Presidents a distraction from issues

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 28, 2024)

Is Joe Biden still the US President? Will he soon be forced out, by using the 25th Amendment, due to his cognitive decline? Is he physically healthy enough to continue in the position or to survive his term? Will Kamala Harris be any better? Interesting times.

What you may not realize is how little it matters. US Presidents have always been figureheads; this has become more obvious over the years. Presidents hold little power; most of it is exercised by unelected bureaucrats and those in intelligence agencies who tell the Presidents what they'll be allowed to do.

There's a joke making the rounds that America is running out of conspiracy theories because they're all being proven true. This is more accurate than most people want to admit.

I know "The Deep State" sounds like a conspiracy theory, but if you think rationally for even a minute, you'll see it has to be how things work.

A President takes office and changes the head of some agency, choosing among candidates for the position who have been pre-approved to pick from. The agency doesn't change, its agenda speeds up or slows down.

My go-to example is the unconstitutional BATFE. This agency may change the ways in which it violates natural human rights, but it never relinquishes power willingly. It never admits its policies are all unconstitutional and therefore criminal acts. No, it simply speeds up, slows down, or picks a new target.

This is how something on the edge of the Deep State works. Now imagine how it is for nameless agencies which are completely hidden from public view. It's worse than you can imagine.

The most any President can manage is to ask an agency to double down, to concentrate more on something else, or do what it does a little differently. So far no President has had the ethical courage to start abolishing these agencies. Nothing really changes; it just gets a new paint job and the doorknobs get updated. Even if every employee were replaced the agency has a life of its own and will continue doing what it does.

Whatever your feelings on the topic, the truth is the President is neither the problem nor the solution. Some are worse than others, but they are mostly a distraction to keep you from seeing who the real enemy is. The root problem must be dug out and burned before liberty can thrive.

-

Thank you for reading. Show your support.

How 'bout neither

Statists love the false dichotomy. Such as the one above. You either accept government violating you or Venezuelan gangs violating you. There is no third option of not being violated.

I'm protecting the identity of the "libertarian" minarchist who posted it. Whether I should or not.

I waded in where I knew I wouldn’t be welcome.

I pointed out that "No gangs would be taking over anything had government not whittled away the natural human right to defend life, liberty, and property with the most effective modern tools available. Government is the problem; more government is not a solution."

Instead of addressing my point, he said: "Yet here we are, in the real life world. Not a philosophical thought experiment in a vacuum."

Me: "So you believe a real world tighter border wouldn’t require a much stronger, bigger government than currently exists? In real life? I’m talking real world, not utopian 'necessary government' delusions."

Him: "I subscribe to the minarchist view on this, that pragmatically, securing a border is one of the few “legitimate” functions of govt in our current reality. Allowing culturally distant, militant, organized, criminal, communist people or organizations to come free is suicide" There's that evil "pragmatism" again-- the belief that anything is excusable if you can make the argument that it "works".

Me: "Are you a libertarian or a minarchist? There are libertarian solutions and there is statism. The gulf between the two is unbridgeable. 
https://kentmcmanigal.blogspot.com/2024/08/it-seems-almost-intentional.html"

He stopped replying, but someone else jumped in: "Given that our government is already the most overblown, powerful force in the history of the world I think we could conceivably direct some of that power to the border without 'expanding it'”

Me: "'Could conceivably'… But they wouldn’t. Nothing in the history of government gives any indication that they would."

Person 2: "So you’re fine with millions of people from 3rd world countries pouring in who cost taxpayers billions a year, who do not share your values whatsoever and who will cement a permanent one party state if they are naturalized, as long as the gov doesn’t get a little more power?" Mind reading must be such an exciting superpower... if only they could do it well.

Me: "Read the blog post I linked to and you’ll find the answer."

And so it goes. Of course, I eventually got blocked. I get it- I'm frustrating. I'm the tar baby. I have patience and I've heard it all before.
Anyway...

If government can get you to beg them to save you- with legislation or border control- they win. And you won’t actually be saved.

To those who believe government holds the answer, the statist approach is always the "pragmatic" way, even if you know government will never do it. Government might close the borders, but if they do, it won't be to make you safer or make your life better in any way. It will be to trap you. To control you. You'll still need to take up arms to defend your own life, liberty, or property.

To them, the libertarian approach, even when it’s no more far-fetched than the statist approach, is “philosophical” and not realistic. Just because they seem to believe so strongly in government. Even when both approaches are on equal footing as far as the state agreeing to the conditions. (It won't.)

"Close the borders", using the government power that already exists so you don’t end up with more powerful government, knowing that this isn't how government has ever worked, and it's not going to magically change now. It might work this time?

