Planting doubt about rights

One reason some people try so hard to belittle the concept of rights is to plant some doubt. It makes it less likely you'll fight back when some government criminal violates your rights. They want to protect the political criminals-- including the police-- when they violate your rights. They don't want you to realize you have every right to fight back. And win.

So they lie to you. They gaslight you and they brainwash you. Whatever it takes to make you morally weak on the concept of rights. They want to steal your confidence and determination. They want you to have a little doubt in the back of your mind that you really have a right to do what you have a right to do.

Is it working? I think it works on all of us at least a little, or there would be a lot more dead IRS agents, cops, and TSA gropers. I realize this isn't nice to say, but it's true.

The people conducting this propaganda campaign value thieves, kidnappers, rapists, and murderers-- they value government-- more than they value you or the natural rights you have by virtue of being alive. They want to protect your abusers from you.

Anyone who tries to tell you that rights aren't real, or tries to convince you they are only privileges, is not on your side. They are on the side of the criminals.

(Image generated on Gab.ai)

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Unnatural disasters

Will the upcoming election be an unnatural disaster? Are you ready if it is?

I try to always be prepared. I try to be more prepared today than I was last week. This isn't always the case, due to finances or whatnot, but it's what I aim for.

If there are attacks to shut down the grid to disrupt elections, are you ready?
If there are riots if the the v*te doesn't go the way the riot-primed think it should?
If unrest becomes kinetic in the weeks after the election, as the count drags on, will you be prepared for it?
Are you prepared if nothing happens, but store shelves are cleaned out anyway because people are scared something might happen?

Is your gas tank full?
Your backup batteries charged?
Your pantry filled and water set aside?
Will you run out of prescriptions at a bad time?
Do you have cash on hand in case digital payments are impossible?
These are all things to think about taking care of sooner rather than later.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Well, he won't be needing it

A public figure (I don't remember which one, nor does it matter) was being praised for speaking the truth. Someone who imagined himself to be clever asked that tiresome post-modernist question:
“What is truth?” 

I responded:
“That which agrees with reality.
If you don’t know what reality is, can I have your stuff when you’re dead?”

Then some other clown came back with "Which reality?" I said, "See above".

It's so edgy to pretend to not understand there is reality and there is everything else. But if you act on that fashionable belief in every moment, you're not going to survive. That's reality!

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Having your rights suspended is impossible

 

Rights can not be lost or suspended. It doesn't matter what you've been trained to believe on this topic.

“But, criminal!”
“But government says…”
“Well, the Constitution says…”

Doesn’t matter. None of that matters. If you believe it matters it just shows you don’t know what a right is.

Pro-gun people are among the most pathetic quislings in the world on this matter. I don't understand why, although I can speculate.

I made a comment on a video about Trump having his guns stolen ("losing his gun rights and having his guns seized") because of the lawfare against him, and while a few of the commenters knew what rights are, the majority didn't. So many tried to say I was wrong without showing I was wrong. Whether they liked or hated Trump didn't seem to make a difference.

A privilege can be lost or rescinded because it depends on the kindness and cooperation of others. 

A right can’t because it’s a right. 

Rights can either be respected or violated. There is no third option. Limiting, taking, licensing, or otherwise infringing on a right is a violation of that right. No matter whether you feel it is justified or not. Feelings aren't part of the truth.

The follow-up objection against rights being rights is that this is "just an opinion". That, because rights can be violated, they aren't absolute; in other words, they must be privileges. "But government WILL take away your rights" for various reasons. No, government will violate your rights, but the rights remain just the same. It's still up to you whether you defend your rights or cooperate with the bad guys violating them-- and it doesn't make you a bad guy whichever path you choose.

Yes, bad guys violate rights. That's the definition of a real criminal: someone who violates the rights of others. Government is a gang of bad guys; criminals. You can know this for sure because governments violate rights as a routine matter. It's the main thing they do.

Those who defend themselves and others from rights violators are not bad guys, even if they kill a violator or two. Or a dozen or more.

Even if you believe otherwise and support the violators, or imagine they are necessary.

Some of these people would probably argue for the existence of "good cops", too.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Election season scary time of year

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 27, 2024)

We're entering the magical time of year. For the next few months, living in a fantasy is socially acceptable.

The strangest season is when monsters lurk in every shadow, free handouts are available for the asking, and everyone gets to pretend to be something they're not. Yes, it's election season...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Libertarians more able to see both sides

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 22, 2024)

How can you expect people, especially those who believe in politics, to agree on anything when they can't even agree on the reality of what is happening right in front of them? Add in the opposing way events are framed, depending on the bias of the information source, and I don't think it's possible.

