-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Monday, August 01, 2016
The Truth
Those who want me to doubt that anarchy (self ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking me to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are perhaps better.
Don't worry. It won't happen because it hasn't yet.
Just as soon as someone reassures me that because something bad hasn't happened yet, it's not ever going to happen... it happens. This happens to me personally all the time. Yay, right? I don't like being reassured because of this trend.
So, I wonder if that applies in the larger world as well. The US dollar hasn't yet experienced hyperinflation- even though by all measure, it should... so will it simply because "experts" assure me it won't?
And, I wonder if it might apply for things that would arguably be bad, but which I wouldn't mind seeing. Like a nice solar flare knocking out technology for a while. Tell me that it won't happen because it hasn't happened. (I know about the Carrington Event.)
Of course, I tend to believe that this also might mean that good things which haven't yet happened are always a possibility. Maybe not today, or this year, but sometime. Conditions change, even if humans really don't. What was nearly impossible a century ago, might be likely tomorrow. It might even have already started and be unstoppable.
So, I wonder if that applies in the larger world as well. The US dollar hasn't yet experienced hyperinflation- even though by all measure, it should... so will it simply because "experts" assure me it won't?
And, I wonder if it might apply for things that would arguably be bad, but which I wouldn't mind seeing. Like a nice solar flare knocking out technology for a while. Tell me that it won't happen because it hasn't happened. (I know about the Carrington Event.)
Of course, I tend to believe that this also might mean that good things which haven't yet happened are always a possibility. Maybe not today, or this year, but sometime. Conditions change, even if humans really don't. What was nearly impossible a century ago, might be likely tomorrow. It might even have already started and be unstoppable.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Sunday, July 31, 2016
Harping on cops
I really hate focusing on cops so much recently. But... cops are THE biggest threat to Rightful Liberty and a voluntary society. Nothing else even comes close. Not a president, not federal judges, not congress. Nothing else.
Cops are where the boot heel of tyranny meets the human face.
Cops are how politicians impose their arbitrary opinions on you and me.
Cops are the occupying army of domestic enemies we should have been fighting off before they got too big to beat. Or, at least, too big to beat without becoming a martyr.
Cops are nothing but a criminal gang- criminal in the real sense, not the artificial "legal" sense.
Exposing the reality of what cops are and what they do is important. The veil of legitimacy that too many people allow cops to hide behind must be undercut. Good people need to be shown why supporting cops is wrong. People who traditionally have thrown unwavering support behind cops need to be shown why it is long past time to wise up and stop doing so.
"Cop" isn't a person- it is a set of behaviors, just like "rapist". Don't commit the acts and you aren't the bad guy. If you stop committing rapes, you aren't a rapist. If you stop committing acts of "law enforcement", you are no longer a cop. But, no one can refuse to commit the acts and expect to remain a cop for long. And, stopping doesn't erase the debt your past acts have created- although I'm willing to forgive a lot, if the violator is truly sorry and repudiates his past actions, and doesn't return to his evil ways.
Being honest about cops has cost me. Personally and financially. But I couldn't live with myself if I turned a blind eye to the evil that is "policing".
So, yes, I am likely to keep harping on it.
Cops are where the boot heel of tyranny meets the human face.
Cops are how politicians impose their arbitrary opinions on you and me.
Cops are the occupying army of domestic enemies we should have been fighting off before they got too big to beat. Or, at least, too big to beat without becoming a martyr.
Cops are nothing but a criminal gang- criminal in the real sense, not the artificial "legal" sense.
Exposing the reality of what cops are and what they do is important. The veil of legitimacy that too many people allow cops to hide behind must be undercut. Good people need to be shown why supporting cops is wrong. People who traditionally have thrown unwavering support behind cops need to be shown why it is long past time to wise up and stop doing so.
"Cop" isn't a person- it is a set of behaviors, just like "rapist". Don't commit the acts and you aren't the bad guy. If you stop committing rapes, you aren't a rapist. If you stop committing acts of "law enforcement", you are no longer a cop. But, no one can refuse to commit the acts and expect to remain a cop for long. And, stopping doesn't erase the debt your past acts have created- although I'm willing to forgive a lot, if the violator is truly sorry and repudiates his past actions, and doesn't return to his evil ways.
Being honest about cops has cost me. Personally and financially. But I couldn't live with myself if I turned a blind eye to the evil that is "policing".
So, yes, I am likely to keep harping on it.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Saturday, July 30, 2016
Market for aggression
(I know the video is dark and back-lit, but I was going for something different, and looking at me isn't really the goal here, anyway.)
There will always be a market for theft and aggression, because people want the benefits it can gain them without taking the risk of doing the evil themselves. So, people without principles will offer to commit aggression and theft for a price to meet that "need".
Cops are one example, but not the only one.
Mafia hit men, government troops, and anyone else who commits violence- in exchange for money or favors- against someone who isn't already using violence (no matter how much you might dislike the peaceable, property respecting things they are doing) is marketing aggression.
And that can't be preemptively prohibited without crippling the rest of the market. You can't legitimately "prohibit" anything, anyway.
However, what you can do (although it isn't always wise) is defend yourself from those aggressors. You always have that right, no matter what anyone tells you.
The current cost of aggression is artificially low. Especially if you can pretend to be a "legitimate employee of government" [sic]. If the cost were raised to where it reflected the reality, fewer people would be able to afford the services of aggression peddlers, fewer aggression peddlers would remain in business, and society would be better off.
Self defense against aggressors (and thieves) is the way to raise the cost back to where it should be. At least, if self defense occurs regularly enough, some will get out of the aggression market, or choose to find an honest job, instead.
