Building a life around politics

I've never met anyone who prioritized politics and was also a genuinely happy person. I suppose if someone gets joy from controlling those around them, and from punishing the ones who don't submit to their control, they might appear happy on the outside- while rotting on the inside. 

This doesn't mean you'll automatically be happy if you reject politics; there are many factors. Sometimes life just stinks, and people using politics against you will usually make things worse. Making politics central to your life isn't going to make anything better. It's a form of self-harm, and it spreads like a contagious cancer to those around you.

Even when politics is a part of nature- such as when wolves fight each other for dominance or over food- it isn't something we should copy. They don't know any better. They also sometimes eat their young. We can do better than that. Only humans- some humans- believe it's a good idea to allow politics to be central in their lives. It isn't.

I would rather not be one of those who makes everything political. It doesn't have to be. Only thieves, murderers, politicians, and other criminals live by politics. 

Politics is what you use when you have nothing worthwhile to contribute. No skills, no goods, no wisdom. Falling back on politics- using force to coerce others to support you while you steal, kidnap, and otherwise violate their natural human rights and try to destroy their liberty- is an admission that you can't make it in the world unless you can use theft, violence, or threats of violence against others. If you use politics, you're cheating, and you've already failed as a human.

You can choose to trade or find other mutually consensual ways to interact with others, or you can be political. There's no third option.

The weather doesn't care about your politics. Neither does your dog- unless you treat it politically by arbitrarily kicking it. Politics is completely meaningless to everything and everyone other than those you target with your toxic political ideas. And all political ideas are toxic.

To those who claim everything humans do is political, I say you've been doing it wrong. You've been a parasite on society rather than a benefit. 

And yet, political people honor other political people with statues and by naming roads and buildings after them. They act as though they are the heart of society; as though the rest of us couldn't survive without their presence. Humanity survives in spite of politics and those who employ it, not because of it.

I'm in favor of showing society how irrelevant and useless politicians and their ilk really are.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

I appreciate those who make things better

Some people actually work to make the world a better place. I appreciate them.

There's another man in my neighborhood who also feeds the stray cats- some of the same cats I feed, but he has a few regulars who never come to my house. He often has 6 to 10 of them at feeding time. (Maybe it's because he offers raw chicken.) 

We've had several conversations about the strays over the years; worrying when a sickness ravages the neighborhood cats, wiping out some of the cats we have tried to save. Wondering what happened to a regular, discussing the new kittens, or reporting a death the other may not know of. I've seen him chasing off dogs (dogs who won't stay home) who come into his yard to attack the cats. 

He's had to defend himself from threats by the local cop, who threatened to "fine" him for feeding cats, saying this made the cats his pets, and no one is "allowed" to have more than 3 cats in town, blah blah, blah. He asked if the birds were also his pets since he has a bird feeder. The cop seems to have left him alone since then.

Anyway...

I appreciate him caring for animals who have no one else to count on. 

Besides him, I notice other people making the world a nicer place just by doing what they do.

I love the delivery drivers I see frequently in the neighborhood. They'll often wave as they drive by. 

I love the cashiers I encounter again and again, doing a job which isn't glamorous and doesn't pay enough, but who still manage to do a job that is essential while being pleasant to the customers. (The unpleasant ones are a conversation for another day.) I look forward to seeing the familiar faces, even though I don't really know them.

Anyone who comes to my attention, doing things that make the world a little better with their contributions, without stepping on the life, liberty, or property of others in the process, can elicit the same feeling in me.

No government mandate was required to get these people to do helpful things. In some cases, they are doing it in exchange for a paycheck, but often people do nice things that only cost them. And a paycheck doesn't ensure good service, anyway.

Maybe it's silly and sentimental to feel this kind of connection with those who probably don't feel the same about me. If so, I'll embrace it anyway.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Angering statists is a strange hobby

Some days it feels like I've said it all before. (Which I know I've said before!)

How many other ways can I explain that to be libertarian (and thus, to be ethical) is to accept the primary human responsibility to not violate the life, liberty, or property of any other person, without exception?
How many times can I explain that calling a violation a "law" and saying it's your job doesn't excuse doing those things?