But respecting the natural human right to defend life, liberty, and property? The ONLY thing that has ever worked or ever will? This is unrealistic. You've got to beg government to save you from the conditions it created and sustains with its illegitimate power.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

I’m resting

I’m still alive.

I’m spending my days bingeing Mystery Science Theater 3000– napping through a lot of it. 

Not feeling great physically. Feeling much worse about rescheduling the surgery.

I was so looking forward to being able to see with two eyes again. I’m tired of reaching for things and missing because I have poor depth perception. And missing steps when going down. 

I understand there are people in worse shape, permanently, but I hate having the rug pulled out from under me like this. I could see the light at the end of the tunnel and it got switched off by the Fauci Bug.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Things never go smooth

Last night I developed a fever, cough, runny nose, and body aches. My daughter tested positive for the Fauci Bug on Monday, so that's probably what I've got.

So, I'm off the surgical schedule for tomorrow. #@%*!

The next available date is October 16, but they'll watch for any openings before then.

I'm really unhappy about this.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Better than any government

Any ordinary criminal is better than any government.

Nearly every extraordinary criminal, like a mass-murdering child rapist, is still better than any government. And better than most government employees.

If you side with government against other criminals you're not helping. You're not on the right side. At best, you are choosing one monster over another monster.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

The more you know... the unhappier you are

The more you know about what's happening in the world, the less happy you'll probably be.

If you don't pay attention to it you'll be uninformed, but if you do pay attention to it you'll be misinformed. And miserable. It's quite the conundrum. 

You need to remember that "the news", when the topic is anything political, is fake. It's all lies.

One way to deal with this is to not listen to anything going on outside your personal sphere. You'll run the risk of being blindsided by something horrible you didn't see coming because you weren't paying attention, but you'll avoid the constant bad feeling of knowing what's happening in other places-- things you can do nothing about. 

Which is worse? Which will have more of an impact on your quality of life? It may depend on who you are.

People who use politics against others are just the worst. It's dangerous to not watch them and see what they are doing, but it is going to ruin your life if you spend much time seeing the evil they are perpetuating on everyone around them.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Giving government power over you

Government really only has whatever power over you that you give it.

It doesn't seem like it much of the time. 

Government employees can murder you-- and may be as likely to do so as freelance thugs. If not yet, then soon. 

Just as the amount of property stolen by government now exceeds the amount stolen by freelance thieves (and has for several years- and this doesn't even count taxes!), the number of people murdered by government may soon surpass the number killed by freelance murderers. It wouldn't surprise me even a little.

Still, if you don't let freelance thieves and murderers control how you live your life now, why let government?

You don't owe them your compliance and obedience. You don't owe them respect. If you owe them anything, it is only what they have earned: contempt. 

If you go out of your way to express this contempt, you are still letting them control you. I have known people who couldn't pass a cop without flipping them the digitus impudicus. Me? It's not worth my time and effort. I neither go out of my way to avoid cops, nor do I seek them out. They are irrelevant to my life, just like a noxious weed or diseased vermin (until someone has shoved them down my pants). Other coercive government employees are the same.

I refuse to give them the power to control what I do, beyond what I have to do in the instantaneous present to keep them from murdering me. And even that is probably too much.

What are your thoughts on this?

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Assassination wrong, counterproductive

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 21, 2024)

Once again, some evil loser killed a person, but not the specific one he wished to kill. Donald Trump, his presumed primary target, survived with a minor injury. I am no fan of politicians or their institutions, but this isn't the way to change things for the better. Not even close!

If you dislike a politician, vote against him, or better yet, do something productive. Build a life for yourself that doesn't hinge on politics or depend on government doing things your way. Be independent.

Don't try to kill the politician or his fans. It's wrong and doing so only proves the point that you, and those like you, are the problem. You've proven your opponents' narrative about what kind of people those who are against their agenda are. Is this what you want? To become the terrible person your opponents claim you are?

A violent revolution will only engender a new violent regime. It may be different from the old regime but it won’t be better. For real, lasting change, a peaceful revolution always beats assassination.

The best solution-- the right one-- is to walk away. Remove the power of politicians and their institutions by refusing to serve them from this moment forward. This works better than voting. If no one obeys, no one rules.

Politicians need you; you don’t need them. The same goes for any government employee- they need you and your compliance much more than you need their "services".

I encourage this kind of peaceful revolution; simply growing beyond fawning over, or obeying, political regimes. None of them are worthy of your respect. Democracy is mob rule and republics always become democracies on their sure slide into tyranny. Don’t keep following that path if it’s not where you want to end up.

