.

If I don't like something you're doing-- something which doesn't actually harm anyone's life, liberty, or property-- I have no right to kidnap and cage you to make you stop. Nor do I have the right to shoot you if you resist being kidnapped. Hiring legislation enforcers-- with money that wasn't mine to spend-- to catch or shoot you on my behalf in the name of "the law", when you aren't violating anyone, is no better.

If I don't have the right to do something, I can't have the right to ask anyone else to do it on my behalf. I don't have the right to ask that money stolen from you through taxation be spent on things I want. I don't have the right to stop you from doing things I don't like if they don't violate anyone. I don't have the right to ask others to impose my will on you as a way to keep my hands clean. My hands would be bloody either way.

I'm not going to gang up with others and vote to forbid you from exercising your rights, even when I dislike what you do. Not even when this is seen as legal and called a civic responsibility or imagined to be a right.

There are limits to what I have a right to do, even when others refuse to respect those limits. I'm not willing to do wrong-- to use politics-- to get what I want.

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com
A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce prohibition.

Pre-existing conditions and Covid

Covid 19 exposed a lot of people's pre-existing conditions. Not necessarily medical conditions, though.

Many people seem to have been suffering from undiagnosed cowardice, authoritarianism, obedience, and social anxiety... and Covid gave them the permission they needed to express those shortcomings fully, with fawning approval. 

Now those people expect the rest of us to manifest the shortcomings they suffer from, under threat of punishment if we aren't as broken as they are. 

I think I'll pass.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Saturday, August 21, 2021

Supposedly, New Mexico is back to mandating masks indoors. I went to a few stores today and didn't wear a mask, was never asked to put on a mask, and I saw other maskless people (maybe 25%). I think the Branch Covidians are finished.

Legislation's result

Those who say "there oughta be a law", concerning anything, must LOVE outlaws. What else could explain their drive to make more and more of them?

Every "law" creates an outlaw. Or millions of them.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Friday, August 20, 2021

"Anarchy, like communism, fails in practice"

"Conservatives" like to pull some statement of this sort out of somewhere dark and musty: "Anarchy, like communism, sounds good on paper but fails in practice."


I've never seen anarchy fail when it is followed. Not once. Of course, it's not a political system, and those who try to make it one will see it fail every time. It's like trying to use the family SUV to get to Mars. You're doing it wrong!

That's also why communism always fails when imposed as a political system. It might work OK as long as you don't try to make a government out of it-- keep it 100% voluntary and let anyone opt out at any time for any reason without punishing them. But once politics enters the picture, it's going to be bad, just like when politics is mixed into medicine/science or anything else-- nothing is left but politics. 

And why the pathetic attempt to always tie anarchy and political communism together? Might it be due to government school indoctrination? I'm sure it is.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Thursday, August 19, 2021

It's up to you, every day

In the old Twitter thread with the anti-gun bigot I've talked about several times, a pro-gun, but also pro-cop, "conservative" justified his support for police (and legislation) by saying, "I don’t want to have to protect my life & stuff *every* day."

Well, sorry Bub, but that's just how reality works.

Cops aren't there to protect you or your stuff. They are there to make a report after you've been violated and kidnap your violator if your violator happens to fall into their lap. Protecting you or your stuff isn't their "job". It is your job and it always has been and always will be. Always. Your wishful thinking and bootlicking doesn't change it.

In fact, cops steal more than freelance thieves now, and have for several years. Are these really the people you think protect you?

Things like that are why I can't be a "conservative".


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Wednesday, August 18, 2021

Kitten update #4

Whiskers finally got in to see the vet today. The news is mixed.

He still has an ulcerated cornea in his right eye. They gave me a new ointment to try to get that healed. If it's unsuccessful he may have to have that eye removed. I'm hoping the ointment works.

He also has an umbilical hernia (I had felt it but thought other issues were more important) that they say they will repair when he goes in for his neutering.

Other than that, he seems in pretty good health. He's making friends/chasing the other cats and my daughter is just in love with him. So much kittenergy!