I saw neighboring yards in town; one had a Trump yard sign and the other had a Harris sign. I'd bet both think they are the reasonable one and their neighbor is nuts. Or maybe they see it as a moral issue. There is an objective reality out there somewhere, but while both can be wrong, there is no way both can be right.

Every event and situation you'll hear about in the political news has at least two explanations, depending on who describes it. If you only get exposed to one side or the other you may not notice this.

A couple of recent examples come to mind:

"Another brainwashed loser tried to assassinate Trump", or "Trump staged another assassination attempt because the news forgot about the last one".

"Haitian refugees are eating pet cats and dogs which belong to other people", or "it's not happening and the anti-Haitian rhetoric is endangering the safety of innocent people".

Which version you've heard depends on which media sources you listen to the most. You can pick almost any politicized story and see the same thing.

One side is likely more correct than the other. Or, at least reality will lean more in one direction than the other.

I think one side is reasonable and the other is closer to insane. It seems obvious, but I've seen others making the argument that looks crazy from where I sit, so it must seem reasonable to them.

I believe politics clouds the mind, making it nearly impossible for people to think rationally, or even to see things as they truly are when politics enters the picture. Author and Dilbert creator, Scott Adams describes the situation as "Two movies on one screen". He's right, except there are more than two "movies".

I think libertarians are more able than most to see both movies at once, or at least we can flip back and forth between them to understand what others are seeing. In most cases, one still looks more sensible than the other to me, but in some instances, both look downright delusional.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Where The Law belongs

Those who imagine government is magical or legitimate dislike what they call "Taking the law into your own hands". What a strange fetish they have.

Where else do they imagine the law belongs? In government’s hands? Ha!

Government doesn't even know what law is. It pretends its legislation is the same thing as law. Sometimes they overlap, but that overlap is getting smaller with each new piece of legislation.

The law-- real Law-- belongs in your hands. It is your responsibility to live according to it; not your responsibility to impose it on others. You are responsible for protecting yourself and others from those who refuse to abide by it. Revenge is not part of the equation.

Trying to pawn this solemn responsibility off on government has never worked. It never will.

Don't let the bad guys shame you for being responsible for yourself and doing what they are incapable or unwilling to do.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Lies told by lying liars

I'll bet many people disagree with me on this topic. As uncomfortable as it may be to admit, you probably do have a right to lie. Simply because no one has a right to forbid it or to initiate force to stop it. It's often a matter of opinion as to what constitutes a lie anyway.

Sometimes, what is characterized as a lie is just someone being wrong. You have a right to be wrong-- you have an obligation to correct it once you know better. That's the hard part for most people, myself included.

I have never fallen for the story that it's wrong to lie to an archator when you're doing so to protect the innocent. That's virtuous. If you lie to a cop. the IRS, or a stormtrooper to protect yourself or others, I'm not going to judge you badly. I may consider you a hero.

There are consequences for lying, though. People have a right to defend themselves from lies that harm them.

I have the right to shun those who lie. If they lie for the wrong reasons and I know about it, I will shun them. Or I'll never trust them again.

Politics is entirely based on someone lying or being wrong. I don't trust people who are being political.

The lie that there exists a right to govern others is a prime example. Regardless of whatever else people may say, that is The Big Lie. Then there are the lies that taxation isn't theft, that police are there to protect your rights, that the military defends your freedom, and that anarchy is chaos. If they can get you to believe the lies, they can cause you to submit to their rule. 

What of the possibility that they don't intend to lie? They may merely be wrong if they believed the lies they were fed at a young age. 

Once exposed to the truth, if they choose to keep repeating the incorrect information, even if they still believe it, I have less sympathy for their position. I'll probably suspect they could be lying because the truth is too uncomfortable.

One thing I wouldn't do: I wouldn't try to silence them. I would not ask government or corporate censors to silence them on my behalf because they are dangerous. I do think they have a right to lie. I have a right to point out their lies. And I don't have to protect them from the consequences of their lies.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Pick your method of destruction

Meningitis or Bone cancer. Those are the choices on the ballot-- at least the choices the installed "president" will be picked from.

I don't even care which you think is which, until you start pretending one is a good choice. No one is suited to govern another. No one has the right to do so. No one has the right to impose a politician on another person.

There's no such thing as a "right to v*te". If you think it's necessary, then the consequences are yours to bear. As with any time you think it's "necessary" to do something you have no right to do. I get it. 

Do so with the understanding that you are doing something you have no right to do. 

Yes, this means I am opposed to democracy, just like I'm opposed to other types of dictatorships.

If I knew for sure one choice would bring about collapse and the other would keep the "system" limping along for a few more years, I'd make the collapsitarian's choice. I might even v*te for it. I don't think it's clear which would do that- but I'm certain none would "save" anything worth saving.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

"Safety" isn't about safety anymore

“Safety” has become a meaningless word.

