Don't Forget TOLFA

I haven't mentioned this recently, but it is time to remind you, once again, to enroll in The On Line Freedom Academy (if you haven't already).

Jim Davies keeps developing new content, and is doing a great job to make this effective and interesting. If you really value liberty, please spend a little time attending The Academy. The time you spend will not be wasted.

This is a practical way to spread the desire for liberty to a lot of people who might not otherwise take the time to think about it. Other methods can help, but until people understand what freedom really is, and see it working in your life in the real world, they may not pay much attention to it. Remember that the most common stumbling block is "the bad guys won't cooperate" or "it won't work in the real world". Show them that the bad guys are irrelevant. Enroll in TOLFA and live its lessons daily in your regular life. Lead by example.

*******************************

The Easy Way Out

Why do some people cling to authoritarianism? Maybe they have no choice. Perhaps because it is more primal; the "reptilian brain" is all that is needed. Authoritarianism is so much simpler. It is a refuge for those afraid, or unable, to think.

I come to this conclusion from personal experience. The only times I am prone to take the easy way out and have authoritarian thoughts is when I am extremely tired or sick and my mental faculties are not up to speed. I am not a morning person. The thinking part of my brain doesn't wake up until around 10 AM. If the baby wakes me up too early it is so much easier to just bark orders instead of working to solve any conflicts.

I pity those who live in that mindset all the time, incapable of growing up and moving past that type of mentality. To them, the answer seems to always be in ordering others around and punishing those who have different opinions or cultures. Fear, control, and punishment: the three horseman of the weak-minded. The tools of the state.


....................................................

Mass Transportation

If you want me to have any interest in "mass transportation" in any form, there are a few minimum requirements you need to meet. These are "needs", not "wishes", by the way.

1) Don't subject me or anyone else to any violations of our privacy. In other words, no metal detectors or "sniffers". No onerous ID requirements. No racial or psychological profiling. No baggage searches or cavity searches. No prohibition of personal weaponry of any sort. Period.

2) Fit my schedule and needs; don't expect me to go way out of my way to accommodate an inconvenient itinerary. I may be willing go be slightly inconvenienced once in a great while, but not everyday.

3) Don't try to turn me into a sardine. I am not averse to being near people, but I also have no desire to have jittery strangers sitting in my lap.

4) Don't develop a partnership with the Enforcers, encouraging them to be a menacing presence on your trips. I don't invite vermin into my house; I do not wish to be forced to share my commute with them.

In conclusion, private vehicles are the most convenient form of mass transit ever developed. To beat them, you will have to do a lot better. Passing "laws" that require me to use your transportation is not "doing it better". If you get your friends in government to do so "for the common good", and then make us run the disarmament gauntlet to get on board, I will personally do all I can to undermine you and your transportation monopoly. Consider that a promise; not that you care.

......................................

Our Consequence-Free Society

I think our society has become mostly free of consequences. Not for getting caught at big stuff (like murder) or at things that threaten the power of the state (like owning guns or avoiding taxes), but in everyday boorish behavior. Jerks feel safe acting like jerks because they know their victims are most likely disarmed and afraid to stand up for themselves due to "legal" restraints.

In a truly free society, cops (actually private security officers) would approach with their hats in their hands, their heads bowed, apologizing profusely for wasting your time. Behaving like the lowly servants they are.

People would NOT try driving down the center of the road just for the fun of watching others swerve out of the way.

People would not walk out in front of traffic simply for the amusement of forcing drivers to slam on their brakes to avoid the "crime" of hitting a pedestrian.

TSA goons would all be picking up trash on the side of the road. Just kidding. In reality, they would all have died long ago from trying to eat rocks and plastic fruit. Or from fighting their shadows and reflections to the death.

The point is, as Robert A. Heinlein said: "An armed society is a polite society". I am ready for a universally polite society again, where instant consequences remind the jerks among us to think about their actions.

..........................................

Well-Intentioned Insanity

"I don't believe most statists (those who believe "government" is a legitimate human endeavor) are bad people. I believe they are mostly well-intentioned. I also think they are a bit insane. Or at least in serious denial."

This is the first paragraph of my newest article in The Libertarian Enterprise. Read the rest here.

Airports: Just Say "No!"

My daughter, who is 17, came to visit me for the holidays. Despite my misgivings, she insisted on flying. A trip of 700 miles, which she has made in around 12 hours by car several times, ended up taking 19 1/2 hours. She was jerked around by the incompetent airline employees (who no longer concern themselves with making the customer happy, but only with satisfying their federal masters), had some of her possessions stolen by the goons of the TSA, and ended up crying. This girl is tough and doesn't cry.

