Liberty, like muscle, needs exercise

(My Clovis News Journal column for March 4, 2016)

This past weekend I went to Palo Duro Canyon to recharge. I wandered through the brush, over the hills, along the creek, exploring whatever caught my eye. It's something I don't do nearly as often as I need to.

The next day I could tell I had been using muscles I don't normally use.

Sometimes discomfort can be a sign you are doing something you don't do enough. Your liberty muscles need to be flexed, too. Otherwise they'll atrophy, it will get harder to live your liberty, and the day will come when you believe it's not worth the effort.

We know how to get out and walk, hike, and climb, but how does a person get their liberty exercise?

It's not hard, but you have been brainwashed to avoid it.

To begin with, don't comply with counterfeit rules.
Don't automatically believe "legal" means right and "illegal" means wrong- that is less true with each passing day.

Don't look to others to tell you what to do or not do. Work it out for yourself and accept the consequences of a wrong choice.

Politicians are the worst; attracted to positions they believe entitle them to control you. Don't listen to them; don't support them; ignore them when possible. Accept that no one can truly represent another person, and no person can ever represent thousands or millions. You don't need to be represented anyway. You know better.

Don't keep the habit of obeying people who claim to possess the magical quality they call "authority"- they are invariably bullies without a lick of sense. Most wouldn't know the right thing if they stepped in it, unless they thought someone would notice and praise them.

Don't respect the contemptible; don't honor the dishonorable. Respect and honor are to be earned, not given away cheaply. Often those demanding your respect and honor are monsters who believe they deserve to be put on a pedestal regardless of what they do. Let the pedestal topple without your support.

Don't bully others for making choices you'd rather they not make-- as long as they aren't violating an innocent person. Respect the private property of others. Keep your word, but don't feel obligated to keep an agreement the other party has already broken.
Do the right thing, even when it's not the popular choice.

It will take practice, but you can do it. With practice self-determination will come more easily. Before long, it will come as naturally as bending knee before the State once did.

.

Complying under threat

That I sometimes comply with the demands of bullies doesn't make the bullies or their demands legitimate- it means I know when I'm outgunned.

But that situation is always fluid. If you act like a bully, you are a bully, and if are a bully, you can never, ever sleep.

- 

Please consider supporting this blog and me, its author. The options are there to the right.

.

Believing as a child would

I was brought up to believe that obeying the law was good, and right, and easy.

Imagine my shock when I first realized that sometimes obeying the law didn't make you a good person.

The shock was compounded when I realized that obeying the law was sometimes wrong.

Later I discovered that not only is it not easy to obey the law, sometimes it is downright impossible, what with laws that conflict and contradict each other.

This caused cognitive and ethical troubles for a little while.

But before long I realized that being "law abiding" is NOT a positive thing. In fact, it's an admission of guilt. It's proclaiming that you have no ethical foundation, but believe that the "law" is good, right, and easy. Just like a small, simple child might.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). They are there to the right. I am grateful for every little bit.

.

Scary beliefs

I don't fear races, nationalities, or whatever.

I fear beliefs. Especially false beliefs people will follow to theft and aggression. And every belief which leads to theft and aggression is false. Without fail.

It doesn't matter what those beliefs are based on- it matters where they lead.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). They are there to the right. I am grateful for every little bit.

The uncivilized religion

Government should operate like other religions.

I don't care what rules the churches in town or across the country make up for their members. Because (until you mix in statism) those churches don't pretend their rules apply to anyone but their members.

I don't worry about who they hire as their preacher or choir director. Their opinions on drugs, sex, rock and roll, or anything else are completely irrelevant to me.

Well, I don't belong to the Church of State, either, but the rude bullies in that particular cult believe their internal drama should apply to me as well as to their members.

 They are uniquely uncivilized.

- 

Support? It would be very nice to have a whole lot of small-amount subscribers- just in case you haven't subscribed because you can't afford much. Follow the big, blue arrow to see support options. Thanks!

Government prevents health care

Last week I got turned away from the doctor's office because I couldn't pay the fees not covered by my insurance. I was supposed to be getting the followup for the lab tests I had done about a month ago.

Now, I'm not really complaining- I don't want doctors (or anyone else) to be enslaved to me; providing their services for nothing. They don't "owe" me that.

However, if not for the DEA, FDA, and other State bullies, I could run to the store and buy my blood pressure medicine (which I have been on since my kidney stone last year) off the shelf, without seeking permission. I could ask the pharmacist for advice about using it correctly.

And that's not all.