Considering that Utopia isn't an option, that's probably the best outcome possible.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Thursday, July 28, 2016
Fred Reed goes all copsucker on us
Fred's off his rocker this time.
"Do you know any cops? Have you ever known any? I mean known them well enough to have a beer with after work, or to invite to a get-together at your house. Have you ever really talked to a cop?"
Yep. It was a big part of my education and wake-up call where cops are concerned.
"Has it ever occurred to you that there might be another side of the story?"
Yep. Rapists have a side to their story too. I don't have to become a rapist to know rape is wrong.
"Now, why don’t you know any cops? For at least two reasons. As a Pathologically Virtuous White (PVW), you are almost certainly a college graduate."
As I say, I have known cops (and ex-cops who loathe cops more than I do). And, no, I am not a college graduate.
"Further, cops are masculine,..."
LOL. O... kay...
"They are conservative and like guns."
They are statists who love Big Government, and only like guns in their hands. Cops are NOT the individual gun owner's friend. Who do you think enforces the anti-gun "laws"? It's not Obama or Chuckie Schumer.
"So you know nothing about them, their jobs, or the conditions in which they work. Especially the latter."
Again, do I have to walk a mile in a rapist's shoes to condemn rape?
"On the street, cops have to be hard-nosed or they lose their authority."
"Authority" is a superstition. The most dangerous one.
"Citizens are a pain in the ass when interacting with cops. They will lie, argue, bluster, threaten, and weasel."
Cops lie. It is an accepted part of their "job"- even under oath in government courtrooms. "Citizens" should be truthful to pathological liars?
"Now, let us go off the deep end and imagine that you,were required to don a cop’s uniform and spend three months walking a foot beat with a real cop in, say, Newark or Chicago or Detroit, downtown. How would this affect your mind?"
Yes, it would damage my mind to commit acts of enforcement. Might I begin to believe I have to right to impose arbitrary demands on people? Sure. That's why I wouldn't lower myself to become a cop. Or a rapist. Just because you can see things from the bad guy's perspective doesn't mean you are innocent when committing the acts that define a bad guy.
"People would not look friendly, especially the young men."
How should people look when confronted with a predator? A predator with a license to kill, who will demand compliance and molest you for doing things you have every right to do, and will then get a paid vacation and be found "innocent of any wrongdoing" no matter how much evidence is against him?
"You will realize that the police are not heavily armed thugs intimidating a helpless and cowering black public."
Right, they are heavily armed thugs intimidating a helpless and cowering... everyone who isn't them.
"Cops are vulnerable. Anybody passing you on the street could stick an ice pick into you, or blow your head off from behind."
So quit. Find an honest job that doesn't make you the enemy of the public.
"Hanging out at the Fraternal Order of Police, you would find that most cops are likable. This discovery would probably disturb you."
Not at all. Most cops are nice, but none are good. If they weren't nice- especially to their own gang, they wouldn't survive. It's common sense.
"You will see things that will change you."
Undoubtedly. But to molest people because you have psychological scars isn't excusable.
"But you would know what you were talking about–and you would find it a novel experience."
Because until you become a rapist, you have no right to criticize rape.
Sorry Fred, but this time you went full potato. I hope it passes.
"Do you know any cops? Have you ever known any? I mean known them well enough to have a beer with after work, or to invite to a get-together at your house. Have you ever really talked to a cop?"
Yep. It was a big part of my education and wake-up call where cops are concerned.
"Has it ever occurred to you that there might be another side of the story?"
Yep. Rapists have a side to their story too. I don't have to become a rapist to know rape is wrong.
"Now, why don’t you know any cops? For at least two reasons. As a Pathologically Virtuous White (PVW), you are almost certainly a college graduate."
As I say, I have known cops (and ex-cops who loathe cops more than I do). And, no, I am not a college graduate.
"Further, cops are masculine,..."
LOL. O... kay...
"They are conservative and like guns."
They are statists who love Big Government, and only like guns in their hands. Cops are NOT the individual gun owner's friend. Who do you think enforces the anti-gun "laws"? It's not Obama or Chuckie Schumer.
"So you know nothing about them, their jobs, or the conditions in which they work. Especially the latter."
Again, do I have to walk a mile in a rapist's shoes to condemn rape?
"On the street, cops have to be hard-nosed or they lose their authority."
"Authority" is a superstition. The most dangerous one.
"Citizens are a pain in the ass when interacting with cops. They will lie, argue, bluster, threaten, and weasel."
Cops lie. It is an accepted part of their "job"- even under oath in government courtrooms. "Citizens" should be truthful to pathological liars?
"Now, let us go off the deep end and imagine that you,were required to don a cop’s uniform and spend three months walking a foot beat with a real cop in, say, Newark or Chicago or Detroit, downtown. How would this affect your mind?"
Yes, it would damage my mind to commit acts of enforcement. Might I begin to believe I have to right to impose arbitrary demands on people? Sure. That's why I wouldn't lower myself to become a cop. Or a rapist. Just because you can see things from the bad guy's perspective doesn't mean you are innocent when committing the acts that define a bad guy.
"People would not look friendly, especially the young men."
How should people look when confronted with a predator? A predator with a license to kill, who will demand compliance and molest you for doing things you have every right to do, and will then get a paid vacation and be found "innocent of any wrongdoing" no matter how much evidence is against him?
"You will realize that the police are not heavily armed thugs intimidating a helpless and cowering black public."
Right, they are heavily armed thugs intimidating a helpless and cowering... everyone who isn't them.
"Cops are vulnerable. Anybody passing you on the street could stick an ice pick into you, or blow your head off from behind."
