Drifting, shifting blogs

There are blogs I used to follow more closely in the past than I do now. In almost every case my falling away has been due to the author drifting either right or left. Embracing exceptions to Rightful Liberty that they personally like.

More of them have recently shifted right than left, but that may just be an indication of the current political climate- "immigrants" and Islamic mass-murderers and a reaction to Hillary Clinton.

The sad fact is, they are ignoring their most powerful ally. Rightful Liberty, without exceptions, can solve any real problem, and expose any illusory "problem" for what it is. Property rights are especially good at this, if they are truly respected. Self defense can solve most of the rest.

But, they can't claim exceptions and violate their enemies just because they want to. If your enemy has no right to do it, neither do you. If you do it to them, you are a hypocrite when you complain they do it to you.

If you can't be consistent when problems crop up, then you may not have been on the side of Rightful Liberty from the beginning. You may have just been using it for your agenda, ready to toss it aside as soon as it got in the way of what you really wanted.

That doesn't mean I stopped reading those blogs- it just means I pretty much stopped engaging and commenting. They still have useful things to add- you just have to be able to discern the gold among the statist crap. And, really, that's pretty easy.

Does it claim governments have rights or "authority"? Statist crap.
Does it claim that "the people" can delegate "rights" they can't have as individuals to a third party to act on their behalf? Statist crap.
You get the idea.

I'm sure those blogs don't miss my participation, but I do miss feeling like they were on my side.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.


(Steemit link)

"Our government"? Don't be absurd

When people use the words "my government" while referring to some gang of bullies, I may roll my eyes and feel pity for them.

But when they use the words "our government" I have a hard time not getting angry.

I promise you that you and I don't share a government.

I govern myself and I don't govern you. End of story.

That doesn't mean there aren't gangs of bullies trying to govern both of us. We probably even alter our behavior due to their presence- just like we'd walk around a huge steaming pile of dog feces. But unless you feel their governing to be legitimate and go out of your way to obey, they aren't "your government", and they certainly aren't mine.

If you want to be governed by a gang of bullies, that's your business. Just don't include me.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.


(Steemit link)

Don't be a "freedomarian"

There's a reason it's "libertarian" and not "freedomarian".

 Yes, freedom sounds great- doing whatever you want, with no limits. Until the guy next to you is doing the same. Then it's not so wonderful. In fact, it's often unsurvivable.

Freedomarians would not be good neighbors.

On the other hand, liberty is self-limiting. You can never have "too much" because as soon as your "freedom" violates someone else, you don't have the liberty to do it.

Libertarians recognize this fact. Thus, libertarian, not freedomarian.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

(Steemit link)

.

Resisting the opportunity to be evil

I have more respect for those who have the opportunity to be evil, yet refuse to give in to it, than I do for those who are naturally good with no trouble.

That probably doesn't sound nice.

I expect good people to stay good- which is why I am so disappointed when they support cops or other acts of evil.

But a good person who has the opportunity to not be good, and who wouldn't really surprise anyone by doing evil, yet stays good anyway is refreshing. And someone I can learn from.

I suppose we all have the capacity for evil, but some people are much less likely to face serious consequences for giving in to it. Due to their family, or social connections, or some other factor. I mean, if you pretty much know you can get away with murder, but you don't murder, that is a good thing in my eyes.

And besides, unless you are a Clinton, you never can be certain you'll get away with it.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.



(Steemit link)

Actual human blog readers are the best

"What a dаta of un-ambiguity and preserveness of precious familiarity regarding unexpected feelings."

That lovely bit of prose, my personal favorite, comes courtesy of Chinese spammers. I laugh every time I see it. And I can't make heads or tails out of it.

When they visit my blog- always in league- they can add 947 (an actual number from a recent spurt) or more visits in an hour or so. That artificially boosts my stats, but somehow doesn't really make me very happy. I want the people who visit my blog to be able to read what I write and to gain something valuable from the experience. I have my doubts they do either one. Or, that they are even people.

I suppose in that case it's unreasonable of me to expect them each to donate $500 or so when they drop by. Right? Although it would be nice.

I'll let you in on a secret- it would be unreasonable of me to expect anyone to donate or subscribe.

Unreasonable or not, expected or not, it sure does brighten my day when it happens.

It gives affirmation that I am providing something valuable that people are willing to spend money on. Which is a very uplifting thing for me.

And, yes, it is very important to try to convince people to reject theft and aggression. It's one of the most important things there is. It impacts everything. It is the choice at the center of every act in your life. Will you do it, whatever "it" may be, by mutual consent, or by force? Will you archate or will you do the right thing?

Are you a helpful individual, or a predatory one? Because you are an actual human reader of my blog, I am convinced I know the answer to that question, and that it's a good answer.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.



(Steemit link)

Using law against someone uncivilized

(My Clovis News Journal column for August 12, 2016)

Using laws to meddle is uncivilized (my chosen headline)

I can relate when someone gets upset about laws being used against them. Especially the phony laws which have nothing to do with protecting life, liberty, or property. To me, this is the height of uncivil behavior. 

If someone has a problem with me, and goes behind my back instead of bringing the problem to me first, I can't take them seriously. Involving the law seems, to me, a cowardly act. They skipped right past being an adult and ran to tell mommy. Or Big Brother, as the case may be. It's as if their very first response to a problem is to pull a gun.

People like that aren't people I can respect or deal with.

So, when anyone has a counterfeit "law" used against them, I understand the anger and frustration they feel.

What is beyond my understanding is when the same people who don't want the meddlesome laws used against them turn to the same sort of law as a weapon to use against others.

What are they thinking, if they are thinking at all?