In a free society you and I would be able to walk into any corner drug store and buy any drugs we want or need. Just hand over the money and walk out- without showing ID or a permission slip. Heroin, aspirin, Cannabis, Sudafed, birth control pills, cocaine, cough medicine, or "homeopathic medicines"- and then be responsible if we harm ourselves or anyone else due to using or abusing them. The scam of regulating drugs is evil.

Health care is a right- as long as you obtain what you want without theft or coercion. It is not an imaginary entitlement that someone is forced to provide you with.

In a free society I could search and find medical care that I could afford. It would be more affordable for everyone without the government's medical professional rationing scheme. There are ways to certify medical professionals and medications without the State being the monopoly who approves them.

When socialists decry the cost of healthcare they look for blame everywhere except for where the blame truly lies. I know where the unnecessary expense lies, and who is ultimately responsible for me not being able to afford it.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

3D printing freedom

The older (and wiser?) I get, the more I despise imprisonment.

I've detailed the reasons in the past.

If you believe there are good justifications for human cages and supporting them through theft, and that it's worth the problems inherent in that sort of thing, please ignore this.

I was recently made aware of a nearby prison's main entry key being lost. In my twisted mind, the first thing I thought of was that I hoped someone could scan the key and put the 3D printer plans to copy it out there on the internet.

Then I realized that would be a wonderful thing to do with every prison key that could be surreptitiously scanned! Just imagine if every prison key in existence were available for download.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

.

Not buying religion of government

(My Clovis News Journal column for February 26, 2016)

The Declaration of Independence says "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

How's that working for you? Judging by the current situation, about as well as any superstition does.

You might as well declare "Everyone needs good food-- to guarantee healthy crops, we sacrifice babies to the Volcano Spirit."

Same sort of nonsense, based on the same kind of lies.

Belief in government-- the State-- is a religion- the world's most popular religion. It competes with all other religions, even when the faithful believe otherwise.

You can perform rituals with good intentions, but believing those rituals cause the outcome you want, although unrelated by cause and effect, is an example of magical thinking. You are establishing a government-- the natural enemy of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"-- to protect Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Might government be a "necessary evil"? If it is necessary, it can't be evil. If it is evil, it can't be necessary. Since government can't exist without theft (euphemistically called "taxation" and property codes) and without throwing the first punch (which is what most "law enforcement" is), it can't be good.

Faith in government also shows an utter denial of human nature- although the faithful would gnash their teeth at the suggestion.

People claim that because humans do bad things and can't be trusted, governments must be established to control them. I'm not sure where the people who make up government will come from, if not from the population of people who can't be trusted to behave themselves. If you set up a club where people can steal and attack from behind a veil of legitimacy, usually without consequence, what sort of person do you believe this club will attract?

Or, do you believe human nature will magically be improved by collecting people who are attracted to power into one big group and giving them power?

In America, the Constitution was supposed to set boundaries which could never be crossed as a way to restrain the nature of government. It didn't work. The Constitution was violated almost before the ink was dry. Today there is no prohibition on government power-- as the Bill of Rights was intended to be-- which remains intact. So, what's your next big idea?

.

Being disarmed can lead to being soft and useless

Yet another observation from Machiavelli:

"But when you disarm them, you at once offend them by showing that you distrust them, either for cowardice or for want of loyalty, and either of these opinions breeds hatred against you. ... But when a prince acquires a new state, which he adds as a province to his old one, then it is necessary to disarm the men of that state, except those who have been his adherents in acquiring it; and these again, with time and opportunity, should be rendered soft and effeminate..." Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince, Chapter XX, 1513)

Yes, complying with anti-gun "laws" does often make one contemptible, soft, and effeminate. And useless. And, therefore, easier to control. Is that how you want to be? Not me.

I'm not even sure the US government and its local accomplices attempt to disarm people because they believe the population to be cowardly. In fact, I think their fears may be just the opposite; that the people won't be cowardly, but will be noble and brave and drive out the cowards who want to rule.

Which brings us to the "lack of loyalty" part, which I would agree with. But only an idiot or an evil person is loyal to evil rulers. Loyalty, like respect, is worse than worthless if it is given to those who haven't earned it. Government earns contempt, not loyalty.

So, yes, I am offended when evil monsters try to disarm anyone. It's right to be offended by harmful actions, just as it is silly to be offended by words or opinions.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

Campaign stress

(Previously posted to Patreon...
Subscriptions are as cheap as you make them! Look at your options to the right; Paypal buttons and below. A Patreon subscription gets you access to everything published there so far. Even a one-time GoFundMe donation will get you access for a month. Go ahead- jump on it!)