So quit. Find an honest job that doesn't make you the enemy of the public.
"Hanging out at the Fraternal Order of Police, you would find that most cops are likable. This discovery would probably disturb you."
Not at all. Most cops are nice, but none are good. If they weren't nice- especially to their own gang, they wouldn't survive. It's common sense.
"You will see things that will change you."
Undoubtedly. But to molest people because you have psychological scars isn't excusable.
"But you would know what you were talking about–and you would find it a novel experience."
Because until you become a rapist, you have no right to criticize rape.
Sorry Fred, but this time you went full potato. I hope it passes.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Time's Up, plus 10 years
It was 10 years ago this summer that I created the Time's Up flag. I don't remember the exact date- although if I looked back through some photos and such I could figure it out within a day or two. It's not that important.
But, I know exactly where I was when the idea of making the Gadsden flag's snake stop rattling and strike first hit me.
I was sitting in a folding chair, in front of my parents' motorhome, in an RV park on the western outskirts of Albuquerque. I was looking at the Gadsden flag flapping on the front of the motorhome- I had hung it there to balance out the federal flag my dad likes to display.
I was thinking "Don't tread on me? That snake has been tread on nonstop for over 200 years, and he's still just sitting there rattling about it. It's about time he took action."
So, I pulled a scrap of paper out of my pocket and sketched it out. Then tried to decide the best wording to put under the striking snake. Besides "Time's Up", I thought of "Liberty" and a few other things. But my friends on The Claire Files forum helped me settle on "Time's Up".
I have had the flags made and sold them. I have had patches made for sale, too. I have let people use the design on shirts, caps, and flags to sell. I have seen modifications of my original design that I liked, and have seen some modifications I didn't like. I have seen the flag used (with my permission) in comic strips. I have seen it used as people's profile picture on social media- by people who wouldn't have any clue about who I am, and wouldn't care if they did know. I have seen the design embraced by people who wouldn't like the principles behind it, such as "Tea Party conservatives". I have also seen it used by people who "get it".
I may not have made many real contributions in my life, but I think the Time's Up flag may be the one contribution which will outlive me.
But, I know exactly where I was when the idea of making the Gadsden flag's snake stop rattling and strike first hit me.
I was sitting in a folding chair, in front of my parents' motorhome, in an RV park on the western outskirts of Albuquerque. I was looking at the Gadsden flag flapping on the front of the motorhome- I had hung it there to balance out the federal flag my dad likes to display.
I was thinking "Don't tread on me? That snake has been tread on nonstop for over 200 years, and he's still just sitting there rattling about it. It's about time he took action."
So, I pulled a scrap of paper out of my pocket and sketched it out. Then tried to decide the best wording to put under the striking snake. Besides "Time's Up", I thought of "Liberty" and a few other things. But my friends on The Claire Files forum helped me settle on "Time's Up".
 |
| The first version |
 |
| The updated version |
I have had the flags made and sold them. I have had patches made for sale, too. I have let people use the design on shirts, caps, and flags to sell. I have seen modifications of my original design that I liked, and have seen some modifications I didn't like. I have seen the flag used (with my permission) in comic strips. I have seen it used as people's profile picture on social media- by people who wouldn't have any clue about who I am, and wouldn't care if they did know. I have seen the design embraced by people who wouldn't like the principles behind it, such as "Tea Party conservatives". I have also seen it used by people who "get it".
I may not have made many real contributions in my life, but I think the Time's Up flag may be the one contribution which will outlive me.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
You know what would be really helpful right about now?
I've been trying to avoid writing a post specifically to ask for money, however... donations are down and subscriptions are, too. But the cats still need to eat, and my daughter still needs and/or wants some things (and so do I), we still need gasoline to get to where we need to go, and there are still way too many bills to pay.
So, if you can, and only if you want to, please make a one time donation or become a subscriber. There are a few options over there to the right.
If you can't or don't want to, no problem. I understand both.
Thank you to all my donors and subscribers for all you have done!
.
So, if you can, and only if you want to, please make a one time donation or become a subscriber. There are a few options over there to the right.
If you can't or don't want to, no problem. I understand both.
Thank you to all my donors and subscribers for all you have done!
.
Don't live down to the expectations
I care that you live by the Zero Aggression Principle and don't violate property.
I don't care about your "race", gender/sex, culture, job, wealth, "nationality", or anything else... as long as you live by the Zero Aggression Principle and don't violate property.
It's so simple.
However, if you use any of those trivial (or imaginary) categories mentioned above as justification for initiating force and violating property, I'm not going to excuse you based on your "race", gender/sex, culture, job, wealth, "nationality", or anything else, either. I know you can be a good person, and I expect you to live up to it.
When you use those excuses as justification for initiating force or violating property you are also spitting on others who don't commit those acts, but who will probably be unfairly grouped with you by ignorant observers.
None of those things require you to be an aggressor or a property violator- with the possible exception of your "job", and you are free to quit any "job" that requires you to be a bad person to do it. And you should.
You don't have to be a bad guy, no matter what you believe others expect of you. So, don't.
I don't care about your "race", gender/sex, culture, job, wealth, "nationality", or anything else... as long as you live by the Zero Aggression Principle and don't violate property.
It's so simple.
However, if you use any of those trivial (or imaginary) categories mentioned above as justification for initiating force and violating property, I'm not going to excuse you based on your "race", gender/sex, culture, job, wealth, "nationality", or anything else, either. I know you can be a good person, and I expect you to live up to it.
When you use those excuses as justification for initiating force or violating property you are also spitting on others who don't commit those acts, but who will probably be unfairly grouped with you by ignorant observers.