He'll still have a few more vet appointments in the near future, though.


Due to the upcoming appointments and procedures, I am starting a GoFundMe, but since you've already donated to help, just share it if you care to. 

Tuesday, August 17, 2021

It's long past time for the U.S. to withdraw its forces from the rest of the countries it occupies. Including, and especially, America.

The good kind of progress

The nearest "PlastiCrap World" store, over in New Mexico, got rid of its anti-gun signage recently, replacing it (after a month or so) with signs saying "Kindly refrain from openly carrying a firearm".

That's progress I fully support. I'm always more willing to accommodate a polite request than a rude demand.

I wish I believed it had something to do with me calling them out in my newspaper columns-- over and over through the years-- for being designated slaughter zones, but I don't. Whatever their reasons, it's a good move.

Yes, I think it's still silly to reject open carry by others, for many reasons, but at least they are no longer demanding you be target practice for evil losers who ignore signs.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Monday, August 16, 2021

If the (less than optimal) use of antibiotics can cause antibiotic-resistant bacteria strains, then the use of low-efficacy Covid-19 "vaccines" can cause new Covid variants. It's the same process. Any claim otherwise is a lie.

If it fails as soon as you stop propping it up with massive amounts of (stolen) money and hired goons, it was always a failure. Whether it is a political government in Afghanistan or a communist utopia.

"The Simulation": A useless idea?

I hear a lot of talk about "The Simulation". 

If we live in a simulation, but it's not possible to "hack" the simulation to get the outcome you'd prefer without going through the same steps you'd have to go through if you didn't live in a simulation, then of what use is the idea? None. It's utterly useless.

If this isn't a simulation, to have success you have to have the right idea at the right time, put in lots of work (in just the right way), and also be very lucky.

If this is a simulation you have to do the exact same thing to achieve success. There's no hidden button you can discover and push to hack the system without doing all the work. Even those who imagine there is a "hack" they've found seem to be fooling themselves about how much work (and luck) goes into the results they see.

So, either way, would it make any difference whether or not we live in a simulation? A difference which makes no difference is no difference.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Sunday, August 15, 2021

Legislative damage takes time to undo

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 14, 2021)

Why are legislative messes so quick to be made but so slow to be removed once in place? After they are shown to move society further from the goal used to justify them, they should be immediately reversed.

If politicians can hide their mistakes without admitting or reversing them-- and get away with it-- that's what they'll do.

At most, cleaning up these messes is done piece by piece, as though searching for a way to keep as much of the mistake around for as long as possible.

Even the failed scheme of alcohol prohibition is still around; handed off to local governments, rather than completely reversed by the 21st Amendment in 1933. Governments are still allowed to get away with unconstitutional restrictions, taxes, and enforcement powers. The ghost of alcohol prohibition still haunts America. It's why there are still "dry counties", liquor licenses, and Sunday alcohol sales bans. If it's wrong when done by the federal government, it's still wrong when done locally.

It's happening again with drug prohibition. It hit society all at once-- not coincidentally just as the federal government was looking for excuses to keep employing all the useless prohibition enforcers-- but only gets removed a little at a time, state by state. Never enough to stop the prohibition-fueled violence.

Maybe it's finally moving in the right general direction, but replacing the eased prohibitions with prohibitions on new things-- vaping for example-- isn't a net gain. Government has never had any business being involved with what people voluntarily consume.

It's the same story with gun prohibition. Sure, more states than ever have passed watered-down relief for the rights violations, dishonestly calling it "Constitutional carry" when the Constitution allows no exceptions whatsoever, but other states and the federal government keep looking for new ways to enslave Americans on the perverse altar of "public safety".

It's said people get what they vote for, but most people either voted for the opposite or didn't vote at all. They shouldn't be shackled with the bad ideas other people supported. Those who vote for something should be the only ones who have to live under it; let everyone else be exempt.

Liberty must be restored, in every case where it has been criminalized and regulated with legislation. No matter what excuses are used to keep violating natural human rights-- even those rights you care nothing about-- it needs to be stopped.