Sure seems like people are causing themselves a lot of unnecessary stress by paying attention to the presidential campaigns.

I get it- some bully is going to be "elected" president, and will be put into a position where he can do things harmful to you. You may believe the best way to minimize the damage is to stay "informed".

When it comes to politicians, there is no such thing as "informed". You will be misinformed in various ways, though. How your specific misinforming takes shape depends on who you happen to get your "information" from. But it's all misinformation or disinformation. Even if you get it first hand!

The only thing you really need to know is that they are all nothing but bullies. Any "authority" they achieve by landing the "job" as the "nation's" primary tax junkie is imaginary. The "authority" only exists to the extent you pretend it exists.

Your life would probably be improved more by ignoring the pageant and doing things that actually matter. Such as learning skills, hoarding money (precious metals, durable trade goods, ammo, etc.), buying and training with guns, and making local friends you can trust. And, doing other things you enjoy! These things matter a lot more than which particular puppet sits at the desk in the Oval Office.

One thing I have noticed is that the predictions of doom if So-&-So is elected never actually come to pass. Yes, each president is a little worse than the one who came before him- since they all continue the bad stuff their predecessors did and build more bad stuff on top of that. But, the specific president is spectacularly unimportant to the whole process. He (or she) is a figurehead. The real State isn't going to even notice which particular bump in the road is holding the office.

And I suggest you do the same.

There are so many ways you can increase your own power over your destiny. You can't control everything, but the more you prepare, the better your chance of weathering whatever comes along.

I don't want you to be frustrated and worried. I think there are better ways to live your life. Wouldn't you agree?

.

"Touched" by a devil

As previously mentioned, I recently read The Prince. A few things really caught my eye.

"And when neither their property nor their honor is touched, the majority of men live content, and he has only to contend with the ambition of a few, whom he can curb with ease in many ways." ~ Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince, Chapter XIX, 1513)

Either this is no longer true, or bad times are ahead for the bad guys of the US, who have spent well over 100 years "touching"-- molesting-- the honor and property of everyone in America.

It's a shame that people can't be roused to action by seeing others "touched". Maybe that is part of my problem- it doesn't have to be personal for me to take it personally. If I don't want it done to me, I don't want it done to you, either. Nor to my enemy. And I will speak up.

Of course, that brings to mind another quote: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." – H.L. Mencken

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

The difference between statism and me

Guess what- there are things I don't like. Yet, I have no desire to impose my likes or dislikes on anyone else.

I don't like pit bulls. But I would never advocate banning them.

I don't like drug abuse. But I wouldn't advocate criminalizing it or caging people for doing it.

I don't like rap music. Or sports. Or "excessive" tattoos. Or loud cars. Or crew cuts. Or business suits. The list could go on and on. Everyone has a long list of "don't likes". Yours won't be the same as mine. You and I will justify our opinions to ourselves, and to others if asked, but that justification comes down to there being some things certain people don't like, but others do. It's purely subjective.

There is no right answer to "do you like...?" as long as you aren't talking about aggression or property violation. Even if you "like" to attack people or steal their property or trespass (in which case you may have a career in "law enforcement")- you have no right to do so, and your victims would be right to kill you in order to stop you.

But, everything else is just a matter of opinion. Even if your opinion is very strong and popular.

This difference was illustrated quite clearly by the case of the woman recently arrested in North Carolina for having sex with her dog. I don't "agree with" people engaging in sex with non-human animals. I wouldn't do it. I would probably avoid anyone I knew had done such a thing. But I don't support sending cops to arrest her. An "arrest" is a violent kidnapping. If you resist being kidnapped by bullies with badges you will be murdered by them. All "laws" are ultimately a threat to kill anyone who defies the opinions of ethical cripples and moral degenerates. Why can't you dislike things without thinking it's OK to rob people in the name of "taxation" and then use their stolen money to violate their liberty?

I understand the disgust certain acts trigger. I even agree in many cases. But to then turn your disgust into an excuse to violate others is really sick.

Just who do the people who applaud this woman's arrest believe she victimized? The dog? Rights aren't applicable across species lines. You have no right to not be eaten by a bear and a deer has no right to not be shot by a hunter. I don't trust people who are cruel to animals, but they haven't violated any other person.

Maybe some of them believe she has victimized herself. That is up to her to decide. Either people own themselves, or they are slaves owned by someone else. If she owns herself, then she is within her rights to use her body and life as she sees fit, as long as she isn't violating someone else. Up to and including destroying herself.