None of those things require you to be an aggressor or a property violator- with the possible exception of your "job", and you are free to quit any "job" that requires you to be a bad person to do it. And you should.
You don't have to be a bad guy, no matter what you believe others expect of you. So, don't.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always stepping up.
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
No one has right to violate others
(My Clovis News Journal column for June 24, 2016)
In the wake of the Orlando nightclub massacre, popular opinion seemed to blame either guns or the murderer's religion. It's good neither is subject to popular opinion, because opinion is fickle.
You have a right to choose and exercise your own religion, and you have a right to own and to carry any weapon you see fit, whether the majority agrees or not.
In fact, you have a natural human right to not be prevented from doing whatever you want as long as you aren't violating any other person's equal and identical rights while doing so. This is an infinite number of rights; more than could possibly be listed in one lifetime.
Your rights aren't dependent upon being written down on parchment. They exist even if government declares they don't. They exist even if cops arrest you and have you thrown in a prison cell for the rest of your life for exercising them. You aren't wrong for exercising your rights; government employees are wrong for violating them.
This is the nature of rights. They are not privileges. They are not subject to opinions or laws. They can't be limited, licensed, rationed, or eliminated for "the common good". They can only be respected or violated. The Bill of Rights, particularly the Ninth Amendment, was a failed attempt to put all your rights off-limits to government by making it a crime to violate them.
Government is the natural enemy of human rights; a predator, never a protector.
Use your freedom of religion as you wish, short of forcing others to live by your religion, through laws or threats. Laws based upon your religious ideals, which violate some other person's right to choose their own religion and not be subject to the edicts of yours, are wrong. It doesn't matter whether you use Christianity or Islam or Pastafarianism as the basis, if you impose your religion on others by law, you have become the bully.
Own and carry a gun of whatever type you choose, everywhere you go, openly or concealed, without asking government for permission, as is your natural right. Don't shoot at people who aren't harming or threatening anyone else, including those doing things your religion says are wrong.
No matter your excuse, you have no right to violate others, and anyone you violate has a right to defend themselves however they see fit. It's called liberty. It works, and is the mature way to live, but it isn't for cowards.
In the wake of the Orlando nightclub massacre, popular opinion seemed to blame either guns or the murderer's religion. It's good neither is subject to popular opinion, because opinion is fickle.
You have a right to choose and exercise your own religion, and you have a right to own and to carry any weapon you see fit, whether the majority agrees or not.
In fact, you have a natural human right to not be prevented from doing whatever you want as long as you aren't violating any other person's equal and identical rights while doing so. This is an infinite number of rights; more than could possibly be listed in one lifetime.
Your rights aren't dependent upon being written down on parchment. They exist even if government declares they don't. They exist even if cops arrest you and have you thrown in a prison cell for the rest of your life for exercising them. You aren't wrong for exercising your rights; government employees are wrong for violating them.
This is the nature of rights. They are not privileges. They are not subject to opinions or laws. They can't be limited, licensed, rationed, or eliminated for "the common good". They can only be respected or violated. The Bill of Rights, particularly the Ninth Amendment, was a failed attempt to put all your rights off-limits to government by making it a crime to violate them.
Government is the natural enemy of human rights; a predator, never a protector.
Use your freedom of religion as you wish, short of forcing others to live by your religion, through laws or threats. Laws based upon your religious ideals, which violate some other person's right to choose their own religion and not be subject to the edicts of yours, are wrong. It doesn't matter whether you use Christianity or Islam or Pastafarianism as the basis, if you impose your religion on others by law, you have become the bully.
Own and carry a gun of whatever type you choose, everywhere you go, openly or concealed, without asking government for permission, as is your natural right. Don't shoot at people who aren't harming or threatening anyone else, including those doing things your religion says are wrong.
No matter your excuse, you have no right to violate others, and anyone you violate has a right to defend themselves however they see fit. It's called liberty. It works, and is the mature way to live, but it isn't for cowards.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Blaming everything but the real problem
When I read "the news" I shake my head in disbelief and sadness at the utter stupidity documented therein. People blame everything under the sun, except that which causes the problems they screech about.
It's because they are dedicated to staying with what they believe they understand even though it is THE source of all they decry.
Until people see, admit, and accept the foundational problem, I don't expect anything they do to "solve" it to work.
There are a few things that can go a long ways toward fixing things: The Zero Aggression Principle (including the Covenant of Unanimous Consent), and shedding the superstitious belief in "authority", which should help you recover from the worship of bullies and gangsters that results from it, and their absurd opinions they'll gladly kill you over.
So, yeah, until people see, accept, and admit how they and their beliefs are causing the problems they whine about, not much will change. But they sure do look stupid yapping on and on about it all.
It's because they are dedicated to staying with what they believe they understand even though it is THE source of all they decry.
Until people see, admit, and accept the foundational problem, I don't expect anything they do to "solve" it to work.
There are a few things that can go a long ways toward fixing things: The Zero Aggression Principle (including the Covenant of Unanimous Consent), and shedding the superstitious belief in "authority", which should help you recover from the worship of bullies and gangsters that results from it, and their absurd opinions they'll gladly kill you over.
So, yeah, until people see, accept, and admit how they and their beliefs are causing the problems they whine about, not much will change. But they sure do look stupid yapping on and on about it all.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately, could use some more help; don't depend on the same people always stepping up, please.
Monday, July 25, 2016
Hating, without vengeance
(Previously posted to Patreon)
I admit, I have a hard time not hating certain people.
One of those is the guy my older daughter Cheyenne was with for about five years. In fact, she had only gotten away from him about a year before she died, and it was mostly due to him that I didn't see her the last 6 years of her life.
