Try for a normal without tyrants

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 29, 2021)

Are you enjoying this "new normal"?

Neither am I. What can be done about it?

Consider:

Those who gained power or prestige by using the Covid panic will not willingly go back to the way life was before. They will have to be forced out. They'll probably make this a crime before you get the chance. Try anyway.

Even if you do successfully force them out, things can never go back to exactly the way they were before.

Covid-19 is a new cold virus, added to over two hundred cold viruses-- rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, and others-- which are already out there. You could get lifetime immunity from each cold virus you catch (as is usually the case) and still get two colds every year if you lived to be one hundred years old. Future generations-- until every cold virus is cured-- probably won't know or care which specific cold virus they caught.

Another change which will probably be permanent is how many people lost trust in "experts". My trust in the medical profession has been almost completely destroyed by the events of the past year and a half and I'm not the only one.

Some of your neighbors have also been inspired to become snitches or enforcers for the state-- enforcing the opinions of politicians against their fellow humans, both as business owners and as freelance "Karens". Will they go back to a healthy way of interacting with others once the silliness ends? Don't count on it.

Governments also got new visions of what is possible; more understanding of what the population will allow them to do. They will take advantage of this at every opportunity.

Things change. You can never go back to the way things were in the past. However, you don't have to allow bad changes to stand unchallenged; you can turn them into opportunities to change things for the better. You can now see cracks in the wall of political authority. Grab a crowbar and sledgehammer and get to work. This wall, like the Berlin Wall before it, can-- and should-- be brought down.

Yes, we will settle into a new normal, different from the one we lived before. That's not necessarily a bad thing. The "new normal" doesn't have to be the one authoritarian politicians want. It can be a normal where tyrants have no place among those who choose society over politics. It's up to you.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Halloween fiction: The mutants are coming!

I'm hiding in the corner of an old dusty barn. Trying to be as quiet as possible while breathing hard from running. I wipe some blood out of my eyes; don't worry, it's not mine. My heart is pounding in my ears, and I need to calm it if I am to hear anything coming.

Feeling around to see how much ammo I still have with me; wondering if it will be enough. I couldn't possibly carry as much ammunition as I'd like, to use against what I'll face when I do make a run for it.

I've got my AR-15 with a full magazine; two more full magazines and a "partial" in my bag. I just counted what was left-- nineteen in that partial magazine. I swapped it out for a full magazine after the last encounter a couple of hours ago, just in case. Could I have fired fewer shots than I did last time? Did I waste ammo? It's a nagging question I'll never know the answer to.

I also have my 9mm handgun, with a full 10-round magazine in it and two 15-round magazines in the bag, besides the 12-rounder clipped inside my waistband. I haven't fired this gun since I ran-- fortunately, I've kept all encounters to a distance.

And that's all I've got as far as guns go... unless you count the .22 LR mini-revolver I always have as a last resort, which I don't.

Are the guns pointless, though?

I'm not even sure where to run. 

The towns and cities are obviously not safe, but neither is the wilderness. Not the mountains, the plains, the deserts, or the oceans. Sure, the places farther from concentrations of people-- or where concentrations of people used to live when this hit-- are slightly less dangerous. But any difference is small and shrinking fast. They are spreading faster than seems possible.

How did the world get into this mess?

A few years ago most people all over the world got a new vaccine. A different sort of vaccine against a disease that in hindsight was a picnic compared to... well, what the vaccine has wrought.

It didn't seem that dangerous at the time, but I didn't really see the need so I didn't bother getting vaccinated.

As it turns out, not getting the vaccine made no difference to my safety. It only bought me a little time. But for what?

Even months later there weren't that many serious side effects. Anyone who had decided against the vaccine was ridiculed and often shunned because it was "obviously safe". That was then. 

Later everyone stopped caring either way, and it was too late.

Before everything shut down it had become apparent that this vaccine, by getting into the recipient's DNA, made it possible for the genes of unrelated mammals to merge if they mated, resulting in hybrid offspring. No matter that they had different numbers of chromosomes or previously had immune responses to each other to prevent crossbreeding. I don't know the exact explanation of how it did what it did, and I guess explanations are pointless now. Who would I explain it to even if I knew?

If this had been the whole story, it wouldn't have been a huge issue outside some backward communities. 

Unfortunately, it also turned out that in a small, but still too large, percentage of the population-- both human and non-human-- this change coincided with the total elimination of any reluctance to mate with anything of any species. Worse, the offspring aren't sterile and can-- and will, with enthusiasm-- breed with each other, passing along the worst traits of the line. Now it's hard to guess what the parentage of the... thing.. about to rape or eat you (not even sure which fate is worse) might have been.

These things have higher intelligence than the animal part of them would have had (the ones which have some human in them, anyway), more stamina, and higher aggression than any normal lifeform. And most of them have shorter gestation periods and mature in only a year or so. Some mature in weeks-- thanks, mouse DNA. Plus, they all have the survival skills and abilities of the wildlife genes they contain. And their appearance. I promise-- you don't want to see them. They are like walking cancer made up of the worst sick taxidermy you can imagine, multiplied by infinity.

