The lie matters because of politics

The lie matters because of politics

(My Clovis News Journal column for June 19, 2015)

The rather disturbed president of the Spokane, Washington, NAACP chapter is exposed as a liar by her parents, and it makes national news and causes an uproar.

Why does her lie matter to anyone outside her club? Race only matters to racists. Worse lies are told every day by people using those lies to harm innocent people they don’t even know.

Judges, police, politicians, and bureaucrats lie in the course of the job, and people refuse to notice until it harms them, personally.

Judges lie when they instruct a jury to consider only the law and their instructions, rather than considering whether the law is a legitimate law or a power grab by the State.

Police lie and say they are all that stands between society and chaos, even while being caught on video planting evidence, shooting people in the back, kicking women in the face, and offering to forget infractions in exchange for sexual favors.

Politicians lie when they offer you a choice between different brands of slavery, but leave real liberty off the table. They lie when they make campaign promises and when they utter the words "crisis", "national security", or "for the children".

Bureaucrats lie when they make up rules and call them "laws" and say you are obligated to obey. They lie when they claim you need this or that permit or license.

All the above lie when they call themselves "public servants" while meaning to be your masters.

In light of all this lying, why is anyone making a big deal over a woman pretending to belong to a race she doesn't?

Because of politics. If you remove politics from the equation it wouldn't matter to anyone outside her personal sphere what she imagines herself to be. As it is, it only matters because silly racists have dreamed up "laws" to treat people differently based upon their "race".

The claim is that the "laws" remove the obstacles society has erected, but if you've been paying attention you know that isn't how it actually works. In the name of "social justice", anti-social injustice has been institutionalized, and for this reason an insignificant woman's racial fantasy seems to matter.

I don't claim her lie was innocent. The NAACP has the right to kick her out for her deception. Remove politics from the situation and, without the reward of special status the group seeks for themselves, there would probably have been no incentive for her to lie to them, and no one besides the club members she deceived would have ever heard her name. Then it would be very unlikely for her lie to harm anyone at all.

-

Support?
.

Discover the ZAP for yourself

(Previously posted to Patreon)

The number/concept "zero" wasn't invented, it was discovered. It had been there all along, undiscovered. Unnoticed. Without having discovered it, much of science was impossible to really do, and much of reality was impossible to understand.

So it is with Zero Aggression Principle and property rights. No one invented the concepts- they were independently discovered many times- by many, mostly anonymous, individuals- throughout history.

Without those features of reality, humans suffer needlessly. Without them, bad guys flourish and prosper. With them, civilization happens.

People may complain that "zero" is "nothing"- only an imaginary thing dreamed up inside the head of people who think about such things. You can't "see it" or touch it. Maybe. But it's still real and necessary.

So it is with the only civilized ways to interact with other people: living by the ZAP and respecting their property rights.

You can deny it, fight it, ridicule it... and it is still there. It would be there even if no one had yet discovered it.

-

Support?

Don't doom yourself to failure

Any plan that hinges on changing other people will fail. It will lead to frustration and, quite possibly, anger.

It's why "restore the Constitution", "learn to use the law", and "remember to say these words" are hopeless fantasies for increasing liberty. It is wishful thinking bordering on magical thinking.

It's also why the ZAP and Rightful Liberty work- you are responsible for yourself. Any change needed is inside you. And since you are the only person you can change...

Perhaps by changing yourself, others will be influenced. If not, you have still changed for the better. You will see the world differently. You will have a new way of acting and reacting. You will be a better person.

.

Statist lies vs the reality

Worthless opinions

I'm talking about mine.

Believe it or not, you don't know my opinions on most things. Because they are only opinions and don't matter. Maybe they aren't exactly worthless, but they are completely irrelevant to anyone but me.

My favorite color, the breeds of dog I dislike, what I prefer to drink... those are opinions. There is no "right" opinion on those things, nor is there a "wrong" opinion. Probably most of the people closest to me wouldn't even know my opinions on those- unless they have asked or tried to rope me into something.