My relationship with him started badly. I texted with Cheyenne constantly, but soon after she got with him, I sent a text to her and immediately got an angry phone call, demanding to know "Who is this?"
I'll let you in on a secret- I utterly despise jealousy, considering it an early step on the path of abuse. I know, because I have lived through it on the abused side.
Well, I laid into him. He made excuses and tried to justify himself, and apparently considered this an apology, but he never changed. It was implied that I didn't like him due to "racism". when that wasn't even a consideration. If you know me, you would know how laughable that is.
During all this my contact with Cheyenne got very sporadic- almost to the point of being nonexistent. The 700 miles between us, and my lack of a reliable vehicle made that even worse.
He refused to let her have her own cell phone, even though she made her own money. He kept her off social media. I have the feeling she didn't get the things I sent through the mail- as she never acknowledged them. The few times I got to talk to her, she defended him. As did her mom. My ex wife said "He's OK... once you get to know him". My son cut off all contact with his mother and sister because of the guy.
After Cheyenne got away from him, I actually started being able to talk to her again. She started posting pictures of herself and her kids on Facebook. She found a wonderful man who made her very happy and treated her well- taking her out hunting and fishing and treating her like a dad wants to see his little girl treated. And treating her boys as his own. They were planning a visit to come see me this summer.
I had pretty much scrubbed the abusive jealous guy from my mind (even though he is the father of one of her boys).
And then she died in the car accident. That changed more than you might think.
Now my ex wife says my son was "100% right" about the jealous, controlling guy, and she's sorry she let him come between her and her son. But my son isn't yet ready to forgive- even though I have warned him he will regret it if he doesn't. His mother is a decent person, mostly. Even if she is a statist who says I'm "crazy".
I feel the jealous, controlling guy cheated my younger daughter and me out of sharing the last years of Cheyenne's life. I don't want to hate anyone, but I may hate him. When I think of him. Which I try not to do.
Even so, I wouldn't initiate force against him. I don't want him imprisoned or violated by police. I have no desire to see anyone "govern" him, although if he violates someone, I'm fine with them defending themselves from him. My personal feelings have no bearing on his rights, or the fact I would defend them. So, if I hate him, which I may, it probably only hurts me. It is something I'm going to need to work through.
.
I admit, I have a hard time not hating certain people.
One of those is the guy my older daughter Cheyenne was with for about five years. In fact, she had only gotten away from him about a year before she died, and it was mostly due to him that I didn't see her the last 6 years of her life.
My relationship with him started badly. I texted with Cheyenne constantly, but soon after she got with him, I sent a text to her and immediately got an angry phone call, demanding to know "Who is this?"
I'll let you in on a secret- I utterly despise jealousy, considering it an early step on the path of abuse. I know, because I have lived through it on the abused side.
Well, I laid into him. He made excuses and tried to justify himself, and apparently considered this an apology, but he never changed. It was implied that I didn't like him due to "racism". when that wasn't even a consideration. If you know me, you would know how laughable that is.
During all this my contact with Cheyenne got very sporadic- almost to the point of being nonexistent. The 700 miles between us, and my lack of a reliable vehicle made that even worse.
He refused to let her have her own cell phone, even though she made her own money. He kept her off social media. I have the feeling she didn't get the things I sent through the mail- as she never acknowledged them. The few times I got to talk to her, she defended him. As did her mom. My ex wife said "He's OK... once you get to know him". My son cut off all contact with his mother and sister because of the guy.
After Cheyenne got away from him, I actually started being able to talk to her again. She started posting pictures of herself and her kids on Facebook. She found a wonderful man who made her very happy and treated her well- taking her out hunting and fishing and treating her like a dad wants to see his little girl treated. And treating her boys as his own. They were planning a visit to come see me this summer.
I had pretty much scrubbed the abusive jealous guy from my mind (even though he is the father of one of her boys).
And then she died in the car accident. That changed more than you might think.
Now my ex wife says my son was "100% right" about the jealous, controlling guy, and she's sorry she let him come between her and her son. But my son isn't yet ready to forgive- even though I have warned him he will regret it if he doesn't. His mother is a decent person, mostly. Even if she is a statist who says I'm "crazy".
I feel the jealous, controlling guy cheated my younger daughter and me out of sharing the last years of Cheyenne's life. I don't want to hate anyone, but I may hate him. When I think of him. Which I try not to do.
Even so, I wouldn't initiate force against him. I don't want him imprisoned or violated by police. I have no desire to see anyone "govern" him, although if he violates someone, I'm fine with them defending themselves from him. My personal feelings have no bearing on his rights, or the fact I would defend them. So, if I hate him, which I may, it probably only hurts me. It is something I'm going to need to work through.
.
Starving while sitting at a buffet
If you saw people starving to death while surrounded by good food, would you sit by silently and watch them suffer?
What if they kept complaining about the food, saying it isn't what they want?
Personally, I would tell them the food is what they need to be eating. I would eat some to show them it isn't poisoned. And I would offer to serve them some. Then it's up to them. I wouldn't force feed them.
Well, people are dying of statism all around you right now. The solution is all around them- in order to avoid it, they have to actively reject it. They don't want liberty- it scares them in one way or another. It isn't what they want.
But I still tell them liberty is what they need for their condition. I live in liberty as much as is possible under the circumstances (even when "illegal" as much as I can without being murdered by cops). And, I offer to help serve them some liberty, just to get started. That's what my blog and newspaper column are all about.
But I wouldn't "force them to be free", even if such a ridiculous thing were possible.
What do you do?
What if they kept complaining about the food, saying it isn't what they want?