It's like some perfect nightmare. I wonder if my horror-fan friends are enjoying this-- if they are still alive.

Now I feel like it's time to run again. I'm as rested as I'm going to get. I need to find somewhere to sleep for a little while, but there's no bank safe handy to lock myself in to feel protected enough to sleep. 

Some food would be nice, too, but honestly, I'm scared to eat one of those things. Would cooking really destroy the DNA enough to make me safe? And what about handling the raw meat and blood while butchering the things? I do have a few nitrile gloves I shoved in my bag as I fled my house just as something with giant curled horns blasted through my back door, but would I trust them? I don't know. 

But I'm getting hungry enough that I'm caring less. I mean, yes, a few hours ago I did make the mistake of shooting that hairy winged thing as it swooped toward me, and a little blood sprayed down on me as it fell to the ground. Just a little splatter. And I feel fine. Great, in fact. Stronger than ever. But hungry.

I'm starting to feel like I don't even need the guns. 

-

Happy Halloween!

Supply chain failure-- the common denominator

For weeks-- maybe months-- now, I've been hearing people giving the reason behind the supply chain failure. But I'm hearing many different reasons, not one. All of them sound plausible, even when they are different.

Ordinarily this would indicate that they are all probably wrong.

But not this time. Not if you dig a little deeper.

Every reason I've heard comes down, at its root, to government caused this problem. 

It's been a long time coming, but the Covid overreaction brought it to a head.

Regulations, rationing, licensing, legislation, handouts... they all came together to cause this mess. It won't be solved by mixing in more of the same. Getting government out of the way is the only permanent solution, but it's one you'll not hear from the mainstream or from government (but I repeat myself).

I hate to sound like a parrot, repeating the only phrase he knows. But, yes, government caused this problem. Government is the problem so often it can't be coincidence.

(After writing this, I decided I might expand it and turn it into a newspaper column. If so, I apologize for the repeat.)

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider letting me know.

The problem may be theirs

How rude!

Thinking back on a previous post, I got to remembering how many times in my life I've been called "rude" or something similarly negative because I asserted my autonomy. And it's a lot!

One person has repeatedly told me that by not allowing them to control me, I am forcing my will on them. I am being rude and should be ashamed.

Once I was working for a staffing service-- which was my actual boss-- when the job-site boss told me to move a stack of long metal poles from one location to another, outdoors, in the middle of a severe thunderstorm. Following the staffing service's explicit directions to not do anything I considered dangerous, I refused. I explained why I couldn't do that. I was kicked off the job after being screamed at for being lazy and useless. The staffing service supported my decision, though.

Because I don't fawn over police and military-- I don't thank them for their service when I encounter them in the wild-- I am told I am rude. I don't slam doors in their faces, spit on them, or even give them the evil eye. As long as they aren't actively doing wrong right now, I treat them as I would treat any other random stranger. But neglecting to fawn over them is "rude".

I don't often give anything to panhandlers, nor take flyers from anyone handing them out. If I say anything, I keep it to "No thanks". There have been a couple of occasions where the person wouldn't take "No" for an answer and I was more assertive, but I only push back as hard as I have to. I won't be bullied. I've been told this, too, is "rude".

I've been called "rude" for ignoring statist rituals to worship Holy Pole Quilt. So be it.

I have no respect for your favorite politician or bureaucrat. I'm not going to fake that I do. Don't press me to give my opinion unless you're strong enough to hear it. And don't call me "rude" if you don't like what you hear; what I didn't want to say in the first place.

I prefer to be civil. I like to be nice. But not at the expense of liberty or truth. You've got to have a line-in-the-sand somewhere. A line no one can push you across, using your desire to be nice as a weapon against you. If standing up for yourself (or someone else) makes you "rude" in another's eyes, the problem is theirs.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Suddenly YouTube is suggesting lots of videos for me on stupid people (their terms)-- what makes them stupid, why facts don't convince them, and why they don't know they are stupid. I didn't go searching for these and it makes me wonder if the Googleverse is trying to tell me something.

Time keeps rolling on

My mom's last uncle-- the last of a set of 11 couples (my grandmother was in a big family)-- died Monday. He was married to one of my maternal grandmother's many sisters. 

I've mentioned him here a couple of times; when his house got robbed (I believe, 3 times), vandalized, and then set on fire by a worthless dirtbag (that's the one dumb enough to get caught). 

Uncle Jay was distantly related to Daniel Boone (not a direct descendant) and looked like an old cowboy. Especially in his hat.

I have to admit, it was time for him to go. He hasn't been doing well for the past year, mentally or physically. I wasn't especially close to him most of my life, but did spend more time with him in the last 5 or so years. I'm not terribly broken up over his death. Still, it is the end of an era. 

Today would have been his 98th birthday. 