Opinions are only opinions. Everyone has a lot of them.

But some things I know.

Liberty is better than slavery and that is not an opinion.

.

Two different approaches

I noticed a difference in approaches recently, between the statist approach and the voluntaryist approach when faced with the same issue.

There is a gazebo at the park near the house. It has a concrete floor, which catches water from the sprinkler system that waters the grass. The sprinkler comes on often enough to keep a puddle on the floor most of the time. The puddle grows a slimy layer on the concrete.

My daughter loves to play in the gazebo. When she was little she could never resist running through the puddle, and each and every time she did- without fail- she would slip and fall. She would get dirty and wet and be very upset about it.

So, I got in the habit of reminding her every time she was heading for the gazebo: "If you run through the water, you will probably slip and fall!" (No, she never remembered once she got there.)

Well, a few days ago she and another kid were once again heading over to run around in the gazebo- and there was a slimy puddle on the floor. I overheard her telling the kid :"Don't run through the water!"

And, then it struck me. That's the main difference between trying to control someone else, and warning someone of probable consequences. The difference between the statist approach and the Rightful Liberty approach.

.

Being nothing

Several times in my life I've encountered people who seem compelled to tell me "you're nothing".

Which is interesting, since I don't remember claiming to be "something" more than what I am- which is me. Whatever others may decide to call me is their business. You may or may not like me, but that's just how it is.

Years ago in the town where I was commonly known as "The mountainman" (or "the pet store guy", depending on who was talking to/about me) I encountered a drunk who insisted on telling me I didn't measure up. His little toe was more of a mountainman than I could ever be. He kept getting right in my face to tell me exactly what he thought of me- which, since I had never met the guy, really wasn't that important to me. His little yappy long-haired lapdog was a "real mountain dog" according to Mr. VaporBreath. I just kept saying "OK. If you say so." (As an aside, this is one of the few times I ever pulled out a gun in preparation to use in self defense- although he wasn't aware I had done so. I was almost certain he was going to attack any moment as he got angrier and angrier- but he suddenly calmed down and left.)

Online I have had people tell me I am not a "real libertarian" or "real anarchist" because I'm not shooting bullies, or sitting in jail. Or moving to Somalia.

It seems that whatever I get a reputation for, someone is just waiting to try to tell me I'm "nothing".

And, I used to care a little, but less and less all the time.

I've never claimed to be perfect. I don't suggest you follow me. I'll tell you what I think I should be doing- maybe I'll measure up... maybe I won't. But I know where I should be. And, yes, I'll probably judge your actions according to what I think is right. But why concern yourself over my approval?

You'll probably not get me into much of a battle trying to convince you I am what you say I'm not. Instead, I'll just go out there and be myself. I'll let my actions speak for me- and either prove you right or wrong.

.

Demanding entitlement drones

(Previously posted to Patreon)

Back around Insurrection Day (July 4) a group of veterans held the "local" Walmart hostage. Or, at least tried to.

They had wanted the Walmart employees to wear red shirts and collect money (or promote something- I forget exactly which) for their group on that Friday.

The Walmart already does a huge collection push for the Children's Miracle Network, and for whatever reason declined to add the veterans to their supported charities. As if they don't already bend over backward to accommodate and worship the military in other ways.

So, on that morning (I believe it was July 3) the veterans showed up ready to invade Walmart to make their demands and try to pressure the store managers into changing their minds.

Walmart managers met them at the door and kept them from coming in.

This was seen as a disgraceful act on the part of Walmart by some people. I heard it said that "if any group deserves [to be honored], it is veterans". Yuck.

I see veterans (in general, I know there are wonderful exceptions) as entitled whiners. They risked life and limb (and often lost both) to impose the agenda of the federal mafia on people around the globe, but want it to be called "fighting for your freedom" instead of talking about it honestly. Then, since being paid with stolen money while imposing The State on people wasn't enough, they want everyone to worship and support them for the rest of their lives.

I'm amazed and glad Walmart didn't bow under the pressure.