Personally, I would tell them the food is what they need to be eating. I would eat some to show them it isn't poisoned. And I would offer to serve them some. Then it's up to them. I wouldn't force feed them.
Well, people are dying of statism all around you right now. The solution is all around them- in order to avoid it, they have to actively reject it. They don't want liberty- it scares them in one way or another. It isn't what they want.
But I still tell them liberty is what they need for their condition. I live in liberty as much as is possible under the circumstances (even when "illegal" as much as I can without being murdered by cops). And, I offer to help serve them some liberty, just to get started. That's what my blog and newspaper column are all about.
But I wouldn't "force them to be free", even if such a ridiculous thing were possible.
What do you do?
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Sunday, July 24, 2016
Statists and "anti-police rhetoric"
Apparently, cops and copsuckers believe there is too much "anti-police rhetoric" these days, resulting in people having the gall to defend themselves from violation by cops. And it upsets the statists greatly. Poor babies.
They are getting their diapers all gooey over people who believe they are exempt from federal laws, income taxes, driver's licenses, gun "laws", and who knows what else.
People who believe the government is no longer legitimate.
People who either know the score, or are deluded into believing they can be a "sovereign citizen". (Ha ha!)
In other words, people who believe they are "above the law".
What a bizarre thing to fear. How minor in the grand scheme of things.
If those trivial things scare them, the bitter truth would literally terrify them out of their minds.
Let me clue you in:
You are exempt from all the above violations of life, liberty, and property.
No State (what you probably mean when you think of "government") can ever be legitimate.
And you are above all made-up, written down laws. Everyone is above the law, because the law is a poor substitute for individual rights and the emergent property, called society, which results. "The law" supposedly serves you, and as your servant, you are logically above it.
Doesn't mean bullies working for the government won't murder you for recognizing this, but the truth is the truth. None of this means you have any right to initiate force or to violate property, but self defense doesn't cross either line.
Cops are just another nasty gang. The big difference between cops and other thugs is that the cops have nicer stuff. Shiny signs telling what you are "required" to do, clean and pressed gang colors, flashy gang cars, fancier guns and weapons (often, stuff you and I are prohibited from owning)- all the stuff associated with the Blue Line Gang. And all this fancy stuff is bought with the proceeds of their crimes- crimes they are committing against you and your family, friends, and neighbors.
"Anti-police rhetoric"; formerly known as "the expectation that cops obey the laws they impose on the rest of us, don't shoot first and ask questions later, don't act like murderous cowards, don't show up at the wrong house and automatically shoot the dog or grenade the baby, and don't aggravate the situation by aggressively accosting people who aren't doing anything wrong".
But, yeah, "anti-police rhetoric" is so much simpler for simpletons to say.
.
They are getting their diapers all gooey over people who believe they are exempt from federal laws, income taxes, driver's licenses, gun "laws", and who knows what else.
People who believe the government is no longer legitimate.
People who either know the score, or are deluded into believing they can be a "sovereign citizen". (Ha ha!)
In other words, people who believe they are "above the law".
What a bizarre thing to fear. How minor in the grand scheme of things.
If those trivial things scare them, the bitter truth would literally terrify them out of their minds.
Let me clue you in:
You are exempt from all the above violations of life, liberty, and property.
No State (what you probably mean when you think of "government") can ever be legitimate.
And you are above all made-up, written down laws. Everyone is above the law, because the law is a poor substitute for individual rights and the emergent property, called society, which results. "The law" supposedly serves you, and as your servant, you are logically above it.
Doesn't mean bullies working for the government won't murder you for recognizing this, but the truth is the truth. None of this means you have any right to initiate force or to violate property, but self defense doesn't cross either line.
Cops are just another nasty gang. The big difference between cops and other thugs is that the cops have nicer stuff. Shiny signs telling what you are "required" to do, clean and pressed gang colors, flashy gang cars, fancier guns and weapons (often, stuff you and I are prohibited from owning)- all the stuff associated with the Blue Line Gang. And all this fancy stuff is bought with the proceeds of their crimes- crimes they are committing against you and your family, friends, and neighbors.
"Anti-police rhetoric"; formerly known as "the expectation that cops obey the laws they impose on the rest of us, don't shoot first and ask questions later, don't act like murderous cowards, don't show up at the wrong house and automatically shoot the dog or grenade the baby, and don't aggravate the situation by aggressively accosting people who aren't doing anything wrong".
But, yeah, "anti-police rhetoric" is so much simpler for simpletons to say.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
Saturday, July 23, 2016
The worst welfare recipients
There's a difference between being a drugged out addict without a job collecting welfare for a household full of kids, and someone who works at the DMV or city hall: the addict isn't "contributing" but at least he isn't actively harming anyone like the government employee is.
If your paycheck comes from the government-- even if you "work for it"-- you are on welfare.
If you use your welfare "job" to harm life, liberty, and property you are worse than any welfare recipient who at least doesn't go out of his way to violate everyone further.
I have more respect for the drug-addicted welfare collector than I do for the sober "tax" collector, the cop, the prison guard, the government school teacher, or any other government employee-- even if their job would still exist in a free society (but wouldn't be financed by theft, and no one would be forced to use their "services").
If your paycheck comes from the government-- even if you "work for it"-- you are on welfare.
If you use your welfare "job" to harm life, liberty, and property you are worse than any welfare recipient who at least doesn't go out of his way to violate everyone further.
I have more respect for the drug-addicted welfare collector than I do for the sober "tax" collector, the cop, the prison guard, the government school teacher, or any other government employee-- even if their job would still exist in a free society (but wouldn't be financed by theft, and no one would be forced to use their "services").