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

All it took was for an outspoken anti-gun bigot to "accidentally" shoot and kill someone (the gun "went off") for all the people who know nothing about guns to start giving their ignorant opinions with grandiosity. I've never heard so much gun ignorance in my life-- and I'm accustomed to hearing a lot of it.

"Not guilty" should be the default

Someone in my family got a jury duty notice again, but the trial was canceled before they met. But this is a good time for a reminder.

If you were a juror and had a bad feeling about the accused, but the government didn't prove its case against him, what would you do?

You should render a verdict of "not guilty" anyway.

"Not guilty" should always be the default. It's the government's "job" to prove their case to move you away from that position, but you aren't obligated to move an inch.

"Not guilty" doesn't mean you're sure he didn't do it. It doesn't mean you think he's a great guy. It doesn't mean you don't believe he's ever done anything else wrong. It just means the government didn't prove its case to your satisfaction-- or that the legislation he's accused of violating in this instance is counterfeit.

I could be on a jury and say "not guilty" but still feel the accused isn't trustworthy. I might still warn people to stay away from him because I think he's a slimeball. But I'm not going to hand the government a "win" based on my feelings and suspicions. Especially if they don't prove their case or are trying to enforce counterfeit "laws". It's your responsibility to hold them to a higher standard when you have the power to do so.

Besides, court isn't real life. It's just a ritual. Your life decisions shouldn't hinge on what happens in a court. If you don't trust someone, don't take a court verdict into account when considering whether you might be wrong about them.

There are people on death row (often for killing home-invading cops) I would gladly hang out with and there are people who have been acquitted that I would only be in the same room with if I were pointing a gun at them.

--- Support FIJA.org and take this short quiz.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

"That was rude!"

Saturday my daughter and I went to a pet expo over in New Mexico territory. One of the booths was the local city animal shelter. As I passed, they asked if I would sign a petition to have the city "improve" the shelter.

My signature wouldn't have been valid, since I'm not a resident of the state, and I don't think government should be running animal shelters anyway. I've repeated over the years that nothing should be "tax" funded, not even if I like it.

So I said, "No, thanks".

The shocked faces should have been a warning. My daughter tells me that a kid in the booth said "That was rude" as we walked away, and someone else said "Wow!".

I was told by someone in my family that I should have just signed. 

I never claimed to have the best social skills, but I don't like being deceptive. I suppose I could have gotten into a conversation to explain my choice. I could have pointed to the cat my daughter was carrying and told them the story of his rescue, as evidence that I love animals. Would it have made a difference in their opinion of me? Does their opinion matter? 

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Taxing rich discourages productivity

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 22, 2021)

Tax the rich? It sounds like a great idea... to people without a grasp of economic reality. For the rest of us, it looks like national economic suicide.

If you punish people for being productive, you'll discourage productivity. Yes, there are some people who would keep working hard to create value even if the IRS keeps stealing it, but many would throw in the towel and live on the bare minimum they are allowed to keep. They wouldn't start businesses to benefit society or to employ people. They wouldn't buy luxuries that people create, build, and sell to rich people. There's no faster way to cripple the economy-- other than a pandemic shutdown.

You could confiscate all the wealth of every rich person in the country, even redefining "rich" so you can take more, and it wouldn't put a dent in the debt Congress has racked up. A debt they pretend is yours to pay. "National debt" is a lie.

If Elon Musk had most of his wealth confiscated to fund government, the future of space travel would be in peril. In fact, it would probably be crippled for the next generation or two, at least in America. It's too great a risk.

Even the rich people I don't like have a right to keep the money they or their parents earned. The only people who don't have the right to keep "their" money are those who get money from politics or other criminal behavior. That money should be returned to the victims, not handed to government.

"Tax the rich" is a trendy thing to say. It demonstrates how "woke" you are. As with most "wokeness" it also declares your ignorance in a loud voice.

I don't want rich people taxed for the same reason I don't want poor people taxed. It's unethical to take money which doesn't belong to you, no matter your justification. Taxation is theft, even if you would rather pretend it isn't. If your plan relies on theft, It needs to be scrapped.

Plus, I don't want government to have money. I'd rather shut off the supply and starve the beast. Taxation is apparently not even necessary for government finances since government has shown it will print whatever money it wants. Yes, this will eventually destroy the economy, but so will taxing the rich. If they are going to destroy the economy anyway, I'd rather they do so without taxation.

-

(If you use Twitter, please consider sharing this on there since I'm indefinitely suspended.)

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Beware statist rule-breakers

Being an outlaw is a noble thing. An outlaw, not a criminal. But there is a risk.

No one is "law-abiding", and especially not those who claim to be. They simply ignore and don't count that legislation they don't agree with. I do the same.

However, statists who break the rules are happy to report your rule-breaking because somehow theirs doesn't count. But yours counts... to them. Reporting you may even-- in their imaginations-- make up for their own rule-breaking. Like a serial killer turning in a jaywalker.