Usually, when the word is used it means whatever government (or government supremacists) want it to mean. As in, "Stay away and leave this to us".

After the helicopter crash in Houston the other evening I saw a video showing the Houston police department’s “safety update”. Mostly the part I saw looked like a compliance update. “Don’t touch anything because it’s evidence”. I didn't even hear anyone make an argument for "safety". Normally they'll at least give it a poor try.

Sure they’ll use safety as an excuse but that’s all it really is-- an excuse. When government doesn’t want you to touch something or do something, they say it’s for “safety”. Even if that has nothing to do with it. 

And people comply because it sounds "reasonable" to them.

"Safety" is the lie underpinning anti-gun legislation.
It’s the justification for car rules.
It's the excuse used to prohibit "immigration".
It's behind all prohibition.
It's the deception behind the police.
It’s the reason people get caged over raw milk.

This overuse (and misuse) of “safety” makes me hate the very idea. Danger, or the possibility of danger, is the spice that makes life worth living.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Politics unhinged

People are becoming increasingly unhinged over politics. I've even encountered growing numbers of Europeans coming unglued over the US government's presidential selection charade. Mostly because of Trump.

It's crazy.

I've seen them insisting things that simply aren't true, but which they say their "independent, non-government" media (like, apparently, the BBC) have told them are true. Such as that Trump was charged with "insurrection" and would have been convicted and imprisoned for it if not for the Republican-controlled government.

Nothing like that happened, but they firmly believe it did. They "see" it so clearly.

When I suggest they've been misled, I'm called a "far-right MAGAt". This has happened so many times recently that it's become somewhat boring. I'm not "far-right" or even conservative, but I'm not insane, either.

It's not just that these people disagree. They are so frantic and hyperbolic in their disagreement that it looks like a mental issue rather than politics. But, perhaps (as I suspect) politics is a mental issue. That would explain a lot.

Be above politics. Stand for truth. Embrace reality, no matter how many call you nasty names for it. They are the crazy ones. They are the problem. They won't face it, but reality doesn't care what they accept. Reality is what it is, and it's not on their team.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

Politics is poison

To govern yourself is to be responsible. This is government without politics.

To attempt to govern others is evil. It is something no one has a right to do and there's no path to creating such a "right". In other words, when you try to mix politics with government you've poisoned government. You've turned it from normal, responsible behavior into doing something harmful to others; something you have no right to do and instead have a responsibility to not do.

Politics changed government from an idea into a dangerous superstition. Into a death cult.

Politics is poison.

It always has been poison; nothing can change it into something positive and healthy. There is no safe amount, but obviously the more, the deadlier.

Because society has organized itself around the integration of this poison, society is sick. Civilization could actually die. Has society already received a fatal dose? It could happen faster than any of us suspect. It may be happening now.

Government is quickly growing larger and more tyrannical. 
Statists are growing more dishonest and desperate. 
I think it’s the death throes of a dying “system”.

-

Thank you for reading.
May I request your support?

World dying from cancer of states

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 20, 2024)

I don't support Israel. I don't support Palestine. I don't support Ukraine, Russia, or any other state. I support individuals who live in places claimed by those states, as long as they aren't violating the life, liberty, or property of others....read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Political signs don't really motivate

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 15, 2024)

Imagine if your neighbors stuck signs in their yards telling everyone about the conditions they suffer from. "We're proud of our itchy armpit fungus!" Would you be convinced to get infected, too?

I'm already seeing political yard signs. If people advertise their support for a political candidate, could they be convinced to put signs in their yards proclaiming their diseases and mental problems?

Scratch the part about mental problems; political signs already announce those to the world.

Have you ever seen a political sign and thought "I should hop on that train!"? Or, are you more likely to think "Ugh, one of THOSE people"? It depends whether they share a condition-- support for a candidate-- with you.

In either case, it's something best kept to yourself. Sharing too much isn't smart. In the case of politics, it creates animosity and division among neighbors. No good will come of it.

It's much more likely to hurt you economically than to help you. If you're a decent person who does a good job, telling the world you're on a political side probably won't win you extra opportunities, but in the current political climate, it can cost you. Maybe you say if they'd boycott you over political opinions you don't need their business. That's fine.

There are celebrities I used to have a good opinion of until they expressed their political biases. Suddenly my opinion of them fell off a cliff. I don't consciously boycott anyone, but once I know someone has horrible political opinions, I can't unsee it and I lose interest in things they are involved in. There are actors and authors I will never again be able to enjoy after finding out too much about what they support.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work in the opposite direction. I might discover a famous person agrees with me and form a favorable opinion of them, but it doesn't motivate me to seek out their content. It's better for them if they don't make an issue of it so I don't know.