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Encounter at the thrift store

I was in a thrift store this weekend and an older guy with a little "service" dog approached me with some mystery kitchen appliance and wanted to know if I knew what it was. I didn't, but I looked up the answer on my phone. He thanked me, then, out of nowhere as I was turning to leave, asked if I'm a Democrat. 

I guess he doesn't read my newspaper columns.

I said, "No, I'm a libertarian so I don't believe in any of that government stuff."

He appeared shocked. He said he likes government because it does things for us and gives us stuff. I said, "Yeah, paid for with money stolen from us, after they skim their cut off the top. I'd rather they just go away. I don't need them."

Then it happened. I've never gotten the "But who would build the roads?" question in real life, but he actually asked in those exact words.

I said, "Don't you think businesses would build roads so you could get to them and spend money?"

He said "Well, they might, but why would they build roads to...?"...and he paused. I saw the wheels turning. He said, "Oh, I guess the roads would have to go everywhere or it wouldn't work..."

I mean, has he never actually thought any of this through?

So, he suddenly changed course and started asking if I'd had the "vaccine". Normally, I wouldn't even answer such a question, but this guy was fun, so I said "No, I decided against getting the rushed-through Trump vaccine". Again, he looked like a deer-in-the-headlights. 

He finally found his voice and said, "Well, the vaccine was the right thing for Trump to do, but anyone would have known that and done the same thing and everyone knew it could be done fast." Strange, I remember hearing the opposite: that a vaccine would take years, and Trump was lying when he said it could be developed quicker. But memory is easy to re-write.

He started telling me how many thousands of people are dying because they won't get the vaccines. I said, "Why would I believe those numbers? Or anything government sources claim?" He said "But government... but why... You don't believe them?" Could he finally be getting the picture?

So then he asked, "You didn't support Trump, either?" I said, "No. Like I said, I don't support any of that".

I left him there pondering and mumbling to the air (honestly, it sounded like he was trying to reassure himself) and I went on about my business.

I was later told that local businesses don't like him because his little dog poops in the stores and he won't clean up the mess. Why was I not surprised?


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Saturday, August 14, 2021

Kitten update #3

Whiskers is finally healthy. His right eye (cornea) still has some healing to do, but it's no longer infected. The cough is gone and there's no more rattle in his chest. There's no excessive sneezing.

He has also transitioned into being an indoor cat, thanks to monsoon rains over the last couple of days. He's meeting the other cats, who are suspicious, but not hostile. There is lots of supervision when they check each other out.

He is extremely playful and energetic, as healthy kittens tend to be.

His life is good. So much better than when I stumbled across his sick, starving body nearly 2 weeks ago. Thank you to those who helped me help him.

I appreciate the donations toward his care and the concern shown toward his well-being.

Chasing the ball. Where did it go?


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com
"'Your child will wait for another child to die.' Amid Covid-19 surge, Dallas County has no pediatric ICU beds left, county judge says." ~ Thus sayeth CNN
How many children actually die of Covid? Or even get put into the pediatric ICU due to Covid? And do none of them in the ICU recover? If not, why does it matter whether a child gets a spot in the pre-morgue? Politics makes people stupid.

Believing in the state's magic

I know there are those who hold out hope by pointing out the state's illegitimate word games and whatnot. They are playing along.

"Legal" mumbo jumbo doesn't change reality. 

Yes, government supremacists like to pretend it does; they want you to believe in their state magic. It's statist wishful thinking.

The United States doesn't own you no matter what, not even if it is a corporation named THE UNITED STATES.
It doesn't matter how your name is written on documents.
It doesn't matter about the legal definition of "person".
It doesn't matter if a flag has yellow fringe.
None of that makes an iota of difference in reality or with your natural human rights, even if states believe it does. 

Don't buy into the lies they want you to buy. You're doing their work for them if you do. None of their legalistic stuff makes you their property. None of it alters your natural human rights. Let them play their word games. If some other state plays along, that's on them. They are the fools.