I got added to some communist's X list of "Nazis", and called "entitled" because I refuted (effectively, it seems) his argument that "land tax", which he differentiates from "property taxes" (yeah, I don't know... communism, I guess), isn't theft, extortion, or a ransom, because you "owe" everyone for any land you occupy. He made many bad arguments for his position. Then he got mad.

Angering bad people feels like a badge of honor. It makes me happy, and I want to do more of it. Yes, it's a personality flaw.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Alien communication

How can those of us who believe in liberty and individual responsibility have a conversation with those who don't? Often, there seems to be no common ground. It's almost like trying to talk to an alien.

It's hard to communicate with those who believe in the imaginary right to govern others. They believe humans are flawed, but politicians are somehow exempt from this. Or that when these deeply flawed humans join together, their individual flaws cancel out.

It doesn't work that way. When people join together to do something they have no right to do in the first place, their flaws compound and expand-- there's safety in numbers. That's why flash mobs of looters who descend on a store face little risk. Those who seek to govern others enjoy the same protection. They are still looters, but they use "laws" rather than bricks.

It's hard to really communicate with people who see a significant difference between the two; those who believe that governing others is a legitimate human endeavor, rather than just another category of crime. We don't really even speak the same language. I say "theft" or "extortion"; they say "tax" or "fine".

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Life is hard; it's harder if you're political

There's a quote that is commonly misattributed to John Wayne: “Life is hard; it’s harder if you’re stupid”. Whoever originally said it, it's true.

People make their own lives harder by being political. Politics makes people stupid, and it makes life much harder than it needs to be.

When one of the members of the group They Might Be Giants scolded me years ago for saying he should stop making everything political, telling me, "Everything is political", it made me see him, and his band, as stupid. As part of the problem. I had been a fan for years, but with one tweet he exposed himself for what he really was. It wasn't a flattering revelation.

Because the only way "everything is political" is if you make it that way. And only a stupid person would do so.

He was unnecessarily complicating his life, just to earn points by peacocking his irrational political beliefs. He was sabotaging his own life with politics. Making life harder for himself, his bandmate, and for everyone in society. Smart people wouldn't do that.

Life is already hard enough; it's even harder if you make it political.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

An acceptable way to be a creep?

Anyone who supports any amount of political government at all is just looking for a "socially acceptable" mechanism to use to violate the natural rights of someone else.

They can use all kinds of pretty words to hide it.

They can come up with all manner of excuses to justify it.

They can list all the things they are afraid would happen without it.

They can even recite history to find irrelevant events to rationalize it.

If you want a way to violate others, but you don't want to look like the bad guy, I hate to break it to you, but advocating for a government to do it for you isn't the way. There is no way. If you violate others, you are in the wrong. Every time. Regardless of your chosen method. And government is the most dishonest of the bunch.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Not always best to follow orders

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 21, 2026)

Most people value obedience more than I do. To me, doing the right thing is what matters...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Authoritarian government weakest of all

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 16, 2026)

Why do so many beg for a big, authoritarian government involving itself in every facet of their lives? Even when it violently destroys their liberty and violates their rights every day? What could possibly be going on in their minds to make this seem like a good thing?

Have these people not seen the results of this over at least the past 25 years? Has a bigger, more authoritarian government made life better or worse?

It appears that many people see authoritarianism as strength. I don't. I see it as weakness, relying on bullying tactics to make itself look strong to gullible observers.

If the authoritarians were actually strong, they wouldn't need to be authoritarian. Strength isn't threatened by opposing opinions. Strength can afford to allow people to live different ways; to opt out and take a different path. Strength doesn't try to censor speech. Strength does not need to spy on everyone all the time. Those are signs of weakness, cowardice, and a lack of confidence. They are an acknowledgement of incompetence.

Authoritarianism always chooses the weakest course.

I believe people who secretly see themselves as powerless, who are therefore afraid of almost everything, want a strong bully to defend them from all their hobgoblins. They are attracted to, or they become, authoritarians. Right and wrong are thrown out the window. It becomes acceptable to commit crime to prevent crime.