It's the same with political yard signs. If I agree with you, it's not going to make me think better of you, but if I think you're supporting something terrible, it will make me think less of you.

To be honest, I don't know if it works the same with people who are more partisan than I am. You'll do what you do either way.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Politics makes people hallucinate

I commented on a hilarious post from “KamalaHQ” after Harris’ interview on FOX, where they had tried to reframe the event to be less bad for her.

A guy in a reply tried to pin “Trump supporter” on me simply because I can see that Harris is an idiot. He kept trying to get me to defend Trump, and he said how brave Harris was for sitting for that hostile interview on FOX and how cowardly Trump is because he won’t be interviewed by MSNBC.

I pointed out that he had gone on ABC for a debate, which was hostile territory, but that I’m still not a Trump supporter, just not an idiot.

He said I was lying about not supporting Trump and he copied my most pro-Trump tweet he could find to shove it in my face as proof:

"If you’re defending people who are eating other people’s pets (assuming it’s really happening), you’re scum. It’s not about who’s doing it, it’s about the act."

That was his proof I am a Trump supporter? It had nothing to do with Trump or any politician.  It wasn't even political.

That's the best he could do. He couldn’t find the multiple places I where said both are bad, but I think Harris is worse? I guess not. He could have at least made a limping argument had he used one of those. But he didn't.

I later looked at his profile and discovered his entire personality is based on hating Trump. Nothing else. So it’s not surprising that anyone less deluded than he is would look like a supporter to him.

Politics makes people stupid. It’s tragic. And these people— on “both” sides— will be v*ting to impose their ignorant superstitions on you and me. Great...

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways of support

Multi-updates

Thanks to a friend and reader, I'm back on my repaired laptop!
I also saved all my text files and photos. It'll take a bit of work to get everything set back up, but I'm getting there. It's such a relief!

Today, I had a follow-up appointment for my eye and it is doing great. My vision in that eye (my right) is 20/20, and my vision in the left one is 20/15! He said the right eye will probably continue to get better. I've never seen so well in my whole life. I'm also getting better at seeing close-up, but will probably always need reading glasses to be able to see to read small print. But this is awesome! I go back in a month to make sure everything is still doing well.

My blackened fingernail is actively trying to disassociate itself from my finger, but one side is still hanging on too tightly for it to fall off.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways of support

I won't participate in the lies

To repeat the mantra “healthy at any size” is to participate in a lie. There is a healthy BMI range (which could be debated) and the further you get from that range, the less healthy you are. Anorexic or morbidly obese, both are unhealthy. Both can kill. Either is a sign that something isn’t right.

Anorexia or obesity can’t change a person’s natural human rights at all. It neither causes someone to lose any rights nor creates new "rights". Someone isn’t evil or even wrong merely for being obese or anorexic. The very idea is absurd.

To love or show concern for someone who is obese or anorexic is kindness. My dad is morbidly obese; it would be better for him if he weren't and I won't pretend otherwise.

To encourage a person with a healthy BMI to become anorexic or obese is evil. Even if, for whatever reason, that’s what they believe they want. To facilitate their self-harm is even more evil. I don't ply my dad with food.

It’s harmful politeness or "niceness" to pretend the victim (or the facilitator) is okay.

“Transgender” is exactly the same.

It is irrelevant that there are physical or chemical/hormonal differences in the brains of people who believe they are "transgender". Schizophrenics also have differences in their brains, and it would be ridiculous to claim they aren’t mentally ill. Alzheimer's causes, or is caused by, brain differences. I suspect the same is true for anorexics and obese people. These are health problems, not self-expression. You would not be doing them a kindness by participating in the lie or encouraging them on that path.

Believing you are “transgender”— born in the “wrong body”— doesn’t make your rights go away or change them in any way. No one is evil simply for believing they are “trans”. Making "trans" seem appealing is wrong. Encouraging others to believe they are "trans" is evil. Facilitating someone’s "trans" illness by providing "gender-affirming care" [sic] is Mengele-level evil, even when the victims have been brainwashed to believe they want it. That doesn’t make it less evil.

It's also not government's business, either to prohibit it, encourage or facilitate it, nor to forbid or punish speaking up against it. Government must stay out of life.

A person has the right to cut off their healthy arm because they "identify" as a one-armed person, but helping them do so is wrong. Telling them it’s okay to do it is wrong. I heard about a woman who "identified" as a blind person and had wanted to be blind since she was a child, so she chemically blinded herself. This is clearly mental illness. If I had blinded her so her body could be more in line with her "identity", I would have committed evil, as did the psychologist who supposedly "helped" her.