Of course, none of this is to be read as being a fan of Walmart. Corporations are another branch of the State and are disgusting, too.

.

Police culture

The police have a "culture". An uncultured culture of entitlement and brutality.

An aggressive gang culture where they cover up the evil actions of their gang "brothers" and "sisters".

A whiny culture where if they don't get the groveling respect they believe they are entitled to, they'll tell you they hope you or your loved ones get raped and robbed so you'll believe you need them- or they'll do it to you themselves.

Or kill you.

To me, cops and their culture are completely unacceptable. They are unwelcome in my presence. I can't really understand why anyone tolerates them.

Oh wait... yes I do. Indoctrination, through TV and kinderprison.

.

Ideas, beliefs change with growth

Ideas, beliefs change with growth

(My Clovis News Journal column for June 12, 2015)

Everyone changes their mind as they grow. Almost everything I now believe is because along the way someone, somehow, convinced me I was wrong.

Most of those changes came after a lot of figurative kicking and screaming. I didn't want to accept I could be wrong, and I liked what I believed. It was comfortable, and matched what many around me seemed to believe.

I once held many more "conservative" ideas than I now do. I used to support police and the military- in general. I used to support the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs. I used to support capital punishment. I used to believe government was necessary for moral society. I used to be fine with the law treating some non-aggressive people as though they had fewer rights than others.

I also used to hold some "liberal" ideas I have since rejected. I used to believe the best way to protect the environment was for government to make up laws telling people what they could and couldn't do with their own property. I used to think government should subsidize electric cars and penalize people who drove gasoline cars. I thought littering or polluting should be a capital crime- OK, I may be slightly exaggerating on that one (but not by much). I used to support a minimum wage, and laws against child labor.

I even used to wonder if the gun ban crowd might be right; maybe guns were too dangerous for people to own and carry.

Of course, I thought I believed in freedom and I believed I was consistent. Now, it is embarrassing and painful to even remember entertaining those ideas, and agony to admit them publicly.

Sure, I always had some doubts that government was as great as many people said, and my observations seemed to indicate it wasn't just the particular person in office which was the problem, but the existence of the position itself. I also noticed the results of laws, programs, and agencies were usually the exact opposite of the purported goal. For years I clung to my comfortable beliefs in spite of these observations. Like so many, I supported freedom for things I liked, but not for things I didn't, and ignored the inconsistency.

Then I began to really think and those inconsistencies began to fall away.

There are still details people I look up to disagree with me on. I consider their points, but if they don't hold up I stand my ground.

I am more likely to be convinced by logic, reason, and consistency than by emotionalism. I'm sure more changes are to come. What convinces you to change your mind?

(One thing I was thinking about, which didn't make it into the column, is that those advocating Liberty never threatened me to change my mind. Those advocating statism of one sort or another never took any other way.)

-

Support?
.

Choices and shame and who cares?

A while back I saw where someone had said that even suggesting "homosexuality is a choice" is "homophobic".

That is crazy.

If anyone says it either never, or always, is a choice they are lying. No one knows that either way. I suspect it is sometimes genetic, beyond choice, and other times is a choice. If someone is pushing one or the other as the only truth it is because they have an agenda, and want "laws" dreamed up depending on how they want reality to be.

Someday, maybe, it will be settled as to whether it is or is not (mainly) a choice.

But who cares?

I am only ashamed of my choices if they are wrong, foolish, or stupid. I am pleased with many of my choices and ashamed of others.

And either way, choice or not, I'm not going to suggest that people be punished for, or "laws" passed against, non-aggressive choices. That would be evil.

.

"Don't keep harping on it"

If a newspaper or network keeps reporting on those who call themselves "government" doing the same thing over and over, but won't publish criticisms from the intended victims each and every time, isn't that favoritism?

Of course it is.

Sure, I want to know when some bully is threatening to violate me, but to keep criticisms from being heard, on the basis of it being "too repetitive", only helps those bullies get away with it. The criticisms are repetitive only because the violations are repetitive.