I don't care if someone is breaking the rules as long as their act doesn't violate someone else. I'd never report someone for breaking such a rule. But then I'm not a statist.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Excuses are easy to find

With all that's been going on, I skipped my daily walk twice in a row. I haven't done that since I started walking for "exercise" a few years ago. I have skipped a day here and there if I was doing something else laborious that day, but never twice in a row-- or even twice in one week.

I wasn't feeling too guilty about skipping the walk, but then I realized it's just an excuse.

I still could have walked, and I should have walked. But excuses are so easy to find... or dream up.

It's the same way with statism.

It's so easy to think of excuses. 

"If people aren't forced to do that good thing, they won't." 

"If you don't forbid people to do that bad thing, and threaten punishment if they do it anyway, they will keep doing it."

"It's for their own good."
"We know what's good for them."
"This is too big for people to do without government."
"They won't be responsible unless you make them."

The excuses flow like a flood. Excuses are easy, principles are hard. But they are worth it anyway.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Ever notice how people who hate guns are generally the least able to act responsibly? It's almost as if there's a connection...

In other news... (with an update)

The past 24+ hours I've been struggling to take care of a very sick 9-year-old cat (Butterscotch), and I'm too tired and emotionally drained to write anything, much less anything smart, for automatic posting tomorrow morning. 

She's had a relapse of a problem she had a little over 3 years ago when we nearly lost her. She has a vet appointment for first thing in the morning. I'm trying to prepare my daughter for what may come.

UPDATE: Butters has a chronic kidney issue (which was the problem before). The vet put her on a few medications to get her over the crisis, and she already seems to feel a bit better. I caught the problem earlier this time so she wasn't as sick. Hard to believe, as sick as she was. I just have to stay vigilant and make sure she doesn't stop eating or drinking for even a day.
As an aside-- the vet looks like Molly Quinn from Castle.

For your favorite miscreants

 I'm offering Time's Up flags again for a while. In time for holiday gifts if you order early enough.

NPCs in action

The small local park is often the target of destructive people. Largely people from a specific demographic.

I don't want government taking people's money and using it for parks or park equipment, but I also think vandalism is one of the most stupid things supposed humans can do.

If you destroy something that "belongs" to government (but isn't otherwise violating anyone the way a police car, for example, does), you gained nothing. More money will be stolen to repair or replace it. Even if you imagine the taxes will be paid by someone else, you still end up paying through higher prices on everything you buy because someone is paying those taxes.

This table has been a recent focus of vandalism. The concrete pad under the table is inscribed with someone's initials and the year "1951", but for the past year, there has been a concerted effort by certain "people" to destroy the table. It has been repeatedly attacked.

Why? I don't get it.

Do these people imagine their life would somehow be better if they just tear down everything until nothing is left? Or are they counting on others to keep replacing what is destroyed with new stuff for them to destroy? What are they thinking?

Therein lies the answer and the problem.

The people who do things like this aren't actually thinking. They don't think of consequences or of the future beyond what they feel at this moment. They act on impulse. They are programmed-- by their empty culture-- to carry out certain actions and are powerless to resist. Thinking would get in the way, so it is avoided. If they are even capable of thinking. And perhaps they aren't. Maybe the capacity for independent thought was never part of their program. It sure looks as though that's the case.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Newest new project

Just for fun, I've started posting my Quora answers over on Patreon. I answer questions on Quora mainly to poke statists. I certainly don't try to convince any of them of anything there. I'm not always 100% serious-- especially if I think the question is dishonest (as so many seem to be).

I had given up on Patreon a while back. Subscribers kept leaving-- especially after the Covid shutdowns crippled the finances of so many-- and it became more trouble than it was worth to post there. But 2 stubborn supporters stuck around through the down time, so I feel I owe them something. This is... something. Maybe something sort of fun.

Yes, I am doing this with the hope of getting some more paid supporters. If it works I'll continue. If not, we'll see what happens.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Societal cancer

Society is an expression of human nature, on a large enough scale to spontaneously self-organize. 

Just like in any self-organization event, there can be localized glitches. Problems-- cancers-- can arise inside that self-organization to threaten its continuation. Cancers, in the case of society, like government-- including police. 

The solution is to cut those tumors out to make society healthier, not to pretend they are the valuable thing in the society. Never imagine those cancers are what make society; confusing the disease for the organism.

Don't be a cancer worshiper.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

At least no one is shooting at me...

How have things been going the past couple of weeks?

"Never goes smooth. How come it never goes smooth?" -- Captain Malcolm Reynolds (Firefly: Safe)

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

The tiresome topic

I would love to never again mention Covid, the pandemic over-reactions, or the mandates. I don't want to mention those things because I'm over it all. Once you stop believing in the Tooth Fairy it stops mattering to your life and there's no longer any point in talking about it. 

And I've never seen any topic expose so much science ignorance (on both sides, unfortunately) as this one. That's before you consider whether governments have any "authority" to impose mandates and whatnot (they don't).

But the Branch Covidians aren't letting it go. They keep intruding in my life with their crazy religious beliefs.

It's not as bad on the Texas side-- although some superstitious businesses still have "masks required" signs by the door even here. And on the New Mexico side of the line, every business has the signs due to the governor's orders, but even those who enforced the signs at first have given up now. 