Trying to help them after they’ve irreversibly mutilated or chemically damaged themselves is kind, but you aren’t obligated to do it, nor to change your life to accommodate their acquired disability. They made the choice and the consequences are entirely theirs to bear.

The same goes for "non-binary" and the dozens of imaginary "genders". They may even be worse.

This is why I will not intentionally use a person's incorrect "preferred pronouns"-- as if anyone has any right to control the pronouns others use when referring to them to a third party. I know I don’t have such a “right”. I will not participate in the lie and make things worse. I will not be a part of the problem. I care about these people too much to do that to them. I will defend them from all archation, from anywhere. That's what I am trying to do here.

I am pro-"trans" people; I am anti-"trans" activists. One is a victim, and the others are predators. Unfortunately, some of the victims become predators- misery loves company.

You can disagree. You can get angry. You can call me names. You can hate me. It makes no difference.

None of this has anything to do with the topic of drag queens. They are just clowns, and I have negative feelings about all clowns. 

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways of support

It's time. Be the extremist you need to be.

Imagine a world where, if a foreign crime gang took over your apartment building, or even your house, and you shot them, you'd be arrested and treated like the bad guy. 

A world where fighting off a kidnapping by a badged thug and his local gang forfeits your life.

A world where every transaction you participate in is supposed to involve a cut going to a gang of rulers.
Where everything you do is subject to their arbitrary rules- what isn't mandatory is forbidden.

A world controlled by criminal gangs, both official and freelance. 

You're expected to accept this situation and pretend it's normal. Maybe even "good". If you admit to seeing it for what it is, you're an "extremist" and a "conspiracy theorist"; a nutcase. If you decline to comply, you'll be caged or murdered.

It's no wonder things are in bad shape. People have been conditioned to accept them and turn a blind eye. They've been trained to be silent about it.

There is a solution, but it is uncomfortable and difficult. It won't succeed immediately, which means it will hurt in the meantime. It's the right thing to do anyway. It starts with speaking up.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways of support

Collapsitarian?

All my life I've been a bit of a collapsitarian. Not that I believe civilization should collapse, just that I believe it is likely to do so unless some difficult choices are made.

Those choices are not being made correctly.

In every election, there's an option that seems (to me) less horrible, but in a way I think if the worst option "wins", maybe it would get things moving. In that case, the worst option might be the preferable one. Yes, it would be painful.

"In order to heal, it must hurt." I knew a guy who said that a lot. He might not have been wrong.

In the long run, liberty will beat superstition and authoritarianism. It's inevitable. It would be nice if we could get there from here without going through a lot of pain. It may not be possible, and if not, I think it might be best to get it over with and move on to something better. Something we already have the key to. Something that we know and which isn't a mystery. Something that works in the real world, today, no matter how many times government supremacists claim it doesn't.

It can be done. Evil, lazy cowards and those who side with them just don't want to. In the end, they won't have a choice. The choices they've made have sealed their fate.

In the short term, things may get messy and uncomfortable. Don't give up hope. Contribute to the collapse, or try to put it off as long as possible. Both have their advocates.

Whatever comes, don't put yourself at their mercy (they have none). Be a prepper. Be as ready as possible. Ride it out, one storm at a time. We can do this.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways of support

When "polite" is too costly

If being polite means I have to pretend lies are true, I'm not willing to be polite.

All my life I noticed I was expected to go along with obvious lies. In the past few years it has only gotten worse. A lot worse. On so many topics and issues-- it's everywhere.

This is a difficult situation for me. I want to be polite. I don't want to upset people or hurt their feelings. But I'm not going to nod along as people celebrate lies.

In some cases, when I've spoken up in the past and I like the person promoting the lies, I keep my mouth shut. They know; there's no need to keep rehashing the topic. Until or unless someone demands I say their lie is true. I won't do that. If I get pushed enough, I will be rude about it.

Sometimes people don't realize they are promoting a lie.
Sometimes they are doing it for personal reasons- to support someone they care about or to keep a job.
Often they are promoting a lie because they have to if they want to stay loyal to a political side. That's despicable, but whatever.

If I discover I've been propping up or promoting a lie, I want to change what I'm saying. It's unthinkable to me that some people aren't like that. But I know they aren't.

I wouldn't stop saying things like "You'll be okay" when I don't think they will be okay, because I don't want to take away someone's hope. But even that prickles my conscience a little. I might just give them a hug or a pat on the back without saying anything concrete if I'm there in person.