Or perhaps "society" or "community standards" have been harmed. If this is the case I'll slap you right in your aura for believing in such a silly concept.

It's not that I am arguing that sex with dogs should be legal; it's that it shouldn't be illegal. Even though I find it disgusting. I know where my boundaries lie. Apparently statists don't. And I suppose that's the real difference between statism and me.

.

Ignorance and statism

Ignorance leads to statism. The more I learn- really LEARN- the further from statism I move. Decreasing ignorance makes statism wither. I suppose the opposite is probably also true, although I have yet to actually meet anyone who gets more ignorant with time (barring a stroke or other brain malfunction), but I know lots of people who remain static in their ignorance and in their embrace of statism.

This pattern I have noticed in myself has gone on for years. Is it likely that I will eventually learn enough new things to change the pattern? To begin seeing benefits in statism that aren't outweighed by the negatives? I suppose it's possible, but not likely.

I'm not saying I know everything. Far from it. I try to learn new things all the time- whether I like the implications of what I learn or not.

So far I see no hints of things, in front of me or just beyond the horizon, that would support the idea that statism is ethical or helps humanity.

The bad things I do learn may indicate that humans are prone to statism. It might be "natural" for most of them. It may take many generations for this to change. That doesn't make it in any way good or ethical.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

Christian liberty posters

Although I am somewhat hostile toward religion, I am not hostile towards individuals who follow religions- as long as they don't use their faith as justification for aggression and theft.

In the spirit of reaching out to my principled Christian friends I made a few illustrations to help them get the point across.

I hope they like them, and can use them. Feel free to copy and use them however you see fit.

(Yeah, this one is iffy. So many seem to believe The State- "America"- to be the source of wealth and prosperity, and worship it for this reason. I still think it works, but you may not.)

Dangerous times for truth and honesty

They say it is dangerous to be right when government is wrong.

It is also dangerous to even question whether government might be wrong, when even other liberty lovers are anxious to throw you to the wolves.

It is dangerous to point out that people are using words incorrectly, ignorantly accusing a person of something by buying into the statist definition which is demonstrably incorrect. But it won't matter because "Emotion!".

It is so dangerous to even mention this that I can't go into further details without being accused of being guilty of the same thing- because I'm seeing it happen to others right now.

I know this is frustratingly cryptic, and I apologize. But as I say, I don't feel like facing the wrath of statists AND liberty-lovers who have bought the State's lies. I just feel really bad for those who spoke up and are suffering because of it.

.

Recent protests missed right target

(My Clovis News Journal column for February 19, 2016)

The past couple of years have seen various protests against out-of-control government employees and agencies. Earlier it was the "Black lives matter" protests of deadly police encounters; more recently, ranchers protesting abuse by the Bureau of Land Management.

These protests miss the mark-- sometimes tragically.

Rule number one: When you protest, make sure you target the enemy, not bystanders.

While I agree "Black lives matter", I couldn't support the protesters when they vandalized, looted, and burned the property of those who were not their enemy. The residents affected by the protests came to fear the protesters, who instead of laying siege to the police station and courthouse, attacked the property of people who were not the problem. They alienated potential allies, causing them to beg for more police in the area. Just fanning the flames. Targeting the innocent is aggression, and cheapens your life, whoever you are.

Rule number two: Be consistent. I agree that the Bureau of Land Management is an abusive, rights-violating gang of bullies. Its buildings-- occupied by the protesters-- were built on stolen land with stolen money. But you lose credibility when you protest under the flag of your enemy; venerating your enemy's symbols.

So, although the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge protesters had the right target, they fumbled on principles.

The only aggression in the attempt to reclaim the wildlife refuge from the agency was committed by the government enforcers, who ultimately committed the only homicide to result.

In both protests, death came at the hands of government employees, and the killers got away with it. How would it turn out for you or I had we done the same thing?

Ranchers have a long history of being abused by government, sharing this common ground with residents of poor neighborhoods who have also experienced a long history of abuse at the hands of government employees.

Both share a common enemy, and I'm sad neither of them notice they should be on the same side. If only they'd move past the divisions which have been manufactured to keep them from uniting against the real enemy. And keep their protests free of hypocrisy and aggression.

Don't copy the behavior of the bad guys. Be above it. Join with others who have been similarly violated where you can find common ground. Together, we outnumber them. Let them come to that horrifying realization, and maybe things will improve once they know they can't get away with it anymore.

.