Any time I see any "national" perspective, though, it's still usually Covid-centric. Even when it makes no sense to insert that into the topic-- it's almost as bad as trying to listen to something "mainstream" without someone going off on a "climate change" tangent. And obviously, the US feral government is still pushing hard to get you to obsess over this hobgoblin. What a bunch of criminals.

I'm not interested in restricting such speech, though. I think it's smart to let wackjobs expose themselves for what they are. But I am tired of them and I wish they'd shut up.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Make politicians invisible again

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 15, 2021)

You may have picked up subtle clues that my opinion of politicians is exactly as low as my opinion of freelance thieves, bullies, and vandals. It's impossible for me to dislike them more than I already do.

Still, I admit some politicians are undeniably worse than others.

My measure of how good or bad a politician is depends entirely on whether they force me to notice them. The more I notice them, the worse I consider them to be. Any politician who isn't completely invisible to my daily life is one I don't like. This not only includes their physical presence, but any legislative or bureaucratic nonsense they drop in my path for me to step in.

If they make up any legislation I might notice, they need to do better. If they flood society with minions acting on their behalf to impose this legislation on me or anyone else, they've crossed a clear line.

I want them to leave me alone, and I mean this in every sense of the phrase.

Obviously, if I notice them because they've stopped bothering me as much as their predecessors in some obvious way, I'll cut them some slack in this one area.

Yet, this wouldn't have been an issue if a politician hadn't meddled where he or she had no business meddling. Somehow, politicians have come to believe meddling is their business rather than being a crime.

It used to be a person could live an entire lifetime without ever meeting a government employee. They were like mythical creatures one heard about from mysterious travelers but had never seen with their own eyes. Much like harpies or Mongolian Death Worms.

Later, the only government employee anyone was likely to encounter was the person delivering the mail. Unless someone actually requested a government employee's presence, they were not imposing themselves in your life.

This isn't the case anymore, much to the detriment of society. This situation is as helpful to society as potholes in racetracks are to racehorses.

Worse, due to the licensing scams they keep expanding you are required to deal with government employees regularly to stay "legal". In some cases once per year, which is far too often. The number of required encounters keeps rising all the time like an overflowing toilet.

I want politicians to become invisible again. Even if their jobs don't go completely extinct, If we no longer see or hear them, it's an improvement.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Texas "Constitutional" carry-- how's it going?

Back before the Texas "Constitutional" Carry legislation went into effect, I had wondered whether it would make any difference. It seems like it may have, but I'm not sure.

I haven't seen anyone open carrying yet. I guess old habits are hard to break. I've always loved seeing regular people (not government tools) wearing a full holster on their belt, but I understand the wisdom of carrying concealed.

I had feared the "We don't care if you die!" signs would remain everywhere, and new ones would appear. That doesn't seem to be the case.

A few new signs of this sort may have shown up (I'm not quite sure), but most of them vanished. Some "Please don't open carry here" signs were posted. Also, a few places left up their old signage referring to license holders and such. I guess they didn't get the memo.

One change I didn't expect is how many of these pro-mass-murder signs vanished from New Mexico stores nearest the state line. Maybe it was only a coincidence that it happened at the same time, but it looks connected to me.

No new legislation was needed, of course; the old illegitimate rules just needed to be abolished or ignored. Yet it seems to have worked out pretty well, considering.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

How can it be both ways?

Why would you pin your hopes on the results of the next election while at the same time believing the last election was stolen? Are you going to v*te harder next time so that no one would be able to cheat enough to beat you? How would this work?

No election is legitimate because no one can have the right to govern anyone but himself. Never. Rights and liberty are not subject to majority opinion or political "authority". That's just how it is, like it or not.

Political criminals will still kill you to prove they are "right". And that's just how it is, like it or not.

But if you believe the last election was a fraud, how can you believe your v*te will matter next time? Do you think the winners will be scared to do it again? Do you think they'll behave because they know you suspect them and will be trying to watch more closely?

Or, do you v*te with the hope that your side will cheat harder next time to pull off a "win" in spite of the anticipated cheating of the other side? Would they need your v*te in that case?

Was there cheating or will your next v*te count?

It just seems really confused to me.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Libertarianism is all about liberty. Liberty is freedom tempered with responsibility. Thus libertarianism is a deep understanding of, and respect for, freedom tempered with responsibility. If you're not smart enough to understand that, don't embarrass yourself by trying to tear down libertarianism with your statist strawmen built of ignorance and fear.

It's not the tool. It's NEVER the tool.

There was a mass shooting in Norway. With a bow and arrows. Five people are dead with more injured. Some people are commenting that bows aren't (yet) illegal or registered in Norway, hinting that this is a bad thing. Talk about missing the point...

 The tool used is not the problem and never is. It doesn't matter what tool it is (unless it is one which can't be used defensively by being aimed at the individual archator-- governments or bombs, for example).