This doesn't mean any other political system is better-- it isn't. No one has the right to govern anyone but himself. Nothing can create such a nonsensical "right" based on the dangerous superstitious belief in political "authority".

Abraham Lincoln was a racist tyrant. "The American Lenin", some have called him. His legacy embodied the domestic abuser's threat: "If you leave me, I'll kill you!" Then, John Wilkes Booth turned him into a martyr whose actual deeds and opinions have been sanitized from most history books. You don't change things for the better by elevating your opponent to martyr status.

Assassination is wrong, but it's also counterproductive and stupid.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

This next week is a doozy

Just a quick note. Today begins the most insanely busy week: a comic-con for my daughter, a follow-up appointment for my left eye, my daughter's birthday, the surgery on my right eye, then a follow-up appointment on my right eye. Followed by making trips to take care of my sister's cats (including one that is elderly and on medication to keep her from dying) while she goes on a weekend vacation. In that order. All except for the cat sitting are at least an hour and a half from home, and all are on different days so nothing can be combined into one trip.

This is the week I warned you about.

I am trying to make sure I have things written to post, but I can't guarantee it. I may not respond to comments or emails in a timely fashion. If I do things right, you won't even notice if you forget about this note. And that's my intention; to make you forget I even mentioned it by keeping things going without a hitch.

Keep me in your thoughts.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Resistance is essential

Speaking of boxes...

To me, it is clear Kamala Harris is worse in every way than Donald Trump. She echoes all his bad traits and adds some creative evil of her own. (I realize I may be attributing to candidates what those pulling the strings are doing. Just go with it.)

I'm also aware this makes Trump the more dangerous of the two in some ways.

If you're trapped somewhere inside the box, you probably balk at some part of this claim. 

You may have a little extra emotion involved, making you hate one or the other beyond what reason would indicate. It's even possible this is why I see Harris as worse than Trump- I may be suffering from HDS rather than TDS. I don't think so, but who would? We all think we see the situation clearly, even if we are in a box we can't see. 

Being outside the box (or some particular box) I understand it doesn't matter as much as those inside the box believe it does. I don't need (or want) to be governed by anyone. I don't require a president; I won't bow to one. I can govern myself just fine-- as can you. Politicians are parasites. Government and liberty are mutually exclusive, and I value liberty. Anyone trying to govern me is the enemy.

Presidents are an unnecessary evil. They aren't part of the solution until or unless you find one willing and able to dismantle the entire structure that gives them and their opponents their power. Don't hold your breath, since the Deep State will never allow anyone like this to get close to being on the ballot, much less to be elected. 

The best power you have right now is in your refusal to comply and your willingness to accept the consequences of noncompliance if there's no way to avoid them. Do not be assimilated. Resist. This is what those outside the box understand. It isn't pretty, but it's true.

The tighter they grip, the more who will slip between their bloody fingers.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Trapped in the box

Statism is a box. It's a trap. It is hard for people to think outside the box; to escape the trap. It's even harder when they can't see they're trapped in a box.

It's a big box. There's lots of room inside.

There are partitions inside the box, keeping matter and antimatter apart so the box can survive. Or, rather, keeping those trapped in the box from communicating with those inside the other chambers and discovering their common condition. If they were really allowed to get to know each other and to communicate, the box wouldn't survive.

Inside the box are things like both defending and defunding the police, borderism and importing migrants, taxation and how to spend it, support for presidential candidates, Constitutionalism, citizenship, woodchippers and other death penalties, the myth of the rule of law and the superstitious belief in political authority. It's where people debate what kind of government to impose on themselves and others.

Outside the box is where you can see beyond the greasy cardboard walls. 

There you can see that borderism and importing migrants look opposed, but are both flavors of statism. Both lead to the same tragic end: government supremacy.

It's where you can see that copsuckers and most of the "defund the police" people have more in common with each other than with those who understand that cops are the standing army the founders of America warned about. They each think cops are the key-- either to "law and order" or to ending racist policing. Either path, separated from the human right to defend yourself and others from ALL attacks, leads to a police state.

Outside the box is where you can see that taxation is theft, extortion, and slavery, and arguing over how to spend the stolen loot is evil. The outside-the-box discussion is how to stop the taxers from taxing.

Outside the box is where you can see the futility of arguing which politician should be running your life rather than demanding they back off.

Inside the box are all those who aren't aware that everyone has the right and responsibility to govern himself, and no one else. 

Is there a way to get through to those trapped inside the box? Yes. It's rare but it happens. Is it more useful to notice that even outside the box is a larger box encompassing those who think they've escaped?