You are sovereign. Act like it.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Friday, August 13, 2021

Arnold Schwarzenegger says "...screw your freedom. Because with freedom comes obligations and responsibilities". Sounds like he doesn't understand the difference between freedom and liberty. I wonder if it would make any difference if he did. Yes, freedom can include things you have no right to do, but liberty doesn't, and he's advocating violating liberty-- something no one has a right to do. Screw your mandates, Arnold.

"Eek! Liberty?! Kill it before it spreads!"

As I've mentioned, I am right on the state line between Texas and New Mexico. NM recently legalized Cannabis (Texas gov says they never will). It's not yet legal to sell it, but it is legal to use it. Legislation is so incredibly stupid.

But, anyway...

Someone from Colorado wants to open a dispensary (why not just call it a store?) right on the NM side of the state line. The town council (of the NM town) is trying to make up new zoning rules, more strict than the already ridiculous state rules, to make sure it doesn't happen.

This is what angers me about statists. They just seem to hate liberty so much that they can't stand to see it threaten to happen.

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Thursday, August 12, 2021

You don't need that!

An actual, although paraphrased for brevity, argument I saw recently for banning certain guns:
"You don't need an AR15. You can use a revolver to live out your white male self-defense fantasies if AR15s are banned*. No one should have to live in a society with semi-automatic assault rifles. Society has rules. If you don't want to live by society's rules, go live in the woods in a Ted Kaczynski cabin, you mouthbreather."

Yeah, I get it. You don't like guns.

And I don't like pit bulls. Probably at least as much as you don't like guns. I see no need for anyone to own one. I've known nice ones, but that doesn't mean some of them, when kept by certain people, aren't crazy dangerous. There are plenty of other breeds you could keep, right?

So, if I were as self-centered as you, I could claim:
"You don't need a pit bull. You can still have a Shih Tzu to live out your white male dog-owning fantasies if pit bulls are banned. No one should have to live in a society with pit bulls. Society has rules. If you don't want to live by society's rules, go live in the woods in a Ted Kaczynski cabin, you mouthbreather."

Except, that I would never make that argument. I am not so self-centered that I imagine I have any right to tell others what they are "allowed" to have. It doesn't matter how much I dislike (or fear) what you have. I'm just not ever going to do that.

Yes, if your gun or your pit bull harms someone (or if there is a credible threat they'll do so), you are fully accountable. You owe restitution-- maybe more than you can ever pay. But before that happens, your stuff is none of my business. 

Yes, society has rules, the primary one of which is "Don't violate the life, liberty, or property of anyone else". Once you start deciding you can tell others what they don't need, you're violating that rule. You are being antisocial and uncivilized.

No one has the right to decide what other people need. You only need air, water, shelter, and food. You can live on Primate Chow in a sheltered cage with a dripping pipe. Anything else is a luxury. But only a monster would force you to live this way based on what they claim you don't need.


*At least until "Saturday Night Specials" are banned.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Tuesday, August 10, 2021

Hypothetically, I care about people... I promise

Is it bad that I seem to care more about a sick kitten than I do most people? Sometimes I think it is.

But, on the other hand, the kitten only cried for help. He didn't hold me at cop-point and threaten my life if I didn't help him. I'm more willing to help someone who isn't giving me an order; who isn't making threats.

Hypothetically, I care more about other humans than animals. But that hypothetical keeps running into reality-- people who advocate violating my life, liberty, and property either through freelance crime or through legislation. It's hard to care about people who demand I be sacrificed on their altar to selfishness.

However... I do care about other people, and caring about other people means it hurts me when others are violated. Never forget, advocating for the violation of one means advocating for the violation of all. 

If I didn't care about people, I wouldn't be a libertarian or an anarchist or a Voluntaryist or an abolitionist (whichever term floats your banana). But I am because I do care. Even when it's hard. Even when it doesn't show as clearly as it should.