The bullies of "government" sometimes (in fact, almost always) keep proposing to violate you in the same way until it finally gets imposed. They keep harping on the issue until they get their way. The media rarely points out that "government" is repetitive in its schemes- but just try to publish a letter to the editor or a column addressing the potential violation each and every time it is proposed or discussed and you'll get shut off. It's like the media is hoping the memory of your rational objections will fade, and the violation will eventually be imposed without anyone speaking up.

It's like the never-ending push for anti-gun "laws". If the bullies don't get their way this month, they'll be back next month with the same "idea". They do the same with their theft proposals.

Take away the soapbox, just like the ballot box and jury box have been taken away, and you leave most people no peaceful recourse. Maybe that's what the media hopes- after all, bloodshed sells papers and attracts viewers.

.

Me vs. (some) Dogs

For those who would like to have more things to hate me for, I have a confession: I am a dog killer.

Or, I have been.

So, how can I hold dog-killing cops in contempt if I'm no better than them?

Well, I am better than them; I never killed a dog in its own territory while I was trespassing, but only at my house. And, always in defense of my property.

When I was younger I always had chickens, pheasants, quail, doves, and rabbits in my yard. In a fenced in area, or in pens and cages. I lost a lot of them to neighbors' dogs, who would run in a pack at night, come to my yard, climb over (or under) the fence, tear open the cages, and kill my animals.

That doesn't sit well with me. My animals are my responsibility to protect, and I take that seriously.

But, at first I was nice. I told the neighbors what had happened and asked them to keep their dogs out of my yard. The response I got several times: "That's your problem."

OK, so if it is my problem, I will solve it myself. And I did. One .22 hollowpoint at a time.

It was a short-term solution, as the neighbors would get a replacement as soon as "Fluffy" stopped coming home. One thing I noticed is these dogs weren't loved. Every one of them was so covered in ticks (and fleas) you couldn't see any skin on their faces- they were just an object to their owners, which made me sad even as I shot them.

The permanent solution was so simple I wish I had discovered it years earlier: Wild turkeys.

A friend gave me some 2nd generation wild turkeys her uncle had hatched out. I put them in a pen that adjoined my chicken pen- and I never lost another critter to dogs.

The turkeys were mean. When I went in their pen I had to wear a heavy coat, make sure my hat protected the back of my neck, and carry a shovel for protection. And I still got flogged. In fact, I had to reinforce the wire of the pen near the door to the chicken pen because the tom would attack the wire each time I went in to do any chicken work, and he was ripping the wire.

But I never had to shoot another dog in protection of my livestock again, and that made me happy.

Later, though, I almost shot another neighbor's dog- this time in defense of my older daughter.

She was about 4 years old, playing in the yard, when she started to scream. A neighbor's black lab had her cornered and was barking aggressively at her. I grabbed some rocks and rushed the dog pelting him and yelling. He ran and I chased him home. His owner was outside and started cussing me for chasing his dog. I told him his dog was in my yard, threatening my daughter- and to keep it out of my yard. He said he didn't believe in keeping dogs penned or chained, because it was like his child. I told him my daughter IS my child, and if his dog doesn't stay out of my yard I would shoot it. I also let him know it wasn't the first trouble I had experienced with his dog- it had ripped up a couple of deerskins I was tanning, and my patience was used up.

Somehow the guy managed to find a way to keep the dog out of my yard- or I had scared it enough it didn't come back. Later the guy was complaining to me that the painters working at the restaurant next door to his cabin had pained his dog red. I was thinking if he kept his dog home he wouldn't have had that problem either.

Notice, that neither I nor the dog owners grovelled for the state to step in and solve our problem. I wonder if it would go the same way today.

So that's my confession.

.

Don't feel bad about putting bullies in their place

I never want to make people feel bad about things they didn't choose, or things they did choose which are not harming others.

I'm not saying I have never said anything racist, sexist, or mean. I have.

And I feel bad about it, and I intend to not repeat that behavior.

But I don't feel bad about calling people on the carpet for doing evil things. Not all opinions or choices are equally valid, and if your opinions or choices lead to behavior which violates the property or Rightful Liberty of another, you need to feel bad about it.