Legitimizing the enemy

No, I am not a Trump supporter. Nor even a presidency supporter. I don't "need" a president. I don't want a president. And- funny thing- I am old enough to have noticed presidents don't actually affect me in any way. No matter who they are.

But, I'm still enjoying watching Trump's campaign.

One of the most fascinating things about Trump's candidacy is how it is bringing out the absolute worst in those who oppose him. With their behavior they are doing more to advance his campaign than his supporters could ever hope to do without their help.

Basically they are making his point for him- whatever it is his supporters believe his point to be.

This illustrates why you'll never see me out protesting "government"; screaming and waving a sign in the face of pro-government extremists. Don't give your enemy legitimacy. Don't give him something to point at and convince his supporters to fear- something he can promise to protect them from.

.

Everyone is "liberal"

Just as silly as "Right vs Left" is the idea of "conservative vs liberal".

Simply, the "conservative" wants things to stay as they are, and the "liberal" (or "progressive") wants change.

But, there are no political people who don't vary on that point, depending on the topic.

Some want anti-gun "laws" to increase, some want them to decrease. Some want "taxation" to go up, some want it to go down, and some want it to be recognized as theft and go away. Everyone is a "liberal"- no one wants everything to stay exactly the same.

There may be some who are truly "conservative" on an issue or two, and who want that one thing to stay the same, but even these people want "progress"- however they might define it- in other areas.

Now, some want things to go back to "how they were", or to how they imagine them to have once been. That's not conservative, either, since it still involved radical change.

Me, I'd like to take the best things from the past, keep the best things from the present, and add the best things the future can come up with to maximize human liberty and minimize aggression and theft. Yes, that's very liberal and progressive, so unlike the statists who call themselves "liberal" or "progressive" but are really just statists who only want to change things toward more draconian control of everything that they fear or hate.

.

Welcome to the Zombie Apocalypse

In a lot of ways it feels as though I am living through a personal Zombie Apocalypse. But no one around me is experiencing things the same way I am. (That's always going to be true, regardless.) To panic would look odd to observers.

I am living in circumstances that test me. Circumstances others, perhaps, wouldn't think anything of.

When I can view it as a survival situation- honing my skills, etc.- I do OK.

Other times it is overwhelming and I am tempted to give up and let the zombies eat me. These are the times I have no corresponding skills to use. I need new skills.

Fortunately, it's not all one or the other, but a combination. And, if anyone wishes to help blow the heads off a few of the pursuing Zombies, I will always appreciate it.

And, it makes me realize others are being chased by zombies I can't see. Zombies that maybe I can help them fend off. If they'll ask.

A lot of people seem to see election season in this way- I wish I could help them see those zombies are an illusion. Or give them the tools to use to behead the zombies if they are real. We all fear the zombies we have no weapons against, and laugh about the ones we know can't touch us.

And we all see only our own zombies.

.

"Anarchist!" Not an insult

(Previously posted to Patreon. Please subscribe!)

That moment when a statist calls you an anarchist, thinking it's an insult rather than an admission you're a better person than he.

I was trying to remind people to not hate supporters of presidential candidates, but to pity them. They are, after all, pitiable creatures; tying their fortune and reputation to demonstrably evil, lying people.

Somehow the conversation turned to hating cops, or not, based on the specious claim that cops are people too, with good or bad, just like everyone else.

I pointed out that it is the cops' actions that make them bad. If there can be "good cops", then there can also be "good rapists". The act is what defines the label; nothing else. And, while cops and rapists both, by definition, violate people to be what we identify them to be, rapists don't demand thanks and respect for doing so. This makes rapists ethically superior to cops.

This didn't sit well with one particular guy.

Quickly the rhetoric was escalated. In a flurry of posts I was asked whether I want the Constitution, or law enforcement of any kind. (No, I don't!) He also made the fatal statist error: If I don't want cops, then obviously I don't want accidents to be taken care of and removed from the roadways. I don't want roads or emergency medical response or fires to be fought. I don't want anything associated with "protect and serve". I don't want anyone to help anyone else.

After I wiped the tears of laughter from my eyes, and reminded him that cops only protect and serve themselves and the bullies who steal the money to pay their salaries, I asked why he believes only tax junkies can respnd to emergencies.

But it was too late. He had called me an anarchist and blocked me.

He believes "anarchist" to be an insult!

Because I don't believe I have the right to enslave, nor the obligation to allow myself to be enslaved, I am somehow bad? Because I respect the property rights of others, recognizing that no imaginary "collective rights" can override them, I should feel ashamed? Because I neither agree to rule or be ruled, I am the bad guy?

Statists are insane.

.