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Parental responsibility and the internet
My eight year-old daughter loves the internet.
While I see how much it is helping her learn so many things, and increasing her reading ability enormously, I know there are dangers.
I have to watch and make sure she doesn't give out personal information, or her location. And have explained why it isn't something I want her to do.
I ask her to let me know if anyone gets "too interested" in her- although her interaction seems to be limited (so far) to posting comments on Youtube videos.
I pay attention to what she finds and wants to show me- and sometimes it is something I have to warn her about, or explain. I'm always there, and I don't judge her for what she finds interesting or scary. That's parenting.
The benefits of her being online outweigh- to me- the dangers. But I know it is my responsibility to watch out and protect her.
I see some parents who seem to resent that necessity, and fall back on "parental blocking" and such, but it's a job I willingly take on. If it weren't the internet, it would be something else. It's always something.
I don't want "laws" or anything else advocated, passed, or enforced to supposedly "protect" her.
Out there in the real world, there are no "parental blocks". And, kids will always find a way around them anyway. Might as well step up and start helping the kids learn to navigate the world now.
.
While I see how much it is helping her learn so many things, and increasing her reading ability enormously, I know there are dangers.
I have to watch and make sure she doesn't give out personal information, or her location. And have explained why it isn't something I want her to do.
I ask her to let me know if anyone gets "too interested" in her- although her interaction seems to be limited (so far) to posting comments on Youtube videos.
I pay attention to what she finds and wants to show me- and sometimes it is something I have to warn her about, or explain. I'm always there, and I don't judge her for what she finds interesting or scary. That's parenting.
The benefits of her being online outweigh- to me- the dangers. But I know it is my responsibility to watch out and protect her.
I see some parents who seem to resent that necessity, and fall back on "parental blocking" and such, but it's a job I willingly take on. If it weren't the internet, it would be something else. It's always something.
I don't want "laws" or anything else advocated, passed, or enforced to supposedly "protect" her.
Out there in the real world, there are no "parental blocks". And, kids will always find a way around them anyway. Might as well step up and start helping the kids learn to navigate the world now.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online..
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
Statism is an empty shell
(Previously posted to Patreon)
Recently one of my blog posts was copied in its entirety and posted as a comment on a news story about a cop who was whining about being disrespected in a business. The commenter did supply a link to my original post- and even if he hadn't, that's not one of those things I get too worked up over. The ideas are what matter; not me or where the ideas come from.
But, what was most interesting to me was the hatred the commenter received in reply.
Subsequent comments went through the Statist Parrot Playbook: "If you don't like cops, move to Somalia", "You hate cops, but just wait until you need one to come save you", and all the usual statist gibberish. Including those who didn't do anything but spew hatred and insults.
But... not one commenter had anything of substance to add. Not one. No arguments explaining why the post was wrong. Nothing based in reason or ethics. Zero. Nothing but silly statist talking points and insults.
Because statism has nothing of substance underneath it.
Statism is nothing but empty cowardice. I suspect that even the parts of statism which look like hatred or other negative drives are just cowardice manifesting as something more toxic. Statism is illogical, unethical, immoral (judged by morality which is ethical), and cowardly.
Cowards are dangerous. And they resent those who aren't cowards- if they can even wrap their minds around the lack of cowardice. Which looks unlikely when I read comments by statists.
In a way, the lack of substance coming from triggered statists is reassuring. Even though they are still dangerous, they have already lost the war. They just may not know it yet.
Keep your head up and your eyes open. We've got this.
Recently one of my blog posts was copied in its entirety and posted as a comment on a news story about a cop who was whining about being disrespected in a business. The commenter did supply a link to my original post- and even if he hadn't, that's not one of those things I get too worked up over. The ideas are what matter; not me or where the ideas come from.
But, what was most interesting to me was the hatred the commenter received in reply.
Subsequent comments went through the Statist Parrot Playbook: "If you don't like cops, move to Somalia", "You hate cops, but just wait until you need one to come save you", and all the usual statist gibberish. Including those who didn't do anything but spew hatred and insults.
But... not one commenter had anything of substance to add. Not one. No arguments explaining why the post was wrong. Nothing based in reason or ethics. Zero. Nothing but silly statist talking points and insults.
Because statism has nothing of substance underneath it.
Statism is nothing but empty cowardice. I suspect that even the parts of statism which look like hatred or other negative drives are just cowardice manifesting as something more toxic. Statism is illogical, unethical, immoral (judged by morality which is ethical), and cowardly.
Cowards are dangerous. And they resent those who aren't cowards- if they can even wrap their minds around the lack of cowardice. Which looks unlikely when I read comments by statists.
In a way, the lack of substance coming from triggered statists is reassuring. Even though they are still dangerous, they have already lost the war. They just may not know it yet.
Keep your head up and your eyes open. We've got this.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Statism is cowardice
Yes, I have said it before, and I'll continue to say it: all statism is, at its very foundation, cowardice. Crippling fear of something. Or crippling fear of nearly everything.
You can tell what the statist fears by looking at the "laws" he supports or advocates.
I have a really hard time understanding this all-encompassing fear.
I have never considered myself a brave person. I still don't. But when I see the cowardice of the statist, it is hard to avoid becoming convinced I am very brave compared to the "bravest" of them.
You can tell what the statist fears by looking at the "laws" he supports or advocates.
I have a really hard time understanding this all-encompassing fear.
I have never considered myself a brave person. I still don't. But when I see the cowardice of the statist, it is hard to avoid becoming convinced I am very brave compared to the "bravest" of them.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Anti-gun laws take our protection
(My Clovis News Journal column for June 17, 2016)
As long as people exist, there will be bad people harming others. I realize this is upsetting news- it saddens me, too.