.

Late!

My Clovis News Journal column will be posted late. The newspaper's site is offline due to a cyberattack/virus. I'll post the link as soon as I can.

The column is in the paper, with another of those headlines that seems completely divorced from the content of the column. Sigh...

"Politically incorrect"? Or something more hilarious?

Most people who believe they are being "politically incorrect" are actually just being political- and are also incorrect.

And many of them feel very smug while doing so.

It's sort of funny to watch.

.

The answers not offered

(Previously posted to Patreon)

I recently took another of those quizzes (probably used by NSA goons to get you to self-incriminate, but at this point, who cares?).

It was titled Can We Identify Your Age Based On Your Political Opinions? I usually just think "No. No you can't" but I took it anyway.

It missed my age by a long shot, but that's based on not being able to choose the right answers on anything.

I thought I would write the answers I would choose to the questions they ask, to be a little more accurate.

Here goes:

#1- "The rich should pay a higher tax rate than the middle class"
No, everyone should pay the same: 0%

#2- "Military action that defies international law is sometimes justified"
There's no such thing as "international law" unless it is Natural Law, and military action which defies Natural Law is never justified, but is always evil.

#3- "Gay marriage should be legal"
No one has the right to regulate marriage by "law".

#4- "Abortion should be illegal"
I don't believe in "laws" against anything. If something is wrong (an initiation of force or violation of property), stop those doing it. Yourself. There are only two types of "law"- the unnecessary and the harmful.

#5- "Law-abiding citizens should be allowed to carry concealed handguns"
Where to start? Well, no one has the right to forbid anyone from carrying any weapon, openly or concealed, regardless of the person's history of complying with "laws" or not, and without regard for where a person was born or what government bullies claim the "authority" to rob and control them.

#6- "Healthcare is the responsibility of the government"
Ummm.... no. Their only responsibility (if any) is to not be evil by preventing anyone from finding and making arrangements for whatever kind of healthcare they want. This is why the DEA, FDA, and various medicine/doctor rationing scams are abominable.

#7- "Marijuana should be legal"
Again, no one has the right to make "laws" against a plant- any plant- nor to tell you what medicines or chemicals you are allowed to put into your body.

#8- "Government regulation of businesses probably does more harm than good"
"Probably"? There's no "probably" about it. No one has the right to interfere in people's trades. Not even "for your own good". That is socialism and harms the business and the customers- and probably ends up harming the customer the most.

#9- "A country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment"
A "country" can't do anything. People do. I do think soiling your own nest is an incredibly foolish and short-sighted behavior. But "whatever it takes" could include killing off all the humans, if someone with that power decides that's what it would take. I don't litter. I pick up trash constantly. I pollute as little as I possibly can, and avoid the use of certain chemicals. And I still think "environmental laws" are counterproductive and stupid.

#10- "It is not necessary to believe in God to be moral and have good values"
Nothing could be more obvious. Some of the least moral people I have ever met believe in God. And most of them support the hideous evil of "The State" with fervor. That doesn't mean that not believing in God/god/gods leads to good behavior, either. The things seem completely unrelated in my experience.

#11- "The growing number of immigrants from other countries threaten our values and customs"
Not sure who this "our" is. If your values can be threatened by the presence of people with different values, then your values are apparently worthless. No one else threatens my values. Now, maybe you could get introduced to new customs, and decide you enjoy them and would like to participate. I don't see how this can be considered a threat, either. If you don't want to whack piñatas at a kid's birthday party, don't. And, if it seems I am picking on one particular group of "immigrants" with that comment, it is only because they are the ones generally being disparaged by the borderists.

#12- "Everyone has it in their power to succeed"
Probably not. We are all born different and have different abilities and talents. Some people are more prone to success- even taking individual strengths into account. Don't erect "laws" and regulations to ensure failure in more people who might otherwise succeed.