The lies that I am expected to go along with, even though they are harmful, even to those they are purported to be helping? No. Not gonna go along. I may still try to find a polite way to be hard on the lie and easy on the believers. If I can't, then the chips will fall where they fall.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways to support

Statism will have to move aside

There are two ways to look at the world, and both are true in their time and place:
You don’t know how good you’ve got it.
Or
You don’t realize how bad things have gotten.

This contrast came to mind this past week. Especially the second part. 

I didn’t realize how bad my eyesight was, even with glasses, until I had surgery to fix it. I thought I was seeing OK- at least out of the eye that was still working after the retina reattachment. 

Even when I got the left eye fixed, I wasn't really able to comprehend how much better I would be able to see after both eyes were working together again. And working correctly, basically for the first time in my life.

If I hadn't taken the risk and the expense to fix my eyes, there's no way I could know what I was missing.

If I refused to make the change, knowing that this would mean I would need reading glasses from now on, I would be missing out. Sure, it's a trade-off. It's worth it.

This made me think...

People in general don’t realize how enslaved they are until they experience, or can truly envision, living in liberty. They can’t comprehend how much better life could be. They use the first view as a crutch to avoid responsibility to make things better. They only see how things could be made worse by fiddling with them, but rarely understand how much better things could be. They let their fear rule them, and they want their fear to rule you, too.

I understand how good it could be. I know how good we have it now, but I know there's room for massive improvement, and I won't be satisfied not giving it a shot. I'm not willing to be mostly blind for the rest of my life because most people are too scared (or criminal) to accept liberty.

Is it a risk? Yep. I'm willing to take the chance. I wouldn't force it on anyone else, but they have no right to stop me by continuing to inflict their statist anti-system on me, either. To force statism on you and me! 

Unless they can find a way to coexist with liberty, they are going to lose their "system" of authoritarian oppression completely. For themselves as well as those of us who won't be enslaved.

We both know which path they are doomed to choose. I think most of them will be glad, eventually.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

FEMA getting in way of helpers

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 13, 2024)

The situation with Hurricane Helene was terrible, but thanks to government— specifically FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Administration— it ended up being much worse than anyone could have expected. As I write this, Hurricane Milton, which looks potentially even more dangerous, has set its sights on central Florida. Will FEMA bungle or sabotage the response to this one, too?...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Freedom of speech non-negotiable

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 8, 2024)

Anyone who is on the side of censorship and punishing people for their speech is not on the right side.

It doesn't matter if they are a government, a corporation, or an individual. It doesn't matter if they are a crooked Brazilian judge, a US presidential candidate, or a probable android running a "book" of faces. Banning speech, especially for political reasons, is inexcusable.

Freedom of speech is non-negotiable, but this matters less when it's speech you like hearing and agree with. No one is looking to silence those voices. It matters most for things people, particularly powerful politicians, don't want you to say or write.

People who want to silence the opposition come up with nice-sounding lies. They'll label anything they don't like as "hate speech", and claim this isn't free speech. They are wrong. They'll claim they are protecting the public from harmful "misinformation". Yet, they'll say this while spreading their own self-serving harmful misinformation.

The excuse of "misinformation", coming from the largest gang of liars on the planet-- government-- fails the fact check. It's a lie even when the information really is wrong. Government doesn't care about misinformation, it cares about information that makes it harder to rule you.

Government has a hard time operating under the pressures placed on it by free speech. This is a good thing. Most governments can't withstand factual information about them and their activities being widely known. It's why they "classify" information to hide what they are doing from their superiors-- you and me. They make up rules which say it's legal, but it's still criminal behavior. If any government can't survive complete transparency, it should die.

The best cure for misinformation is true information. If someone is spreading misinformation and you silence or block their words, you've given them credibility-- especially if you're as untrustworthy as a government or a corporation known for carrying water for government. Lies must be countered with truth. It's the only way.

Invariably when someone is a free speech absolutist, someone else will claim they're in favor of schools providing pornography to children. If you believe this, and if this is where your mind goes automatically, you might be too politically brainwashed to think clearly. Which is where politics often leads.

The next time you see someone trying to silence opinions and information, ask yourself what they are trying to hide. Then stand with the free speech absolutists.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

This is why we are in danger

According to a dedicated anti-conservative account on X, it makes a person "far-right" to admit there was no insurrection on January 6 and that elections aren't credible (ever, not just that one).

No, it takes awareness, observation, knowing what words mean, and a lack of partisan brainwashing. 

I told him that every day I get called "far-right" by radical Leftists and a Leftist by the Far-Right. He demanded I present evidence.

I told him he is the evidence.

People like him are also proof that politics makes people stupid. Or, since "proof" is subjective, it is more evidence on the heap. A heap so high that to me it is convincing proof.

He believes his media sources, he trusts what cops say, he believes in democracy, he wants you to be governed, he doesn't listen to others, and he makes up reasons to not believe reality. He's common. He has more in common with the Republicans he hates than he does with me. He won't see it.