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

It doesn't mean you're a monkey

The first time I ever heard of Monkey Pox was when I worked at a pet store. We had ordered some prairie dogs but the order was canceled by the wholesaler because Monkey Pox had been found in their facility. 

That would have been in the mid-90s.

Back then no one was afraid the name Monkey Pox would offend anyone, so no attempt was made to change the name to "M Pox". 

I guess now Chicken Pox and Rat Bite Fever need to be dishonestly renamed in case anyone feels they are being equated with chickens or rats, or are being accused of having sex with chickens or rats, if they catch those diseases.

It's just so stupid.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Toxic twins

Imagine twins who have been hurting each other since they were in the womb. Neither one wants to stop, and each points to all the times in the past when his twin has hurt him as justification for each new attack. As adults, the twins have formed mafias to commit their acts on each other and the family members of the other. Somehow they believe this mafia makes their behavior more legitimate.

Each twin has his own supporters and haters. Egging him on to hurt the other again. Their behavior threatens everyone in the whole world.

I have zero sympathy for either twin.

This, to me, is the story of the Middle East.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Amendments Convention a trap

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 14, 2024)

Roosevelt County has stepped into a trap. Convening a U.S. Amendments Convention would be a mistake.

The Bill of Rights already contains the most important Constitutional amendments and the federal government usually disobeys it. They interpret those amendments into nothingness any time one would stand in the way of government doing something it wants to do.

The fundamental human right to own and carry weapons? Government illegally decides what kind of weapons it will allow the people to keep and bear, which people it will allow to exercise their rights, where those rights will be allowed, what kind of government fees will be charged, and it regularly throws people in prison for exercising the right in a way government doesn't like.

It's also an amendment many people would repeal.

Any faction which doesn't like any of the amendments in the Bill of Rights will claim it can simply pass another amendment to change it. Of course, alter any part of the Bill of Rights and the whole deal is off; the federal government can pack up and leave the country.

The only justification for amending the Constitution is to close loopholes which allow tyranny to sneak in; to place more rights off-limits to legislation and more limits on government. New amendments would need to restrain government, not the people.

I don't trust politically motivated people to amend the Constitution responsibly, but to try to buy votes with tyrannical amendments their base wants.

What if they did stick to limiting government power? History suggests it won't work any better now than it has over the past two-and-a-half centuries. Government will not be limited.

How about adding an amendment to strengthen the rest? I'm talking about an enforcement amendment, spelling out exactly what the penalty would be for any government employee who violates any part of the Constitution; hot tar and feathers or a rope being historically appropriate fates. This is the only sort of amendment I would support. It won't work. As long as government gets to investigate itself, it will keep finding it did nothing wrong. Or someone would find a way to use it against the people.

The best use for the Constitution at this time in history is to illustrate how criminal the US federal government has become. Inviting more amendments won't turn out well for anyone other than those who won't let a document restrain their power.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Reminder: Keep prepping

This seems like a good time to remind you to keep prepping. 

Expect trouble during and after the s/election. If it doesn't happen, at least you were ready in case it did. The natural world can always throw a disaster your way, too. As can general human incompetence. Be ready- stay ready. It will never hurt to be more ready than is necessary.

If anyone makes fun of you for being ready for something that didn't happen, just know that smart people will never do that.

Lately, my prepping has come to a grinding halt, due to various circumstances. But there's nearly always something that can be done. This is a reminder to myself to find something and do it.

If you don't have money to stock up on things, practice your skills (they'll always matter more than the things anyway).

If you can't practice for some reason, read books or articles, or watch videos on prepping. Get ideas.

Make lists. What you have (check expiration dates), what you need, what you've realized you don't need, what might need to be replaced... whatever lends itself to a list. See what you might be missing that you didn't notice until you had things written out. 

Sort through your preps and make sure everything is in order. If nothing else, this will help keep you in the prepping state of mind, which is always useful.

Be ready out there.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

What brings her joy?

Koala Harris' cackling is being rebranded as "joy". She's "joyful".

Perhaps.

I know people whose sense of humor is limited to enjoying seeing people get hurt. Jokes or humor which would require thought to find funny don't register as funny to them. That kind of stuff is more likely to anger them.

Evil people feel JOY when they violate others.
So, yes, I'm sure the Kackling Thing truly is joyful. It would fit her type.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

I can see clearly now (out of one eye)

I'm back. I had to get reading glasses before I could do anything on the computer.

I'm seeing pretty well... out of the left eye. The shortcomings of the formerly "good" eye are more obvious now. Having a good lens shows me how bad my vision has been- shockingly bad. I have apparently been seeing everything in a muted sepia-tone. And clouded and smeared. An unexpected benefit: the new lens is making the world bright and colorful. I didn't know what I was missing.