The most destructive weapon is political government. It can't be aimed sufficiently to target only an archator-- just like a nuclear bomb. If you believe bombs and governments can be used defensively, the burden of proof is on you, because this is an extraordinary claim.

If the control freaks employ the least ethical "tool" to ban guns, knives, or bows and arrows, evil losers will use something else. If the political criminals ban that thing, too, evil losers will move on to something different. There's always a "best available tool" if you're an evil loser. In fact, the most horrible evil losers use political government as their weapon of choice. Banning political government would be pointless too, until humans grow up enough to make banning it redundant. Until then, don't let political criminals get the drop on you.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Going with the flow (of traffic)

There are things I do that some might mistake for "obeying government". Such as driving on the appropriate side of the road.

There are reasons to drive on the socially accepted side of the road. Legislation isn't necessary. I don't want to be in a head-on crash, and that's less likely as long as I go along with the social convention to drive on the same side as (almost) everyone else in this area. It is self-interest as well as being a way to avoid harming others

It's similar to the reason I don't archate. I have determined that my own life will be better if I drive on the right side of the road and if I don't violate life, liberty, or property. Who would need another reason?

I don't even believe legislation dictating the side of the road to drive on is legitimate. If you're self-destructive, how is it going to stop you? It's a pointless "law".

Along the same lines, if you're doing dumb or harmful things just because legislation says not to, you're being controlled by government.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Statism is self-sabotage

Something I've noticed most of my life-- at least since I figured out that there were statists and non-statists-- is that statists are invariably angry or otherwise miserable. They've sabotaged themselves by adopting a broken belief system.

Even when I'm in a bad mood, it would only be worse if I were a statist. I know because that used to be the case. I'm much less angry now than I was back when I thought government could possibly be legitimate in certain situations.

The statists I know seem to always be angry over something and it looks like it's due to their statism. The more statist the person, the worse their anger and misery (and the more likely they'll project this anger on non-statists).

I think statism is naturally uncomfortable for humans, even though most seem to choose it. I suspect they don't realize it is optional-- this is probably by design.

They probably want government to do something it isn't doing, while it is doing something else instead. They seem to want to control what people do (cough-cough *wear masks, get jabbed*). They are possibly also upset by those they see living more free than they'd like government to allow. 

Basically I think they want the impossible-- to control other people completely. They don't seem to understand what makes humans tick. This ends up making them angry at other people and government for not solving this issue.

I wish people would be more responsible, kinder, and smarter. I am not under any delusion that I can force them to be. It would only frustrate me more to try, or to blame other people for not controlling the ones who can't control themselves. People are going to do what they are going to do, regardless of my wishes or my idea of what would work better for them. I'm not going to sabotage my peace of mind by joining the control-freak cult.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Politics is no more the "real world" than TikTok. In fact, politics is the TikTok for people who take themselves too seriously and believe themselves to be "adults".

Political power is the power to bully

If you define political power as the power of government, then I don't want political power. It's the power to bully. This power is concerned with controlling others. I'm only concerned with controlling myself, and that doesn't involve political power. 

However, sometimes you'll need to remove a bully's political power before you are able to control yourself. I understand using power-- force-- to stop others from controlling you. 

Political power is initiated force such as government action, rather than defensive action. I don't believe that's justified. Everything beyond the economic means or defensive force is political power. 

There is an acceptable way to use power-- using power to take back, from an archator, your power to control yourself. But government action?

I think there are better ways to get rid of bullies and regain your control than by using government. Including simple self-defense. I consider it more adult to use individual self-defensive violence than to use government violence-- including v*ting-- against an archator. Government-supremacists would rather you didn't do this.

Their opinion is trash. 

I will never think it's wrong to violently deal with a bully of any kind. I've encountered too many of them to have any sympathy whatsoever. I do not care if bullies get shot and killed by their victims, and I would never punish the victim for doing so. The bully made the choice to bully, so the cost of that choice rests on them. Yes, those who support bullies and political power will probably punish you for standing up for yourself, but don't mistake this consequence for proof that you did wrong.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

US may be one panic away from disaster

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 8, 2021)

A couple of centuries ago, a smart fellow known as Voltaire pointed out, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

This is a timeless truth.

It explains why a disturbing number of people in the year 2021 are calling for segregation, imposed poverty, or even concentration camps-- they prefer to use euphemisms-- for their neighbors who are, for whatever reason, unvaccinated against Covid-19. If this isn't a willingness to commit an atrocity, what is?

They've been fooled into believing absurdities concerning the virus, now they are publicly calling for atrocities. Society is ripe for some political functionary to start committing atrocities, using the excuse of "public safety", and these people would cheer and start lighting up the tip lines. Or dragging their neighbors to the "authorities" themselves.

There is a big overlap between those who want officials to punish their unvaccinated neighbors and those who want government to ban gun ownership. Maybe this doesn't mean anything, but it is worth noticing.

Many of these same people want to convince you that Ivermectin is only a horse de-wormer. Would they also characterize penicillin as only a horse antibiotic? Both are partly true, but incomplete.