#13- "Sometimes citizens must give up some privacy to be protected from terrorism"
If that's the case, it's a good case against lowering yourself to the status of "citizen", which is synonymous with "slave" in my mind. But, exactly how does behaving as a terrorist "protect" anyone from terrorism? Aren't you just becoming what you tell people you are protecting them from? Of course you are. I would rather risk the occasional act of "terrorism" than put up with bullies spying on my every move. Or, on the every move of my worst enemy. Not on my behalf.

#14- "Social welfare makes people too dependent on government and less accountable for themselves"
"Don't feed the wildlife. It would become dependent and lose the ability to fend for itself." How can this be true of wild animals and be not true about humans? If you get accustomed to being fed, housed, doctored, and policed, how will you ever learn to take responsibility for yourself? You won't. You'll become a domestic animal, farmed and used.

#15- "Capital punishment can sometimes be justified"
Not in my opinion. No government anywhere, ever, has been (or could be) honest enough to be trusted with the power of life or death. The "justice system" is a horrible joke, with juries routinely passing along the result the government employees desire- which is almost always some version of "guilty as charged".
The only ethical death penalty is carried out at the time and place of the attack, by the intended victim or a rescuer. Anything later is revenge, not justice.

So, there you have it. A quiz with the right answers for me to choose, rather than the statist standard answers that assume a statist outlook.
.

Love Gov

This is a video series I recommend- from Independent Institute. It's funny and truthful.

M only quibble is when they talk about government debt putting an individual (besides the government employees who actually took on the debt) into debt. Not my debt, and not yours either.


Watch all 5 episodes. Really. Number 5 was my favorite, but they are all good.

.

Don't hire bad guys for something you should do

I have no interest in sending cops after anyone for anything.

 If someone is doing something bad- aggression or property violation- and needs to be stopped, stop them.

 Don't add to the wrong by allowing a gang to exist on theft and aggression to (supposedly) "fight" theft and aggression. That's just insane.

.

City councils radically un-American

City councils radically un-American

(My Clovis News Journal column for June 5, 2015. This is the repeatedly rejected one. The version you'll see at the newspaper site is the editor's version- which really isn't much different, but some. I'll probably find a way to post- somewhere- the original version, along with the reworked one which was rejected that I will post here in its entirety in a month.)

Through observation over my adult life- and especially lately- I have come to a conclusion: city councils are the realm of the petty megalomaniac. Need proof? The publicly stated goal of one such gang in the area recently was to plot to impose "enforceable rules that all residents could be held to".

That city council's stated goal is a sad, perverted goal; harmful and radically anti-American.

It was triggered when some people didn't beg them for permission, and pay the demanded bribe (which is dishonestly called a "permit"), before improving their own property in a way which harmed absolutely no one, and in a way many others have done before.

The only rule needed doesn't have to be written: don't violate the property of others. Nor does it need to be made enforceable. Defend your own property from those who try to violate it. I'll even help.

The only real danger most property owners ever face comes from those who imagine they have the right to enforce rules to control everyone else's property... and their eager quislings. It's that dangerous, superstitious belief in "authority" again.

A legitimate rule would apply only to government employees: "You will not violate, under color of law, the choice of others as to how to use their own property, nor steal property in the name of taxation, permits, and fines".

If any city council wants to legitimize itself, it could abolish all its made-up rules and become nothing more than a social club. It could then make all the rules it wants between its members. That path leads to no glorification or rush of power, though.

Do you consider ObamaCare a problem? It can't damage your rights as badly as local busybodies. You encounter them every day, whereas the vermin in Washington DC or your state capital don't generally notice you unless you first seek them out.

Property codes are not needed. Not everything needs to be controlled. We are fast approaching the day when everything not forbidden is mandatory. And I, for one, refuse to play along.

I don't want you committing enforcement of property-violating rules against my neighbors. I don't want you enforcing your twisted notion of "the common good".

It's time to wrest control of our private property back from those who believe they have a right to make up rules which violate us to feed their communistic hunger. It's time to tell them to knock it off and go away. North Korea seems a good fit for those who lust for ever more government control over every aspect of their neighbors' lives.

.