I'm having a bit of trouble adjusting to using the eye I haven't been able to see out of since the end of October. But now it's the good eye, so I have to consciously switch to it sometimes.

I'm anxious to get the right eye done. Even knowing what it entails.

The laser procedure was kind of horrific. The lens replacement actually was, too. I think I would prefer to be unconscious for both, but I guess they don't do that. At least it was fast.

As soon as I left the surgical center, my vision in the eye was perfect. Soon the post-op swelling and grittiness set in and the vision got blurry. The next morning, my vision was still bad, but it cleared up within just a few hours. It still has a ways to go, but the surgeon said it will continue to improve over the next couple of weeks.

It's not quite a bionic eye, but it almost feels that much superior to what I have been living with.

I'm already really impressed.

I highly recommend having it done if you need it.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Speaking of being able to see...

Being able to see through the lies of all political parties is a superpower. It's not something very common in today's world.

It seems to be limited to libertarians and anarchists. Which isn't surprising.

You'll get used to being accused of being on "the other side" each time you criticize the stupidity or evil you see on one side. Or assumed to belong to a side each time you call out something a side is doing right. (Yes, they do occasionally do something right.)

Let it roll off your back.

Politics makes people stupid, and usually evil, too. It makes them blind to reality, seeing everything through the lens of politics-- a lens even worse than the one I had surgery to remove. But they don't want their flawed lens removed. It lets them imagine they see what they want to see.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Surgery day

I’ll be arriving at the eye surgery center in about 10 minutes. I’m getting there a bit early- hopefully they’ll let me in. They were a bit adamant about not having much of a waiting area.

I’ll see how this goes. Smoothly, I’m hoping. I hate medical procedures, though.

UPDATE: I’m home. My eye feels gritty and dry. As long as the eye anesthetic was working I could see perfectly out of that eye. Now that the anesthetic has worn off I’m keeping that eye closed for comfort.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

They'll sell you out

If government does manage to get the rifle ban it drools over, don't expect any meaningful support from gun stores.

In particular, I don’t trust any gun store that promotes drug prohibition to stand up against a ban on AR15s. 

They'll roll over and sell you out, just as I've heard of them doing to people who bring in a firearm that lacks a serial number.

I understand why they feel they have to do it-- they believe they require licensing from government, and these licenses can be revoked. And will be revoked if they don't carry water for the authoritarian state. This is why licensing of any kind-- even if you feel like it's a good idea-- is one of the worst things ever.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

It might be an improvement...

My daughter asked her mom if she knew who the vice president was.
She didn't, so my daughter said "It's Kamala Harris".
Her mom said "Koala?"

So, now when I hear of Harris and her campaign, I think of a red communist koala eating your dollars, pooping out equity and gun bans.

(Image generated with Gab AI)

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

I will speak out as long as I'm able

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 7, 2024)

You are probably familiar with the poem, First They Came, by Martin Niemöller. The one which begins, "First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist." It goes on to list more groups "they" came for.

We are living in such a time again. People in power are coming for those they don't like: often the ones who speak out against the evil being committed by political criminals in positions of power. They are coming with lawfare, inflated charges, SWAT raids, and censorship.

What would the poem say today?

First they came for the January 6ers and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a January 6er. Then they came for Donald Trump and I didn't speak out because I'm not Donald Trump. Then they came for the Republicans and I didn’t speak out because I’m not a Republican.

Remember how Niemöller's poem ends? "Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me."

When they come for me, will there be no one left to speak out for me? That's the way it might go if society stays on the same course. I don't intend to let that happen.

The reality is I have no illusions I would be last on any list to be rounded up. With this realization, from the beginning, I-- unlike the man in the poem-- have spoken out. Even though it makes people mad. I will continue to speak out against those who come for any individual for any reason besides violating the life, liberty, or property of another person. Even if I don't otherwise support anything they believe or do.

It's also an unfortunate fact of life that those who have been targeted in the past will usually target those they see as their oppressors as soon as they gain the power to do so. I've seen this happen repeatedly as long as I've been alive. It's wrong, making things worse instead of better, but they do it anyway.

With this in mind, when they come for the addicts I will speak out though I'm not an addict. Then they come for the migrants, the sexually confused, and the Democrats I will speak out though I am none of those.

Whatever happens, I will continue to speak out as long as I am able, and I hope you do, too.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

Feeling a little Jonah-ish

The world has gone mad. It didn't have far to go to get to this point, but it made the last jump pretty fast.

It could be interesting to sit and watch everything play out.