Any medication can be dangerous if used incorrectly. Trying to shut down discussion concerning a medicine-- whether Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, or Cannabis-- is neither rational nor ethical. It's not science, but superstition. If you feel the need to shut down debate you've admitted your position is weak.

This doesn't mean I believe you should use any particular medication. Your medical decisions are between you and your doctor, with your informed consent being the deciding factor in every case. Government, social media corporations, and I shouldn't have any say in the matter. You might as well listen to your dog's medical advice-- the credibility is about the same.

I have no idea whether Ivermectin or anything else is effective against any specific virus, but I know when people are lying. You are being lied to.

It's not completely their fault. They've been lied to by politicized "experts" and they bought it hook, line, and sinker. Now, based on the absurd lies they believed, they have come up with what must seem to them to be a reasonable reaction.

It's not ethnic cleansing, but ideological cleansing. Does this make it better in their minds? America may be only one panic away from disaster because so many have believed absurdities.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

"Tyrannovania has the right to..."

I do not support any state. No state has the "right" to exist. 

Yes, individuals have the right to organize and cooperate, but not to form states or otherwise violate the natural rights of any other individual.

This always comes to mind when I hear someone say that such-and-such a state "has the right" to do something. No, it doesn't. Individuals do, as long as they aren't violating the life, liberty, or property of anyone else, but a state doesn't. No collective has the right to violate the rights of any individual. (Not even of those inside the collective, especially when their "consent" was coerced.)

The belief that they do has caused a lot of tragedy on a massive scale. "Consent of the governed" is a scam.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

No political government-- "government" or state-- is legitimate, credible, or ethical. Not one ever has been or ever will be. Because they are political. And if you remove the politics it stops being what anyone would generally call "government".

Abolish the police. That's not bathwater and whatever's floating in it is no baby. Toss it out.

William Shatner is going to space on Blue Origin's rocket. I can't help but think that's kind of awesome. Even if something goes wrong-- space is risky-- for Captain Kirk to die in a spaceship mishap (or even just in a spaceship) seems correct in some way. I'm hoping for his safety, of course, but he's 90 years old and has had a good run, and this wouldn't be the worst ending.

"Just breathe...."

The last few days I've been wound up. Too wound up.

I was worried about my dad's vaccination sickness-- he has finally recovered.

I've had some particularly aggravating repair projects going on that I wasn't having a lot of success with. Self-inflicted injuries, sore muscles, frustration, and things that didn't fit together the right way because they weren't the right parts. I'm sure you know how that goes. If not, you're more competent than me.

Then, on a visit to my parents' house, I was subjected to live "news" reports about that Arlington, Texas school shooting, and the absolute idiocy of the cops, politicians (including school administrators), and the news media comments just about drove me up the wall until I could escape. My daughter said I started yelling.

It was a perfect storm to stress me out and get me worked up.

Normally I'm a pretty calm person. Just maybe not these past few days. I need to recharge. I need a cave in the wilderness. Or, even just some wilderness-- which doesn't exist near here. I'd love to be a castaway on a deserted island somewhere. For at least a few weeks.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

A license is not the same thing as a credential. A license is government permission-- after paying government-- to do something government pretends to have political "authority" to ration. A license is mandatory.
A legitimate credential says you have been judged (by someone others believe to be competent) to be competent at doing something. But no one is prohibited from doing the same thing without a credential.

The view through "government goggles"

People who hallucinate that any part of political government is "ours" are going to see almost everything through that filter. In other words, they won't see anything accurately, but through the distortion of government goggles.

Scarier still, they'll not see you or your rights as you or they actually are. Since they don't see these accurately, they don't have any qualms about violating you. They may even deny you've been violated at all.

After all, if you think your life, liberty, or property are sacred, you'll get in the way of "our democracy", "our president". "our law enforcement", "our military", "our schools", etc. Standing up for yourself feels to them like you've violated them since you didn't allow them to do to you as they wish.

If you doubt me, take a quick peek through government goggles sometime. But don't let them stay on your face too long or you'll get brain damage.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

This morning's kinderprison shooting happened at the school my w0ke niece worked at a few years ago. 

To scare people into supporting mandatory Covid "vaccines" it has been necessary to convince people that a cold virus is as dangerous as polio.

It has been said "That government is best which governs the least". Thoreau was on the right track, but not exactly right. That government is best which governs the fewest. The best government governs only one individual-- the self. Governments get worse the more people they attempt to govern. Any government trying to rule, for example, 300 million+ people is pure evil and needs to be disposed of.

Politics makes people stupid, but it also makes them aggressive, evil, and easily manipulated. Divorce yourself from politics as much as possible. You'll still be cornered by people armed with politics, but defending yourself from them isn't politics; it's survival.

Malpractice

I'm more than a little angry.

Friday morning my dad got the (at least in his case) unnecessary Covid booster and the flu shot. He's been sick since Saturday morning. It made him more sick than he was when he had Covid back in the summer of 2020.