The belief that "laws" will stop bad people is one of the most dangerous delusions ever to take root. Whether in a free society or a police state, bad people will do bad things.
One benefit of a free society will be the lack of "laws" helping attackers carry out their evil plans. Such as the anti-gun "laws" which gave the Orlando night club murderer the armed advantage and time to kill.
To be perfectly frank, that's all anti-gun "laws" do. They filter out the guns which might be used to defend you, while being powerless against the guns which are used to murder. It boggles my mind how anyone could believe this is a good idea, or increases safety. If someone is set on murder, a rule or a sign by the door isn't going to stop him.
Those who believe in "laws", rather than in rights or in how people actually behave, keep pushing for more of the same. Ignoring natural rights never works out.
If everyone would live by the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP)-- the idea which defines libertarians-- life would be better. The simplest way I have seen the ZAP expressed, by libertarian author L. Neil Smith, is "the fundamental human right not to be physically attacked- or threatened with attack- if you have not attacked anybody else." Self defense isn't an attack.
It would be nice if the whole world were libertarian, committed to "live and let live" and respecting the property of others. But it isn't, yet. You can even go on hating anyone you want to hate, if you feel you must, as long as you leave them to live as they see fit.
Of course, most already live by this principle, they just try to carve out bizarre exceptions for certain aggressive folk, due to the "jobs" these people hold. Exceptions are imaginary.
In a libertarian world, life would still go on much the same. There would still be struggles, difficulties, and bullies. Your problems would change, but they wouldn't go away.
So practice dealing with the problems you have, in the world as it now exists, without violating anyone and making things worse.
The best way to make the world a little more humane and sane- a little more libertarian- is to put this into practice in your own life today. A libertarian world, one person at a time.
As long as people exist, there will be bad people harming others. I realize this is upsetting news- it saddens me, too.
The belief that "laws" will stop bad people is one of the most dangerous delusions ever to take root. Whether in a free society or a police state, bad people will do bad things.
One benefit of a free society will be the lack of "laws" helping attackers carry out their evil plans. Such as the anti-gun "laws" which gave the Orlando night club murderer the armed advantage and time to kill.
To be perfectly frank, that's all anti-gun "laws" do. They filter out the guns which might be used to defend you, while being powerless against the guns which are used to murder. It boggles my mind how anyone could believe this is a good idea, or increases safety. If someone is set on murder, a rule or a sign by the door isn't going to stop him.
Those who believe in "laws", rather than in rights or in how people actually behave, keep pushing for more of the same. Ignoring natural rights never works out.
If everyone would live by the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP)-- the idea which defines libertarians-- life would be better. The simplest way I have seen the ZAP expressed, by libertarian author L. Neil Smith, is "the fundamental human right not to be physically attacked- or threatened with attack- if you have not attacked anybody else." Self defense isn't an attack.
It would be nice if the whole world were libertarian, committed to "live and let live" and respecting the property of others. But it isn't, yet. You can even go on hating anyone you want to hate, if you feel you must, as long as you leave them to live as they see fit.
Of course, most already live by this principle, they just try to carve out bizarre exceptions for certain aggressive folk, due to the "jobs" these people hold. Exceptions are imaginary.
In a libertarian world, life would still go on much the same. There would still be struggles, difficulties, and bullies. Your problems would change, but they wouldn't go away.
So practice dealing with the problems you have, in the world as it now exists, without violating anyone and making things worse.
The best way to make the world a little more humane and sane- a little more libertarian- is to put this into practice in your own life today. A libertarian world, one person at a time.
-
If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.
Dead bullies
The worst thing about the shot cops is how it has inspired so many to bend over backwards to kiss cop butt.
If someone shoots a rapist or two, no one suddenly feels compelled to reassure other rapists that we still love them. No businesses put up signs saying they support rapists.
Then I see people also tripping all over themselves to say it isn't OK to use force to defend yourself from aggressors if those aggressors wear a badge. That's insane. And evil.
If you don't want to be shot for being an aggressor, stop aggressing and distance yourself from any gang activity which involves aggression (or property violations). It's really not that hard to understand. Actions have consequences even if you believe you are hiding behind the "law".
While you have the absolute human right to use violence to defend yourself from aggression and theft, it may not be the smartest move you can make. Sorry; that's just the way it is. Reality doesn't care how you feel about it. Their gang is larger than the number of people who would stand with you, so defending yourself from their violations will result in your death. Only you can decide if this is the moment it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
While I don't encourage you to shoot cops, I will never grieve for a dead bully.
If someone shoots a rapist or two, no one suddenly feels compelled to reassure other rapists that we still love them. No businesses put up signs saying they support rapists.
Then I see people also tripping all over themselves to say it isn't OK to use force to defend yourself from aggressors if those aggressors wear a badge. That's insane. And evil.
If you don't want to be shot for being an aggressor, stop aggressing and distance yourself from any gang activity which involves aggression (or property violations). It's really not that hard to understand. Actions have consequences even if you believe you are hiding behind the "law".
While you have the absolute human right to use violence to defend yourself from aggression and theft, it may not be the smartest move you can make. Sorry; that's just the way it is. Reality doesn't care how you feel about it. Their gang is larger than the number of people who would stand with you, so defending yourself from their violations will result in your death. Only you can decide if this is the moment it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
While I don't encourage you to shoot cops, I will never grieve for a dead bully.
-
Think about helping- If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
Sunday, July 17, 2016
It's been over 100, but it's a dry heat...
Just in case anyone would like to help, I need money for a home AC repair. The humans and felines thank you.
.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)