PS: I sincerely thank the two readers who chipped in toward the kitten's expenses. It means a lot to me and to my daughter. It helps remind me that people are worth caring about.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Monday, August 09, 2021

Cori Bush got something right

I know you probably don't want to hear it, and I hate to have to say it, but sometimes a politician can be directionally correct.

Some people are criticizing Cori Bush, some politician from somewhere, over her support for defunding police while hiring her own private security. (Here's a link, but of course, it's from one of those fake news organizations, so take it all with a grain of salt: link)

If that were the whole story she'd have it exactly right. Shocking, I know!

Of course, being a politician, any money she spends on anything-- food, transportation, clothing, housing, or security-- is stolen money. If it weren't for institutional theft ("taxation") she wouldn't have the money to spend.

But, if she were not a politician she'd be doing it right.

Yes, the police must be defunded, dismantled, and disavowed. Then the "taxes" which would go to funding that gang need to be abolished, too. That money could then be used for whatever each individual wants, including security of some sort if that's what someone wants to spend it on. People could hire private security or buy a gun. They could even pool their resources-- through mutual consent with others who also want the "service" and are willing to chip in to pay for it-- to hire something superficially police-like (but without "qualified immunity" and such). I wouldn't chip in, but that's just me.

You can't legitimately justify legislation enforcers by pointing to a problem they perpetuate-- crime-- through their enforcement of disarmament legislation. Well, you can try, but you look like an idiot doing so,

I know... copsuckers gotta copsuck. They hallucinate that cops are the good guys and are different than their freelance competition. Of course, police now out-steal freelance burglars (ignoring other types of freelance thieves) even before you count the "tax" money they receive, so the claim they are the good guys is completely delusional. 

Abolish the police, then accept the responsibility for your own security-- it has always been your responsibility whether you wanted to face that or not.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Sunday, August 08, 2021

Don't tolerate vandals, vandalism

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 7, 2021)

The article in last week's paper about the problem of restroom vandalism in Clovis city parks struck a chord with me. I've seen the results myself.

I realize the people who vandalize park restrooms aren't the kind of people who read newspapers. Nor much of anything else for that matter. I'm going to express my contempt for those reprehensible creatures anyway.

The most useless thing in the world is a park without restroom facilities. If you're going to have a park, you need the facilities. It doesn't matter if you're the parent of a small child who waits until the last minute to tell you they "need to go... NOW", or an adult who has to interrupt a family visit to the park in a desperate attempt to find a nearby fast food restaurant with a public restroom-- which was even harder to find in the era of "take out only" under Covid-19 hysteria.

If I sound like I speak from experience, it's because I do.

I never excuse taxation and don't want it used to fund anything, even things I like, including parks or their restrooms. But what kind of a dimwit vandalizes restrooms? I'd guess they are the kind of people who will relieve themselves on a picnic table or on someone's lawn, just because they are too self-centered to care about others.

Vandalism and litter are two things I can't think of any excuse for doing. If you ask me, both are as irresponsible as cluttering the world with legislation.

Vandalizing tax-funded property can only have one of two results-- either those damaged properties get repaired, costing even more stolen money (you might call it "public funds"), or they get taken away so that no one will have them. Don't count on getting a tax rebate due to fewer available facilities, though. It's not going to happen.

How can this problem be solved? My suggestion would be to let local businesses and individuals build, own, and maintain park restrooms. Let them protect their facilities however they see fit. I would hope security cameras inside the restrooms are off the table, but there have to be other clever solutions.

What can you do? Don't tolerate vandals. Anyone who vandalizes anything is your enemy. They are violating you and me. Don't vandalize anything in my presence and expect me to laugh about it or ignore it. I won't. It's completely unacceptable.

(The week after this was published, vandals struck the city aquatic center. And a week or so later, vandals broke the glass in both outer doors of a Family Dollar near my house.)

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #2

Yesterday we went to the Big City to celebrate my son's birthday with him. The rescue kitten went with us because I hated to leave him alone all day. It was a good decision.