I think encouraging an 80-year-old-- who has already had Covid-- to get the "vaccine" and its booster is malpractice. Giving him the Covid booster and a flu shot at the same time compounds the malpractice to an almost incomprehensible level. Flu shots alone have always made him sick, but not this sick.

The only reason he and my mom got the Covid "vaccine" in the first place is that my 29-year-old niece-- who has been oozing w0keness ever since college-- insisted that no one in the family could see her baby unless they got the jab. I could live with that mandate; my parents couldn't. So they took the completely unnecessary shots. The baby subsequently caught Covid anyway and had the sniffles for a couple of days.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Not anti-vaccine but anti-mandate

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 1, 2021)

I am not anti-vaccine. I've been vaccinated for a few things in my adult life because I think the risk of those vaccines is less than the risk or inconvenience of the diseases they are supposed to prevent.

I wouldn't bother getting a quasi-vaccine which neither prevents the vaccinated from getting nor spreading a disease I'm not particularly worried about; a sort-of-vaccine which doesn't even last a few years, to moderate a new, slightly more dangerous, cold virus. A cold virus, which like all other cold viruses, will never go away.

It would be dishonest to call me an "anti-vaxxer". I'm not one. I think some vaccines are very useful and are a great benefit. Just not this one.

If you want the vaccine because your opinion of the relative risks differs from mine. I want you to get it. If you get the vaccine, I hope it works or at least makes you feel safer-- whatever you want it to do.

New data might change my mind and make me decide I want one of these vaccines, too-- if the new data comes from a source I trust. A source more credible and trustworthy than those currently counting the numbers of cases and deaths. Government is not such a source.

Why would anyone assume the numbers reported by government agencies and other politicized entities are even close to true? It is an unsupported assumption. I don't trust anyone connected to politics.

I oppose using government power and threats of violence to force others to get vaccinated or to wear masks. I also oppose using government power to forbid vaccinations and masks for those who voluntarily choose them and bear the full costs themselves.

I'm not anti-vaccine. I am anti-mandate.

In this case, I see no difference between bullies, governments, or corporations. No government or corporation has any right to do anything, since rights are individual, not collective. A collective can't have the right to violate individuals' rights.

Yes, private business owners have the right to require masks in their business. I also have the right to refuse to trade with those business owners.

I oppose anyone who helps government create vaccine passports of any sort. I oppose those who advocate for social division based on vaccination status. Even if I later decide to take the vaccination, I will always oppose "Papers, please" and other authoritarian interference in life.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Justifying mandatory Covid "vaccines" for young kids in government school with the observation that other vaccines are mandatory for admission into kinderprison illustrates that mandating any vaccine is wrong rather than making the argument that a mandatory Covid "vaccine" is OK. Also: Death to kinderprison.

Heed the warnings you are lucky enough to get

It's a constant frustration for me to warn someone about an issue I can see on the horizon only to be scoffed at or told I am lecturing. Then-- at least when it's my personal life-- to be expected to fix the problem once it happens. After my warning was completely ignored.

It happens so often as to be a theme.

It's the same whether I'm warning people in public about looming inflation, warning people to prep, or warning someone in private that they are ignoring something that's going to cause a problem in the near future.

Do you experience this, too?

I am often a good "fixer", but I'd rather avoid issues I see approaching, heading them off before they become problems that need to be fixed. But when I warn others, and it's up to them to do something to avoid this future problem, they usually don't. Then they expect me to fix what their inaction caused. I guess they think it's easier to let the problem happen and then have me fix it. I should just refuse to do so, but I won't.

To be honest, I've been guilty of ignoring the warnings of others, too. More when I was younger, but it still happens sometimes. So I guess I can't be too hard on others.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

No, I'm not pharmacologically enhanced

A few months back I was asked by a reader if I had ever used "shrooms". 

He thought that the way my mind works, as seen in my writing, suggested that I had. I haven't.

He wasn't being sarcastic or mean by saying this-- we had a nice conversation about it after he asked.

It's an interesting thought, though-- that my mind might, without 'shrooms, work similarly to the minds of people who have had that experience rewire their brains. Or maybe it doesn't and that was just his way to make sense of the way my mind works.

Maybe 'shrooms would make me "normal". That would be a tragedy!

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Burn it with fire

It's always easier to keep from making a mess than to clean up a mess you've made. Not that it's easy to not make a mess, just easier than cleaning one up.

When you neglect the messes you've made, they snowball into bigger and bigger problems. After a while, the mess is so bad there's simply no way to clean it up anymore; you have to just burn down the house. 

Like one of those hoarders whose house can't possibly be cleaned up and made safe or healthy again.

Those who came before us had the chance to clean up the messes they were making by establishing states-- political governments. But they didn't want to. They just kept making more and more messes (governments) and pretending it was fine.

Now the disgusting thing is filled with rotting food scraps, dead cats, roaches, billions of pages of legislation filling every room floor to ceiling, and who knows what else. It can't be cleaned up. It will simply have to be burned. Don't blame those who are facing the reality you don't want to face.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com