Needless to say, I needed a few days to calm down before I wrote about this incident. I long ago realized that flying is no longer an option for me. The last time I did it, back in 2000, I ended up getting to my destination and discovering a .22 round in my pocket. This was in spite of practically stripping off everything I wear in order to prevent such from happening. Now, if the TSA goons discovered something like that before I did, I would probably be raped by them or tasered to death.

There needs to be a real free-market airline. One that tells the feds where to stick their terroristic regulations. One where the pilots and attendants are armed, and where the passengers are assumed to be as well. I know this would mean that the liberty-free zones euphemistically called "airports" couldn't be used, since they have been stolen by the feds. I also know that the feds would fight any such attempt, claiming ownership of the sky or some such socialistic balderdash.

Still, it is time. Don't believe me? Watch this: TSA brutality.

--------------------------

Not My Choice to Make

I am absolutely unbending in my recognition of the right of everyone to own and to carry weapons everywhere, without permission. I stand up for this right almost everyday, in some way.

There are a lot of people who I feel are not responsible enough to own guns. Many of them work for government in some capacity, but that is a tangent for another day. The thing is, it doesn't matter what I think about anyone else owning a gun. It is not for me or anyone else to decide for them, unless or until they make it so by misusing the gun. That is the way it should be.

I might prefer that my "under aged" daughter not have sex. However, she is not my property and I know she is responsible enough to make her own decisions regardless of what "the state" dictates. I can offer advice, if asked, but can't make legitimate demands of someone who owns her own life and accepts the consequences of her actions. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

I am not free to run the lives of others, just as they are not free to run mine. This is why I would not make a good authoritarian: I understand where my boundaries lie.


*************************

A "New" Year

The logical place to divide the year is at the solstice, so I think this is a little arbitrary, but "Happy New Year" anyway.

Now, what will I do to make this coming year better than the previous one? I'm open to suggestions.

The Year in Review

Not really, but isn't that what we are supposed to say now?

All I want to really say is a big "thank you" to my loyal readers. I hope 2009 will be better for you than 2008 was. I hope you will make a commitment to be freer in your personal sphere this coming year.

I'll just leave you with this thought:

Liberty happens one person at a time, in spite of the claims to the contrary. Take charge of your own liberty. Don't worry about the moronic agents, enforcers, or bureaucrats of the state. They will bring about their own demise if we let them. So, let them.

Stay safe, but not too safe.


....................................

Consistency

The inconsistencies that make a person take on authoritarian attributes confuse me. I respect consistency. I may hate a person's stance on a particular issue, but if they are completely consistent, I can at least respect the fact that they are not a hypocrite.

Yet, while I have met people who seem consistently "libertarian" (something that can be done without much effort, as long as you overcome your brainwashing), I have yet to find anyone who seems consistently "authoritarian". They always make exceptions for themselves, and often for their friends. This is how you can tell that they are wrong.

This doesn't mean that everyone who claims the label "libertarian" is consistent, just that it is more obvious and glaringly ridiculous when they aren't. All rights for everyone, everywhere, for all times without exception. That's where "consistency" dwells. Any "but"s show the flaws that are still present in the person's thinking.



....................................

"Well, That's Different"

The government's "War on (some) Drugs" depends upon ignorance in order to retain popular support among the population. Unfortunately for rationality, ignorance is rampant.

As an illustration: Someone I know recently handed some prescription medications to another person who was in pain. I pointed out that, by DEA standards, the act made both people "drug criminals" and made the "supplier" (who, by the way, supports the stupid and evil "War on Drugs") hypocritical. The "supplier" said "Well, I think this is different." I said "That's why it is hypocritical."

I just wonder how many other things are "different" to the state-hypnotized mind.

..........................................

People

On the whole, I like people. There are some whose actions I despise, and some people are so devoid of any redeeming characteristics that I just write them off and do my best to avoid them. Still, most people are not too bad, even if I don't agree with them.

On the other hand, most people who hold authoritarian ideology seem to hate and distrust everyone. This is how they justify trying to control every aspect of other people's lives. Even some people who dubiously claim the label "libertarian" seem to be this way, and it is probably what diverts them from the path to liberty.

Don't waste your time hating people or looking for ways to punish them. Most "offenses" should probably be ignored. Only respond with force when you are attacked.