Stay armed. Stay prepared in other ways, too: food, water, off-grid energy (solar, muscle power, etc,), and above all, skills and mindset.
Do not comply.
You don't owe loyalty to any politician or state-- they've put in the work to earn your contempt. Let their chickens come home to roost.

Take care of yourself and your tribe-- however you define it. Let the archators take each other out-- out of your way; it's what they want most and what they've v*ted for. Honor their wishes. And duck!

Those who have begged for authoritarians to rule them are getting ruled good and hard. They won't learn anything through this lesson. They'll keep believing superstitions such as that money can't exist without the state because theft gives money its value. Or that government can be good and is necessary, and that anarchy is death and destruction.

If you want to warn them of their folly, go ahead. They won't thank you or even listen. Maybe a bystander will, though. If you'd rather watch them burn for their ignorance, that's fine too. At this point, whatever happens to them is because they've demanded and enabled it. I know I have no right to force them to safety.

I just hope you and I can avoid the worst of it. Preparedness will help.

If I had the ability, I might be tempted to poke and prod to see what happens. 
On one hand, the longer things take to play out, the more time you and I have to prepare.
On the other hand, the longer this goes on, the worse the final implosion will probably be. And it might be on the heads of our kids and grandchildren.

And, yet, maybe things will settle down. A little worse than before (as always), but not so bad that it crashes around our ears. The slow crawl to collapse could keep moving relentlessly onward. Like a glacier. I would like to think it could be reversed, but I see no evidence anyone but you and I are even aware of what's going on. How can it be reversed if no one will even admit what's happening?

Part of me says that previous generations have also thought the world was in trouble in their time. Some of them were right. We may be in a similar situation, but there are new variables that have never existed before. Will they make a difference? I guess we'll find out.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Taxation gives money its value?

The guy mentioned in the previous post, who wanted me to admit to loving some forms of socialism, also has strange ideas about money. Ideas so odd that I'll just have to show you exactly what he claimed.

I've explained my understanding of money in the past.

When I said if something can't be provided voluntarily, without "taxation", it needs to go away, he countered with:

"You're effectively asking for an anarchy where everyone looks after themselves. No laws, no money. I say no money because it's something created by the state. Taxation is interesting, it's something that has to happen to give value to money. Without it you could use anything you can get people to agree on. But taxes make you need $s so the gvmt are in charge of money. There's a conversation to be had about the rate of tax though"

Yes. Anarchy, please. It's not what he claims, but that's for him to learn by experience. I'm surprised he didn't whip his Somalia out and wave it around.

Anyway, he believes money is "created by the state"? That money has no value unless it is given value through taxation? It sounds like he's describing fiat "money", not real money. 

I told him that was cute and asked if he'd like to admit to any other superstitions.

"No doubt you think money comes from the people, or business. You got a printing press laying around?"

My response was: "That’s not money. It is a substitute for money that people accept. It’s a receipt for money that no longer has money backing it up. Just the promise that government will keep stealing to prop it up. The US dollar has lost nearly 100% of its value since it [sic] the Fed began the scam."

He concluded with "As Minsky said anyone can create money, the trouble is getting other people to accept it."

He's not wrong about that. I suppose the way government pulled off the scam was to start with real money, then take away the reality of it a little at a time until nothing is left, but people still accept it out of habit when they probably shouldn't. The same scam is likely to work for anyone with the resources to pull it off.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

"But you love THIS socialism, right?"

In response to the sick Tim Walz comment about "One person's socialism is another person's neighborliness" I posted the image shared above.

A statist thought he'd get me with "Is the police department socialism? Fire department? Military? If you think any of these being controlled at the national, state, [or] civic level is a good thing then you just supported a form of socialism."

I know. And...?

No. I don't think letting government control any of those things is a good thing-- I don't support them. At least not in their government iteration. They are funded with theft ("taxation"), you can't opt out or provide a competing service for yourself (and others) and save your money. And I told him so.

So he tried a different approach: "Police & fire departments are funded by local taxes. The military is funded by the senate authorising the creation of money."

What does that have to do with the topic? But, I'll play. I told him they were still socialism and unethical. If something can’t be funded voluntarily it needs to die.

Because of his bizarre comment about money, though, and his apparent need to educate me, this then devolved into a discussion of what "money" is, which will be part 2.

Really, though. Do people who oppose political socialism have that hard a time grasping that government police, firefighters, and military don't get a free pass? That if a service is actually necessary and wanted, people will support it without being robbed and threatened?

Do socialists believe the rest of us are this clueless? And is this why they think they can get us to embrace socialism if they frame it a certain way?

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Blog alert

I'm approaching time for my eye surgeries, which means blog posts may not be as regular as normal after next Tuesday. But they may be-- I just don't know how things will go until I get there.