If you rely on a criminal gang to hold other criminal gangs at bay, you're only making the situation worse. You're shirking your personal responsibility because you don't believe you are "enough" to deal with dangerous things. You make things more dangerous for yourself and everyone around you by empowering authoritarians, believing this fixes your problem.

Whenever there's a situation and a person's first instinct is to call someone else to come save them rather than dealing with it themselves, I lose respect for the person. It's the same whether you're talking about things and events in the neighborhood or across the globe.

Then these people wonder why things keep getting worse.

"Leave it to the professionals" is the advice of someone who wants you weak and scared. Someone who wants you dependent on them, so you'll keep handing them your liberty and your money. I say the "professionals" and their authoritarian desires for control, surveillance, and "safety" are the problem. You, living your liberty to the fullest, are enough. You've got this.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Bad rules

The only legitimate justification for a rule is to make life better by protecting life, liberty, or property.

If a rule doesn't do this, or actually makes things worse, either because of the rule itself or how it is enforced, then a change is necessary. Either change how the rule is enforced so it doesn't make things worse, or eliminate the rule entirely.

I'm not opposed to rules. I'm opposed to bad rules. Harmful ones. Stupid ones. Punitive ones. Rules that make life worse.

And I'm opposed to anyone who enforces such rules.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

"Yeah, but..."

So many people are desperate- absolutely desperate- to keep believing government is good. Or at least "necessary". They'll do all sorts of contortions and gymnastics to defend their belief.

When I point out that inflation is strictly caused by government counterfeiting money, they'll say "Yeah, but even if it didn't, greedy people would still raise their prices." You see what's wrong with that, right?

It keeps playing out the same, no matter the topic.

No matter what evidence they are presented with, they always have a "yeah, but" ready. It doesn't matter how delusional the excuse is, as long as they keep believing it.

And, at their foundation, they still all come back to fear. 

They are afraid of living without being governed.
They are afraid of what will happen if other people aren't governed.
They are afraid of what will happen if "those people" get control of the government. 

They never consider that the main problem is people, like them, who believe government is necessary, or even good. 

They just can't let go. They can't admit it was a scam and has proven to be a complete failure in doing the minimum used to justify it, over and over, throughout ALL of human history, no matter how it is designed or run.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Unhealthy fear leads to government

Why are so many people so afraid? Why do they embrace their fear and use it to justify horrors?

I am afraid when I encounter a situation I don't feel adequate to handle, and when the consequences seem too big to bear. Medical situations cause me fear more often than any other situations do. This fear doesn't inspire me to violate others, though.

Unlike what I see happening around me, my fear doesn't come from not having the ability or right to control other people. 

I can see how it might happen, as in an active shooter situation. But seeing armed people- as long as they aren't wearing a badge or acting aggressively- doesn't cause me fear, or even stress. There has to also be that credible threat. And I can take measures so that I don't feel quite the helplessness others might. Which means I do have the ability or right to "control" bad guys in this way, so there's less fear than if I were helpless.

I'm not scared of people who are doing what they have a right to do.

I wonder why other people seem so afraid- afraid to the point that they want government there to protect them (even though it can't, or doesn't, do so).

They must be engulfed in feelings of inadequacy and helplessness. They must feel like Big Brother is the answer to their fears.

I wish I had the power to calm their fears. But pointing out that they have options, and that fear doesn't have to rule them, only seems to make them angry. As though they enjoy their fear and don't want to lose it. 

There are better, healthier ways to enjoy fear than imposing a government. Ride a roller coaster- if that's not enough, make sure you're not secured in the seat. Or watch a scary (or gory) movie. Or jump off of bridges- tied to a bungee if you like. Fly a Tesla Roadster over a canyon. None of those fear-inducers violate others. Using your fear to justify a government does. Don't do that.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

The Statist fraud

Government is supposedly established to secure the rights to life, liberty, property, and "the pursuit of happiness".

It didn't work. Government has become the primary violator of those rights.

Abolish it.