That doesn't mean that I will let others, who say they only want to "help" me, have any authority or control over my life. Their right to tell me what to do ends where it runs up against my self ownership and my self determination. Live and let live, or there may be unpleasant consequences.


..............................

Hello, Everyone

After being without internet for a day and a half, I'm back, but I'm taking a couple of days off to spend time with family. Enjoy whichever variation of the winter solstice celebration you observe.

Merry Christmas!

**************************

Rules of the Road

A common misconception of us liberty types is that we "refuse to stop at stop signs". To this, I reply: Not usually. Remember, most of us have no problem with legitimate "rules", but only with rulers. I oppose (and sometimes ignore) rules that are obviously ridiculous and designed to only control actions that have no victims.

Stop signs are not usually in that category. Although I could point one out, if you would like, that I never saw anyone stop at. Yes, It was that ridiculously placed! Normally, stopping at stop signs is just a case of common decency, and one rule I follow.

Another legitimate rule of the road is the rule for driving on a particular side of the road. It makes sense that certain rules permit me to know what to expect on the road as I come around a blind corner, at least up to a point. Technology will one day make this a moot point, but for now, please stay on "your side of the road". It is simply courtesy and responsible behavior.

"Speed limits" usually are pointless and distracting. They force a driver to divide his attention between safely operating the vehicle and watching an arbitrary parameter. However, as long as the speed limit doesn't unnecessarily endanger me or my passengers, I normally follow it anyway.

That does bring me to a serious road hazard. Speed traps, or whatever you wish to call them, are a serious danger to safe travel on the roads. Notice how often drivers who are not even "speeding" slam on their brakes at the sight of one of the highwaymen hiding in his extortion collection vehicle. And when these parasites actually pick a victim, they pull off to the side of the road and compromise "public safety" even more; sacrificed for monetary gain by the state. The drivers singled out are rarely causing any danger, but are simply violating an arbitrary rule about velocity. This "traffic stop" behavior is a violation of the rules of the road, in my opinion.


...............................................

Statist Feelings

This may came as a shock, but there are times and occasional situations, where my first feeling is not exactly "libertarian". When that happens my first assumption is that I am wrong. It is a good assumption, because it has turned out true every time so far.

I stop and try to think about why I feel that way, and I invariably find that there is a blind spot I haven't noticed or some toxic feeling that I am holding onto unnecessarily. Usually it is in response to hearing about some crime that seriously disturbs me, and thoughts of what should be done to the attacker.

With a bit more thought and reflection I can replace the incorrect feelings with rational thoughts. It's like flushing the toilet. With the new perspective comes a clarity that was lacking before, and it is like a breath of fresh air.

Fortunately, this happens less and less frequently. With experience a person can learn that liberty is always the right answer no matter the question.


----------------------------------------------

Fawning Over Government

Why?

Why do they seek approval from the state for their every act? Why do they enthusiastically cheer on the tightening grip of the police-state? Why do people try to be noticed and praised by those in government? Why do they act like desperate puppies needing to be praised by the "master"?

Do they need to be told they are a "good little citizen"? Do they believe they will get the crumbs of the elite, Do they honestly believe that as long as they fawn over those in power they will not be eaten, or do they more realistically hope to be eaten last?

Why?

Just trying to wrap my head around this one.

"Liberals Who Like Guns"? Hardly

On a conservative gun blog, I dared to point out the folly of picking and choosing when it comes to rights. Not all gun blogs are this way, and the one in question isn't always that way, either. But... sometimes....

Anyway, one commenter decided that since he couldn't refute the statement I made, he would insult me. Fine. He said:

"All
rights for everyone..." Libertarians are just Liberals who like guns. You guys
are exactly useless, just like the anarchists..

OK, first of all I am an anarchist, so your attempt at an insult missed the mark (be sure of your target).

Second of all, if, as you claim, I am only a Liberal who likes guns, tell me why I absolutely despise any form of welfare. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, food stamps, all those things (and more) are repulsive to me. They are financed through theft from working people. Socialism and fascism are not any nicer if you call them by trendy names.

This tired tactic gets used on me a lot. "Conservatives" call me a liberal, and "Liberals" call me a right winger. What you have got to grasp is that this is a "divide and conquer" technique. As long as you can be convinced to support only those basic human rights you happen to like, the state, our true enemy, wins. It is all or nothing folks. That is why I will continue to speak out for ALL rights for EVERYONE for ALL times.