However, this morning as I was leaving for the final requested pre-surgery eye test, I managed to slam the end of my right index finger in the front door. 

I'm not good at typing under optimal circumstances. I use 3 fingers, and now I've lost the use of one of those-- the primary one and the one I depend on for using the mouse-- for a couple of days or so. Depending on how long it keeps throbbing. 11.5 hours and it's still exceedingly painful, but maybe it will not be as bad by morning.

Anyway, if blog posts are a little less reliable for a while, that's the reason... or the reasons. I'll do what I can. I did manage to get one written and scheduled for tomorrow morning, and I wrote this.

Yay, me.

(UPDATE: It's morning. The back (proximal) half of my fingernail is a nice blackish-purple color and my fingertip is swollen and a little red. The finger still hurts, but it is usable as long as I don't hit the keys too hard.)

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Playing the "slur" card

Nasty people who want to stop discussion now call anything they don't like a “slur”. I've seen it and so have you.

It is one of the most irrelevant, dishonest, manipulative, censor-y things anyone can pull when they have nothing to stand on.

Most of the time it’s just a lie.

I saw a video of George Snuffleupagus interviewing some guy, and George, because he's a racist, just wanted to talk about "race". He kept going back to that topic no matter what. It was disgusting-- I don't even know (or care) who the man being interviewed was (probably a politician). The other guy was trying to get back on topic, but to derail the conversation, George would accuse him of using a "slur" again and again. And I never saw him using one.

If accurate observation feels like an insult-- a "slur"-- to you, you're probably the liar.
If you are feeling insulted on behalf of someone else, let them speak for themselves. They don't need your infantilizing.

Call me what you want. It's either true or it's not, but I'm slur-proof. I have had statists try their best. They've expected me to feel insulted when they've called me an anarchist. This is accurate and I'm not insulted. They've tried to label me a "globalist", but since this is a lie it has no power over me. It's just showing them to be ignorant.

If you want to try to "slur" me based on my true characteristics-- "race", sex, sexual orientation, beliefs, or whatever-- it's not going to happen. I am what I am. I'm not so fragile that I'm going to scream "slur!" over it. It's either true or it isn't. None of it is anything to feel insulted over.

Statists get all bent out of shape when it is pointed out to them that they are statists. Like it's a "slur" rather than an accurate assessment of their position. They believe that governing others is a legitimate human endeavor, but they apparently don't want to admit it. If your stance brings you shame, maybe you should reconsider and change something in yourself.

If anyone tries to use the "slur" card, that's not going to go the way they want, either.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Who's the hater?

To me, it seems like the more w0ke someone is, the more they hate people in general. 

I know someone who’s quite w0ke and who often accuses me of hating people I don’t hate. Yet they are the one constantly saying how much they hate people. And wanting people to be controlled by legislation. 

I want people to live in liberty, free of authoritarianism. This w0ke individual does not seem to want this, but keeps advocating the opposite.

You have to hate people to want more legislation enslaving them and to want more enforcers imposing legislation on them.

It doesn’t look like an anomaly to me since I keep observing this same behavior in others.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

It seems almost intentional

I oppose government borders and restrictions on people moving where they want to go.

But I also oppose governments importing people or encouraging them to move in by offering or giving them handouts and preferential treatment, even and especially when they refuse to assimilate and, instead, choose aggression and intimidation. Which is why I understand borderists, even though I disagree with them.

I also oppose governments disarming the people and forbidding them from defending their life, liberty, and property from ALL archators- foreign and domestic.

I oppose governments pretending to be the final arbiter of justice. Giving some people cover when they violate others- because “they come from a different culture” or something like that.

I oppose the idea that rights are subject to a v*te. It doesn’t matter if those v*ting on whether rights will be respected or not were born on the other side of the planet or next door. The majority being against rights, and using the superstitious idea of government to impose their will is stupid and evil.

I oppose government.

It’s no wonder this sort of situation explodes in anger and disorder. It probably guarantees it, given time.

It’s a recipe for disaster. For violence. For death. Hopefully for insurrection and rebellion.

I wonder if governments do this intentionally to cause societal trouble so they can crack down on the population. To have an excuse to become even more authoritarian and violent toward the population. It wouldn’t surprise me. Whether calculated or not, it creates a crisis government uses to gain power. Government is the real enemy.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Keep independence part of holiday

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 30, 2024)

Do you celebrate Independence Day or do you celebrate the Fourth of July instead?

It’s the difference between celebrating insurrection, secession, and the violent overthrow of a tyrannical government in the cause of independence, or demonstrating your loyalty to an even more tyrannical government and its military.