I've been giving him antibiotics in his food since Friday. He can taste it and can be stubborn about it, but has finally accepted it. He's still snotty and his eyes are still gooey, though. I do think he's improving some. He has gained a lot of weight in the past week. He no longer feels bony; I can pet him without his spine and ribs feeling so obvious. He is very playful. 

He has also been taking up most of my free time, but that's OK. 

The road trip was probably the kitten's best day ever. He had a great time with my daughter on the 180-mile round trip. He played, ate, and slept in the back seat. Usually in my daughter's lap. He got to play and explore my son's apartment, too. I think he's already spoiled.

The kitten also got a name: Whiskers.

My daughter is wanting to buy him a lot of things. I really need to find him a home once he is healthy, but that's not going to go over well with her. I guess we'll see what happens.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Saturday, August 07, 2021

Enemies out of thin air

Do you have actual enemies? Yes, whether you know it or not. But do you hallucinate more enemies than you really have?

People who wouldn't otherwise have "enough" enemies-- or who want to pretend their real enemies aren't enemies-- often hallucinate enemies. Then by treating those chosen people as enemies, they make them into real enemies.

These days, "The Unvaxxed" and "The Maskless" are popular targets to make into enemies, as are gun owners.

Yes, there are people out there doing wrong. You have real enemies; people seeking to violate you (and others). Most use legislation, others are more freelance about it. No need to hallucinate more of them, just because you don't take the real ones seriously.


Now would be a good time to help support KentForLiberty.com

Friday, August 06, 2021

Conservatives are wishy-washy on rights and liberty because they love punishment so much.

Thursday, August 05, 2021

Is housing a human right?

Lots of noise is being made over the claim that housing is a human right. Is it?

Well, yes. But not in the way it is being presented. Those who don't understand what a right is get confused over things like this.

You have the right to provide yourself with housing. This just means no one has the right to forbid it, as long as you are housing yourself in a way that doesn't violate their life, liberty, or property.

No one has the right to impose building codes or to impose "zoning" that would prevent you from housing yourself. 

You are responsible for making sure your house doesn't collapse on top of you. If it does, you probably built a house that was beyond your skill level. Maybe you shouldn't do that.

"Taxation" makes it harder to house yourself, and is therefore something no one has a "right" to do.

But no one is obligated to provide you with housing at their expense. You don't have a right to trespass on someone else's property. You don't have the right to live in someone else's house without paying them the amount of money you have mutually agreed upon. You don't have a right to the type of housing you'd prefer if you can't provide it for yourself. 

So, if by claiming "housing is a human right" you are imagining it's OK to force someone to house another against their will, you're showing you don't understand rights. You may be a socialistic statist.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Wednesday, August 04, 2021

Kitten update

Playing with his toy

For those who might care, the rescue kitten is getting stronger. He's got a good appetite and is playful; he has a sweet personality. 

He still has a respiratory problem and his eyes are still gooey, but he can open his eyes now. 

I bathed him and have washed his face to help get the crust off, but it's stuck on there pretty good.

I've been using some rather old injectable penicillin, but am having my doubts that it is still good. I've ordered something fresh.

He has probably doubled in weight since Sunday. Still feels bony, though. I should have weighed him to begin with.

He deserves a chance and I'm doing what I can to give him one.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Tuesday, August 03, 2021

Is democracy the greatest threat to human rights?

Beware those who want to enslave


People who don't believe in rights usually seem to have ulterior motives. They want to do things to you without seeing themselves as the bad guy. If they can say rights don't exist, it's easier to justify enslaving you.

Standing right beside them are those who imagine they have a right to do things no one can have a right to do.

That one gem of a human I was arguing with is a prime example. Some of her supporters may even be worse.

She wants to choose her own rights-- including the "right" to use government violence to prevent you from having guns.

She thinks my idea of rights only applies to "straight, white, males" no matter how clearly I've explained that that isn't the case at all.

I believe gay transgendered married multi-racial trios of independent migrants should defend their marijuana crops with full-auto rifles because no one has the "right" to forbid it. That "no one has the 'right' to forbid it" is the only thing that matters where rights are concerned.