Crazy People

What can be done for crazy people? You know, the ones who the more sensitive types might call "mentally ill"; and particularly the ones who are prone to violence, since the others are not really a problem.

I'm not a psychologist or anything, so my opinions carry no weight. I'll express them anyway.

Do the rules not apply to the "mentally ill"? I think they do. Don't initiate force, and if you do, expect consequences. I think coddling crazy people only reinforces their behavior. Don't shield them from consequences or they will never learn to take responsibility for their action. If they insist on calling the cops when their cannabis is stolen, let them. If they attack innocent people, let the chips fall where they may. Some actions need to be selected against by our evolutionary imperative. Short-circuiting nature doesn't help anyone in this instance.

If your family is burdened by such a person, and you can't keep them under control, you may need to wash your hands of it and hope for the best. There is no Utopia. Just don't expect me to pay for the upkeep of violently crazy people through "taxation". That just might make me violently crazy.



----------------------------

New Mexico Suffers Damaging "Storm"

The tyrants and enforcers of the New Mexico state government are so pleased with themselves for coming up with a new campaign for "fighting drunk (sic) driving". They are bragging about their new idea in radio ads and on billboards.

They are calling it "The Storm". The inference I am supposed to make, I suppose, is that if I dare to drive "drunk" (or just in an area where they fear "drunk" drivers may be travelling) the wrath of State-God will descend upon me and violate all of my human rights.... for the good of the collective.

They claim "It’s a clear warning to drivers—Do not put others or yourself in danger by driving after drinking." Where is this "danger" coming from? Not the alcohol, but from the enforcers. They are the real danger.. to our lives and liberties. To think that in other areas, where your rights are not violated with quite as much enthusiasm, "drunk" driving has also declined. Maybe tyranny isn't necessary after all.

So, in violation of human rights and civil liberties, state troopers will be bringing a storm upon the people who dare to travel in "their" state. Does this make them "stormtroopers"? Yes. Yes, it does. Empowered and burdened with all that the label implies.

....................................

Bill of Rights Day- Do "They" Care?

Today, December 15th, is Bill of Rights Day. In recognition of that, I thought I would post an illustration of why the Bill of Rights, while arguably a nice idea, does nothing to restrain out-of-control statists. I understand we are talking about non-federal statists here, but I don't see any federales rushing in to defend these victims of tyranny, either.

I read this story about Amish people being fined and harassed for not getting building permits. A few quotes that illustrate the statist mindset really stand out:

"They just go ahead and don't listen to any of the laws that are affecting anybody else. It's quite a problem when you got people next door required to get permits and the Amish don't have to get them"

So, stop attempting to meddle with anyone's private business, you parasite. Yes, I realize it would take away your power and deprive you of your ill-gotten gains, but you're just going to have to put on your big-boy pants and get over it. Tyranny is wrong, no matter the excuse you use.

"You try to work with both sides," Howe said. "(We tell them) this is what we need you to do so everyone can go home and relax."

And if you would get out of people's lives, everyone could still "go home and relax". You are the only one preventing that with your counterfeit "laws". Understand? You are the one in the wrong here, not the Amish homeowners. You are demanding that they lie back and enjoy the rape "just to get it over with". That makes you evil.

"Custom-built homes are allowed in Wisconsin as long as the plans meet code standards, but apparently the Amish don't understand that"

So if a free person refuses to comply with your petty demands, you think it is because they are too stupid or backwards to understand what you are saying? Are you really that pathetically delusional? Oh, you are a bureaucrat, so we all know the answer to that.

"The government must show a strong reason why regulations outweigh religious freedoms"

This quote comes from the guy defending the Amish, and just shows how deeply the statism mythology runs. Instead of being wishy-washy here, he need to educate the nanny-staters: The First Amendment which forbids the government certain authority, dictates that there is no option for your governmental edicts to "outweigh" religious freedom. Not unless cannibalism of live victims or some other rights violation were being committed. That activity is much more likely among the bureaucratic kind, than among the Amish. Nope, here there is no "victim" here other than your ego and illegitimate power over the lives of others. Your desire to control others does not outweigh the right to be left alone by vermin like you.

"Building officials argue permits and codes ensure structural safety, but Amish homes aren't falling down, he said."

Exactly, so the bureaucrats are helping no one and must be told to mind their own business and get an HONEST job.

"People aren't getting hurt," he said

That is the bottom line. No victims, no "crime"; no authority for government interference. None.