I know which one most people celebrate.

Most holidays get corrupted and co-opted over time. Complaints about the commercialization of Christmas are as traditional as Christmas gifts. Yet, no holiday has changed more than Independence Day. It has become a celebration of the opposite of its original spirit. It would be as though Christmas had become a day of hatred and theft. This is probably why almost no one calls it "Independence Day" anymore, choosing instead to simply identify it by the calendar date.

I'm sure this is no accident. The US federal government would prefer you believe the holiday is about remembering it as the hero of the story for defeating the evil British government centuries ago. It wouldn't want you to think outside the box and make any inconvenient connections beyond the curated events as told in history books. Or notice that the British government of that time was less authoritarian and tyrannical than the current US federal government has become-- by a wide margin.

Independence Day is not about cookouts, fireworks, or military appreciation. It's about violently throwing off the rule of the most powerful government in the world at that time.

Unfortunately, those who accomplished this feat immediately made the fatal mistake of replacing the cancerous tumor they had removed with a "new and improved" cancerous tumor; one which has grown larger and worse than the original had ever dreamed of being. It's an error most revolutionaries make. I suppose they didn't know any better. They were apparently still suspicious of liberty in spite of their impassioned speeches praising it.

Where do you stand? With liberty and against political government, or with the majority?

Do you love liberty, or do you prefer "liberty, but"?

Do you follow the crowd which rejects liberty-- the right to do everything which doesn't violate anyone else-- preferring the freedom to do whatever you feel like doing, regardless of who you violate, as long as it's legal? Or, like a politician, do you not understand any of these words apart from what government says they mean?

Keep independence in Independence Day; it’s the reason for the season.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

It's not a political issue

The fundamental, natural human right to own and to carry weapons is NOT a political issue. It's a survival issue. On both sides.

Those who are against the right to own and to carry weapons say the weapons are the problem. The weapons threaten their survival. They blame the weapons for the acts of bad guys. This isn't too bright.

Those who respect the right to "keep and bear arms" understand that bad guys are the problem Regardless of the weapons available for them to choose from. And that bad guys will continue to be bad guys; willing to attack and murder, even if all guns magically vanished from the Earth. 

Bad guys are willing to be more brutal than good people can generally bring themselves to be. They also get more real-life practice being brutal. Even with identical weaponry this gives the bad guys an advantage. 

If you criminalize weapons, or simply make it slightly harder-- more complicated or costly-- for the good people to obtain and carry them so they'll have them available when needed, you've given the bad guys, who already have an advantage, a greater advantage. 

Because the bad guys don't care about your rules. They'll find weapons even if you ban them entirely.

So, yes, the natural human right to own and carry weapons is a survival issue. Only one side of the argument is making a smart argument that actually gives the good guys a survival advantage- or at least levels the field. 

The anti-gun side is making a terrible, stupid "argument" which gives bad guys a survival advantage. An "argument" that only works with brainwashed drones who are already on their side. Once upon a time when I was young and gullible, I seriously considered that they had a point, but then I started thinking and realized they didn't. They still don't/

They may say, like Whoopi Goldberg says, that they aren't going to take all your guns; only your AR-15. But that's only right now. If they were successful, next week they'll demand you give up something else. And something else the week after that. Not one inch.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Upcoming surgery update

For me, not the cat...

My eye surgery was scheduled for next Wednesday but they called this morning and rescheduled. It’s been delayed by 6 days because they want to do another test.

I’ve found out the cost and all that. It’s less horrifying than I was expecting, but still stratospheric. On top of the medical expenses from last year’s multiple “events”.

I could really use some help, but only if you want to. And only if you can afford it. If requests of this nature make you upset, just ignore it please.

Whatever you choose to do, thank you.

The various links for donation options are here: Show your support?

How can you tell it's a police state?

You and I are expected to obey government immediately. If we don't, we may be killed.

Government is allowed to take its time obeying the rules that create government and give it illegitimate power. 

If government is violating the Constitution, and even if it finds itself guilty of doing so, it is allowed to keep violating the rules for months, years, or decades without penalty. "Until the courts can work it out." There's no immediacy. There's no risk to government involved in breaking the laws.

Someday, maybe, it will have to stop. No one whose life was destroyed in the meantime gets justice. Those killed in the enforcement of the counterfeit rules can never be restored to life. No government employee faces any consequences.

The shadow of a doubt always comes down to favor The State.

This is how you know you live in a statist "society"-- a police state where government power (or imaginary "authority") is believed to be more important than individuals or their rights. It's a backward anti-society. It's what they all are at this point in history.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?