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary", but somehow we're to imagine that those same non-angels become better individuals when given the power to "legally" violate others with very little risk to themselves. 

That doesn't work. The worst people among us are drawn to positions of government power. Government isn't necessary, but is clearly contraindicated under the same conditions used to justify it.

Abolish it.

"But if you'd just read this treatise, laying out why government is good and essential, you'll see why you have to accept it and work with it to get whatever scraps of liberty it is willing to let you have."

No. Delusional people writing down justifications for their delusions hold no interest for me. Liberty is superior to any system seeking to violate it. Even if it's a government you like and want to excuse.

Abolish it.

I know, abolishing government is hard. Maybe impossible (for now). So, in the meantime, at least stop pretending it has any legitimacy. Treat it as you would treat any freelance criminal gang. Do what you must to avoid being murdered by it. Protect your property from it in whatever way you can. Exercise your liberty in secret if it's too dangerous to exercise openly.

And don't buy the justifications that the statists are trying to sell you. It's fraud. It's a scam. Buyer beware.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Feel free to assume your liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 14, 2026)

Assume liberty.

Most people have been trained to automatically ask what government allows; what the rules say. They assume they don't have liberty; otherwise, they wouldn't wait to see what someone says they are allowed to do...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

You know what's best for you

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 9, 2026)

I don’t know.

What don't I know? I don't know exactly how you should live or every detail of your situation. I don't know how to solve every possible random problem in the world. I don't know what complications might arise. I don't know solutions I can’t see or haven’t thought of. All the variables; the consequences of any potential solution. I don't know how, or if, society should be run.

I don’t know, and I accept it.

While I'm comfortable saying I don't know, there are also things I do know.

I know that no one else knows those answers, either. If they claim to, they are being dishonest. Those who make up legislation are often even more ignorant about the topics they legislate on than the rest of us. They are imposing a bad solution, forged on an anvil of ignorance with a hammer of imaginary political authority, and they'll hurt you if you choose your own path. They will punish you for knowing your own situation better than they do, and acting on the knowledge.

What kind of horrible person would do that?

I also know that no one has the right to govern another. I know there's no justification for violating other people's natural human rights.

I know real rights don't conflict. When they appear to clash, it's because someone is advocating so-called "positive rights"- the belief that someone owes you simply because you exist. Health care, for example, is a human right only if you're talking about treating yourself or reaching a deal with a provider. No one, including the DEA, FDA, or other government regulatory agencies, has the right or imaginary authority to interfere. Nor is healthcare something you can ethically force others to provide for you; that's slavery.

Those who hate the thought of everyone's liberty being fully respected will often ask me to explain, in minute detail, how to solve every possible situation which might arise. I can't. I don't know. The problem is, their favored solution fails if put to this test, too. They are careful to never let it be examined, but quick to turn the tables to hide the failure of the system they prefer.

It's dishonest, but you should now be able to see through it.

It's OK to not know everything, and to admit it. You can still know when something is wrong. These are two complementary sides of self-awareness.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

"Not logical or based in reality"

Typical interaction with a statist, copied and pasted:

(Story about some dire consequence of the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs.)

Drug abuse is stupid; prohibition is evil. Anyone supporting this has lost their compass.

“Your solution to such societal blight and expense upon the taxpayer for crime and welfare costs is what?”

Stop taxing people, and there’s no more expense upon the taxvictims.
End welfare for the same reason. (Charity works; welfare destroys.)
And what do you consider “societal blight”? I think if the stupid and evil War on Some Drugs is ended, a lot of the worst addicts will die off. The rest will either figure out how to be productive while abusing substances, or they’ll have to stop.
There’s really no downside unless you’re addicted to government and its “solutions”.

“You're an idiot and your village wants you back.”

That’s exactly the kind of response I expected. Thank you for confirming my hypothesis.

“You're living proof of your low IQ. Clearly you're told that often.”

And…

“Nothing to respond to. Your options are not logical or based in reality.”

-----------------
You be the judge. 

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Living in the Age of Lies

It feels like society runs on lies. Ignoring or even repeating the lies is rewarded. You are certainly not to refute the lies with reason or reality! Telling the truth is seen as antisocial behavior. 