He doesn't realize he's hallucinating. He'd never admit it if he got an inkling. He's not alone. Certain things make me fearful for the short-term outlook of our species. Clutching onto political nonsense is one of those things. People like this are a danger to everyone when they get power, including the power of large numbers. They'll impose deadly democracy on us even if it kills them, just because they believe in it so hard.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Counting on the kindness of the Universe

Luck gets some people through when they ought to suffer for a lack of readiness. Not saying I want them to suffer, but it seems the laws of reality would not be so forgiving of me.

I've talked before about my friend who believes she's invincible because she "has medical training" (worked in the kitchen of a nursing home) and can defend herself from any threat with her keys.

Well, she also refuses to take a hurricane seriously... because...? Just because.

She was right in the path of Hurricane Milton. She's only lived in Florida for a few years, but she knows it all. There's no need to prepare for anything. "Nothing is going to happen". She got lucky, again. 

Is there anything other than her job, and advancing up the ladder, that would get her attention? I mean, sure, it's great to take your job seriously, but it's pointless if you don't survive because you close your eyes to danger.

I wish she would listen to me, but maybe she doesn't need to. Maybe she really will keep being lucky and will never need to be ready to face any threat. For her sake, I hope so. Because she's determined to not change.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Two eyes again!

I’m on my way home after my post-surgical follow-up. I have stereoscopic vision again, with depth perception and everything! I actually got chills just walking into a grocery store.

It’s been almost a year since my retina detached and set this all in motion. It happened on October 26. I have another checkup on the 18th. But the doctor expects no problems.

Thanks for the support.

The election will be a mess

If Trump "wins" the election I will be unhappy and I will assume there was some cheating.

If Harris "wins" the election I will be unhappy and I will know there was massive cheating on a scale to hand her the office.

If Oliver "wins" I would be somewhat relieved and I would know I had left my current reality and slipped into a better one, but one still dumb enough to allow rulers to govern others. There's room for improvement.

For me, there's no acceptable outcome from an election.

All elections are rigged because "None of the above; abolish the office" isn't the default on every ballot. 

I have no use for a president. I don't need to be governed and I don't need you to be governed to protect me, because I'm an adult, not a helpless child.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

What else would "opportunity economy" mean?

If Harris is serious about her plan to create an "opportunity economy", I'm on board. Not to v*te for her, obviously, but to not be quite so opposed to her. As soon as she actually implements it, anyway. Not a moment before.

It's up to her. She needs to get on it.

When will she be abolishing all taxes, business regulations, and licensing? Before the "election" would be the obvious time.

That's the way you'd promote an opportunity economy. The only way.
Anything else means she's lying.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

The last post-apocalypse firearm

I keep thinking about the question of "the last gun I'd ever give up" and I finally came to a decision. 

I would choose my flintlock pistol. 

It wouldn't be my first choice, but if things got bad enough that I could only keep one, it is the most sustainable long-term. If I were a nomad without a home base, I might choose differently.

Ammunition is the main reason for my choice.

Black powder can be made at home, so there's less risk from the supply chain or the murderous BATFE's rules. Of course, in such a situation, the murderous BATFE wouldn't exist, so their empty opinions could be ignored.
Powder manufacturing is also why I would choose a different gun if I were nomadic with no place to set up to make black powder.

Lead can be found as trash. I find lead wheel weights on the street all the time, although the zinc ones are becoming more common. You can get a bullet mold the size you need and use it practically forever. In a pinch, you could probably find a way to make do even without a bullet mold.

Patches for sealing the bullet in the barrel can be made from old shirts or handkerchiefs, or can be skipped altogether if you don't mind a loss in accuracy.

Flint or chert can be found just about anywhere, and would be easy to pick up and carry to use later. No, I don't have any locally, but I pick it up whenever I do find it in my travels.

The gun is also simple to disassemble and work on. I think I could keep it running to be passed on to the next generation. If all else failed, someone could probably turn it into a matchlock without too much trouble.

Yes, for defense I would rather have a revolver or a modern semi-auto with a magazine. But unless you can get brass and primers, those won't keep being useful under post-apocalyptic conditions. And, I doubt anyone has enough ammo.

Feel free to explain why I'm wrong and what you'd keep.

Also, until the apocalypse happens, if you want to sign up for the ammo subscription service, AmmoSquared, you can use my link https://ammo2.me/dullhawk and help us both. I've also added the link to the sidebar.
If you sign up from my link, using the "join today" button, once you've spent $20 we each get an additional $25 in our ammo accounts. I put in very little every month, but it's adding up. I hope you'll try it. We both win!

