No one has such a "right"

No one has the right to be a police officer. 

Not even of the nice Andy Taylor variety.

No more than anyone has the right to be a burglar, a rapist, or a serial killer. The "right" to archate doesn't exist and can't be created, not by a majority opinion, by a document, by acceptance, or by a perceived "need".

When actual natural rights conflict with someone's imaginary "right" to be a cop, the cop loses, even if he/she murders the other because of the superstitious belief in "officer safety"/

Don't like that? Don't be a cop.

(I am typing this with my eyes still dilated, so I can't actually proofread what I'm typing. Grammarly is looking for mistakes, too.)

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Defense against the DK

I really kind of hate recognizing the Dunning-Kruger Effect in others because it makes me aware I’m probably experiencing it in some way myself.

The friend I’ve mentioned before who “doesn’t need a gun” because she has had medical training and will use her keys for defense if attacked is one person who makes me uncomfortable for this reason. I see this effect in her all the time on so many different topics.

She knows so much that there’s really nothing she can learn from others. But most of what she knows isn't based in reality. Not even close. She doesn't know what, or how much, she doesn't know. She is the textbook example of the DK Effect in nearly every domain she talks about.

At least she makes me think. And, of course, I will never suggest she is experiencing the DK Effect since if she learned about it, I would be an ex-friend. It's just educational for me to observe it in action.

Then I wonder, if she can be so obviously wrong on what she’s confident she knows, how might I be wrong about things I know; about a need to initiate force and theft and thus a need to govern others? 

I do understand the arguments made by those who want to carve out a need for political “authority”, I just don’t buy them. And I’ve tried to see it from the other side. Hard. But maybe I'm wrong. If I'm an example of Dunning-Kruger I wouldn't know.

I do have a sense of what I don't know and how much I don't know (it's a lot). Maybe that's a bit of a defense against the DK. Or maybe I just hope it is.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Choosing to live in a dystopia

Often, when you point out the absurdity of living with political government, some genius will inform you that "Utopia isn't an option" as a way to justify their acceptance of government's atrocities.

It's kind of a dumb argument. 

The only ones I've ever seen trying to impose a Utopia are those who believe their brand of government is the one which will bring it about.

It won't.

I've never seen a liberty advocate pretending that liberty will bring Utopia. But it's a convenient straw man for statists to try to use against the idea of removing the power of their religion from society-- they already carry it around in their pocket.

Utopia isn’t an option, but dystopia is always optional. 

Government is a way to pick that option.

Choosing to try to govern each other is choosing a path to dystopia.

Liberty and government are mutually exclusive-- the more of one you have, the less you'll have of the other. You might not like what everyone chooses to do with their liberty, but it will never be a dystopia-- for that you'll need government restricting and strangling liberty.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?