That doesn't sit well with me. 

So, I sometimes get in trouble for openly rejecting the social lies. I've even made other libertarians mad this way.

It's worth it.

If you can't be the one saying "The emperor has no clothes", then what good are you? 

It doesn't mean you have to call out every lie. That would be exhausting. But when you are expected to repeat a social lie, or to nod along when the lie is told, don't. Sure, you could say it's not true, and that would be the most powerful thing to do, but it's not always necessary. Sometimes your silence is enough to shock a social liar into fumbling with his train of thought. I've seen it happen.

This Age of Lies is an opportunity for the hero who values the truth, wherever it leads.

-

Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Don't believe government necessary

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 7, 2026)

I can understand why so many people believe they need government. Many of them seem unwilling or unable to govern themselves.

Grocery stores are a good example of these bad examples...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Services can be provided sans government

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 2, 2026)

I don't want or need to be governed, but I still want a few of the things people claim government does or provides.

The difference is, I want these things provided voluntarily, without taxation or other forms of coercion. If something isn't essential enough for people to chip in and fund, it needs to go away. Forever, or until enough people decide to pay for it without being forced.

I want children to be educated. I don't want schools run by government, funded by taxation, or their standards established by government. A century and a half of this mistake has resulted in a population of functional illiterates.

Even if you support centralized schooling, there are better ways to do it. Come up with what works best for you. The only limit: you can't force others to pay for it, or force them to send their children to it just because you believe it's best.

Justice for crime victims is important. America doesn't have a credible system for providing justice. Governments have punishment systems, which they've fooled the population into confusing for justice. Justice means restitution, or a best effort at restitution. Government is good at punishment- less good at punishing only the guilty, and terrible at facilitating restitution. Restitution doesn't give government money or power.

Keeping accurate records of who owns what, in case of disagreements over ownership, is an essential service. It's a disservice to keep records of ownership so you can tax those belongings, or so you can later deprive someone of their property because a political criminal has written a rule making this property illegal. If you can't imagine a way to keep records without violating rights, you aren't trying.

Defending liberty is critically important, but government has proven itself utterly incapable or unwilling. It's too busy looking for loopholes around liberty. It's nearly impossible to find a government employee, including those tasked with defending liberty, who could give an accurate definition and explanation of the concept. They'd probably spend the time trying to justify their own job, instead.

I even want robotic probes, explorers, and colonists sent to other planets, but not enough to force you to pay for it. I can wait for a billionaire to find a reason to send them.

If there's something you want, why do you believe it's not popular enough that others would join you in paying for it voluntarily?

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

Liberty- costly and worth it

Liberty isn’t free.

I don’t mean this the way statists usually do. 

What I mean is that I understand that liberty comes at a price. It’s dangerous. 

You can stand for the right to own and carry guns and get killed by an evil loser with a gun.
You can oppose mandatory vaccination and die of a disease.
You might oppose prohibition and sobriety checkpoints and lose a family member to an impaired driver.
You can oppose mass surveillance and be the victim of a crime that could be solved with more spyware.
You can oppose censorship and get called rude names.

Statists will laugh, because they don't get it. They can't see past their ignorance.

Bad guys aren't violating you because of liberty. Liberty doesn't include the "right" to violate others, and it doesn't shield you from random bad things happening. Life and death happen. The Universe isn't fair.

The price of liberty is that if you're consistent, you might find yourself facing a situation that slavery might have made less likely. 

So? Liberty is always worth the cost.

-

Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

"Just doing my job"

When a federal, state, or local government employee, doing government's bidding, violates life, liberty, or property, they should be held personally responsible for paying restitution. (They are responsible; they just aren't currently held responsible.)

They should pay the full price; not the tax cattle.

Or, if you believe in punishment/revenge as a facet of justice, they should be subject to whatever someone else, not working on behalf of any government, would face if they'd done the same sort of thing.

A government "job" doesn't absolve a violator of their responsibility or guilt. It never has. It's weird that anyone would believe otherwise.

-

Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?