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Does she v*te?

Just consider the character and intelligence of those who live among us. It's not fine.

My insider in the local PlastiCrap World told me that a woman got angry last week after being told she couldn't try on underwear. How stupid does someone have to be to think that would be OK? But there's more.

Then she decided to get back at the store by emptying her bladder and colon in the dressing room.

Then, around the time her mess was being discovered, she got caught shoplifting. She was taken away by cops and banned from the store.

Some people would say people like her are why "we need" government. 

I say people like her are the ones who'll be v*ting and filling government "jobs". Maybe even running for office. People like her have political power over you.
People like her are why government is a bad idea and why it doesn't work.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Government efficiency crushes liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 1, 2024)

Government efficiency may sound like a worthy goal. To me, it sounds like the worst threat imaginable.

Historically, Germany's National Socialist government was efficient, as was Mussolini's fascist Italian government. Today, the Chinese communist government seems to be dangerously efficient. The US federal government, famous for its inefficiency, is still too efficient for comfort. Efficient government inevitably becomes too much government.

People who push for government efficiency often believe this would save tax dollars; efficiency is how they plan to keep tax money from being wasted as badly. Taxation is unethical and I would like to see it abolished in its entirety, but the last thing I want is to get all the government we are forced to pay for. I want some government inefficiency because that's the only place liberty can hide and survive.

An efficient government would use this efficiency to better spy on you and more tightly control everything you do. An efficient government would end up doing more to control you with the money available. An efficient government would find it easier to tax away every cent they claim you owe. It would continue to spend all it takes, and more. Politicians aren't going to steal less from you; they will keep taxing you but do more to you with this money.

An efficient government could track you all the time, and get the information instantaneously, to use the data against you. Didn't let your tires quite stop spinning at the stop sign, or going slightly faster than the arbitrary speed government edicts allow? Guaranteed extortion-- called a "ticket" by the armed extortionists.

It might end up with your food purchases being watched to see if you are costing nationalized healthcare more with your unhealthy eating habits. Would you be allowed to purchase that milkshake if the Surgeon General thinks it's bad for you, and if his bureaucracy can cancel the transaction in real time?

You may not believe it could ever go so far. You might be right, but I'm not willing to let you bet my life, liberty, or property on it.

If you don't realize how this efficient government could turn into a nightmare, you don't know history or human nature.

As long as I'm forced to tolerate governments crippling society, I want them as inefficient as possible. Even if this means it's painful. If it's painful, maybe fewer people will be willing to continue tolerating it. This might be our only hope.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Armed enemies preventing assistance

Government agencies-- FEMA and the FAA for a couple of timely examples-- are the enemy. Some of them are armed enemies. You don't hate them enough.

They and their employees-- those not ignoring the orders of their employer-- need to be treated as such. At least by those they are victimizing.

If a government employee is threatening violence to stop you from delivering or receiving emergency help, they are worse than Al Qaida, ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Antifa, or the Chinese Communist Party. Combined. Yes, really.

Why are Americans so weak and useless that they allow these enemies to tell them what to do? To prevent them from helping? Oh, right-- because the enemy is armed and has a huge gang providing backup.

No government employee should be allowed to be armed while on the "job". None of them. If that means they can't do their "job", then that's a good thing. Let the people handle it. We can. Better, without violating anyone. Without pretending we have the authority to claim a monopoly of "assistance".

You probably still don't hate government nearly enough.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

I'll take second helpings of Liberty

The way most people want liberty is that they like to chew it up and taste it, but then they spit it out. They don’t really want it. 

They like the idea of it but are scared of experiencing it in reality. "Terrified" might be more accurate.

They make bizarre excuses so they can keep advocating for political government. For Rulers and other political criminals. For slavery, theft, superstition, and the ruination of society.

They focus on "corruption" and deny that government is working exactly as it has been designed to work. They live in a state of denial and a state of enslavement; dual "citizenship" for the statist.

They carefully avoid anything which would give them a hunger for real liberty. That would upend their world.

So, "just a smidge" is all they want to taste. It's a sad way to exist, but it's their choice. It's not their choice to impose their cowardice on me. 

Me? I want a heaping helping of liberty, and I'm going to eat and digest it all. It's good for the health and good for the soul. Quite unlike the poisonous dish of statism.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

A foul authoritarian

Who else sees Burgermeister Meisterburger whenever Tim Walz is on your screen? It's like one of those "separated at birth?" things from a few years back. Or the current "I'm going to tell my kids this was...".

I saw it the very first time I saw him, and I still see it. I can't unsee it.

If only real-life political criminals like Walz were as harmless and humorous as fictional authoritarian monsters. We can still laugh at the similarities.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Help in various ways?