She and her followers keep harping on the same claim, both are saying rights don't exist, that they only exist for "rich white men"-- and she thinks "minorities and women" should get to v*te on "new" rights they might like-- "rights" which would negate actual human rights. But what other rights would anyone need? The "right" to enslave? It's nuts.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Monday, August 02, 2021

The dangers of taking a walk

Every day I take a walk. Yesterday morning during my walk a sick, starving kitten found me and started following me, crying for help. I tried to harden myself and just walk away; I can't afford any new expenses. 

But I couldn't.

I realize this was a stupid thing for me to do. I'm a sucker.

It's probably a hopeless case. It has a respiratory infection, eye infections, and is just skin and bones. I've seen friends lose kittens who were in better shape. I can't afford a vet visit. But I've set it up for comfort and am giving it kitten formula and soft food. I've also given it subcutaneous fluids, ophthalmic ointment, and antibiotic injections. 

In spite of my daughter's begging, I absolutely can't afford another cat, so if it survives I'll have to find a home for it.

I don't want my cats to get sick from exposure, so I'm doing all I can to keep things clean. Keeping the kitten out on the protected porch. Washing and sterilizing my hands and anything I touch. At least I have lots of alcohol and anti-microbial wipes on hand.



Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Sunday, August 01, 2021

Government wrong tool for society

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 30, 2021)

You are smart enough to know a hammer is the wrong tool for driving a screw. Yes, It can work in an emergency, but it isn't best and can cause future problems. Either use a screwdriver for the screw or find a nail for the hammer.

In the same way, government is the wrong tool for solving society's problems. It might appear to work, but you'd do better to find the right tool for the job. A social tool, not an antisocial tool.

Politics is antisocial. Someone only wins by making someone else lose. A social solution, though, is always win/win. At best, politics means you've fixed something by shuffling problems around. At worst, you solved nothing and created new, bigger problems in the process-- think of the examples of drug prohibition and anti-gun legislation.

Crime, homelessness, pandemics, etc. can all be addressed by finding voluntary solutions rather than non-consensual schemes. You also have to accept that some things can't be solved by any means; you just find ways to deal with them. Ways which don't make things worse by violating anyone's rights.

If you believe the only way to fix a problem is to steal, through taxation, the funds your project needs, and to threaten or attack people with legislation to make them cooperate with your plan, you've become as big a problem as the one you sought to solve. You solved nothing; you only replaced one problem with another problem you created. This isn't a net gain.

I have seen liberty work every time it is put to the test. Not "tried" in a weak, piecemeal sense, but fully embraced. The fears dreamed up as an excuse for violating liberty didn't come to pass. They never will.

Remember, liberty doesn't mean doing whatever you want, but doing whatever doesn't actually violate anyone else, regardless of how others may feel about what you're doing. Liberty is freedom tempered with responsibility, and your primary responsibility is to not violate the equal and identical rights of others. It's simple, but hard for people to grasp when they'd rather not understand.

Liberty, in every situation, provides the best possible tools. This is because it's not a single tool, but a complete tool set along with a machine for making new tools which never existed before; tools you didn't know you needed. No, it isn't perfect. Nothing is. It's still a far cry better than the alternative.


Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Enemies? Or just problems to solve?

I try to keep in mind that my enemy isn't people so much as a way some people behave-- anyone can behave in that way under certain conditions. If you archate, it doesn't matter what you call yourself-- you are the enemy of liberty, society, and responsibility, which makes you an enemy of mine. 

But you can stop acting that way and you can be forgiven. 

Evil is an action, not a person. (Although, if a person consistently chooses evil behavior, labeling that person as evil is helpful shorthand.) 

Someone doesn't need to be evil to be subject to self-defense; they only need to be committing an act of archation-- acting in an evil way-- where the best choice at the moment seems to be using force to stop them. 

It's not personal, it's necessary. They aren't an enemy, they are just a problem. No need to imagine they are more than they are.


Please donate or subscribe to support KentForLiberty.com