You only deserve the liberty you respect in others. If you run to report anyone for doing things which upset you-- things you may even feel are wrong, though they don't violate you or any third party-- how can you complain when someone turns the tables and does the same to you? When it comes to "an eye for an eye", I want to be selling eye patches.

You don't like someone's sex life? They may not like yours, either. It's not the law's concern.

You don't like what someone smokes, drinks, or otherwise consumes? Maybe they don't like something you do. Perhaps they even believe something you do is wrong and should be punished.

Maybe you suspect someone doesn't have their papers in order, or is breaking some law you support. On average, you commit three felonies every day without intending to, or even realizing it. No one is law-abiding.

To send the law after people is hypocritical, or worse.

It doesn't matter that some politician once had a warped idea, made up a law about it, and has an army of hired guns at his disposal to enforce his opinion under threat of death. If you send the enforcers after someone because they violated one of these "laws", you have broken the truce society depends upon for its very survival. If there is any such thing as a "social contract", you have discarded it.

-

If you get any value from my writing, consider rewarding me with your financial support commensurate with the value you receive. You can also do that with zero cost to yourself by upvoting my posts on Steemit. 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 keep writing without the fear of saying something to get fired over. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don't depend on the same people always helping out.

It could be worse- you could be a statist!

I am a much less angry person since I dropped any belief in "authority" of The State (or anyone).

We AVAL (Anarchists/Voluntaryists/Abolitionists/libertarians) are always accused of being what we are because of anger, but the angriest people I see are statists. Maybe that's because nearly everyone I see is a statist.

But, really, statists are just consumed with anger. Sure, they hide it behind euphemisms like "rule of law" and such, but scratch the surface and you'll see the true foundation of their belief.

But, me?

I don't have much desire to punish others, or control them. I don't expect perfection, but I will hold people accountable. Is expecting accountability "anger"? Well, when the bad guys don't want to be held accountable, I suppose it looks like that to them. Also, they really hate it when they force you to defend yourself from them- and they will call you names for that, too. But, again, the anger and hatred is theirs.

That doesn't mean it's all sunshine and roses. It is often painful to see things as they really are, rather than as you wish they were. And it can be lonely, too. With life, it's always something. But, it can always be worse by being a statist.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

(Steemit link)

Dealing with government-lovers and their kin

Part of the reason I acknowledge the fact that there are no good cops, while admitting there are "nice" ones, is because of the cops I have known and those I have talked with. When cops are being truthful, because you are a Nobody who can't touch them, they are really scary.

Another part of the reason is simple logic: you can't enforce "laws" without doing evil. It's just not possible at all.

But, I'm not generally going to make it an issue as long as someone else doesn't make an issue of it first. I really don't go around looking for a soapbox or an excuse to "preach" at statists.

So it is with the National Socialist Pledge to SkyCloth or the National Love Song to Imperial War. They are basically non-issues to me because they aren't important enough for me to waste time stressing over. No, I won't participate in rituals that are wrong, but as long as you don't try to force me to, your participation is irrelevant to my life.

Smoke crack, worship bullies, or perform superstitious rituals-- whatever you want, as long as you don't violate anyone else. But why is it that State addicts can't be like crackheads and just leave people alone? (I suspect it is because superstition is more addictive than any drug, and misery of that type demands company.)

But some people are much more confrontational than me. That's fine with me- it's going to take more than one approach. But, how far removed does someone have to be from any of those vile people, rituals, or behaviors before you don't have a dogmatic need to harp on it? I get it if they are married to a government employee, or the parent of one. But if their cousin works for the State, do you really feel like hitting them over the head with it if they aren't bragging about that fact? I don't. Not usually.

Now, if someone keeps rubbing it in my face, then all bets are off. I'll be painfully truthful about your evil bully loved-one if you don't let the issue drop. And in that case, don't blame me for your hurt feelings.

(Steemit link)

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Prohibitionists and other nasty diseases

You might suspect I hate prohibition. And you would be right.

Do I want to abuse all manner of drugs without the risk of being "legally" destroyed for doing so? Not exactly. Although, if I ever find myself in the position where a doctor is scared to prescribe me the pain relief I need due to "laws" which could end his career if he gives me what I need, you'd better believe I will want all the drugs I can get, "legally" or otherwise. And if I can get them, I will, with a perfectly clear conscience. Drug use is not wrong, even though drug abuse is often dumb.

However, prohibition isn't just about drugs. It is about some bully telling you what you are allowed (or forbidden) to do with your own life.

Prohibition is one of the most evil acts governments commit. And every act of government is evil at some level, so there is quite a competition for the bottom.

Guns are another popular target for prohibitionist pecksniffs. And again, it is people bullying you "for your own good"... and I hate that kind of person. No matter what they want to prohibit.

Governments- through those vile bullies- also enact prohibition against knives, self expression, information, sex, travel, and anything else they believe they can get away with. They are never right to do so, because prohibition is people control, nothing else. And as such, I despise it in all its forms.

(Steemit link)

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Did you really come out "OK"?

(Previously posted to Patreon)

If you go through something and claim you came out OK, yet it causes you to support that which you went through being done to others, you may not be OK. You may be brainwashed.

I see this when the issue of "spanking" comes up. Libertarians who spank claim it doesn't violate the ZAP, when it can do nothing but. Whether it is one of those times when you "must" initiate force and then deal with the consequences, is another issue altogether- I won't open that jar of fruit flies right now.

I unwittingly performed a lifetime experiment in spanking. My first crop of kids were spanked. My current kid never has been. I see zero difference in the impact on encouraging good behavior, but a 100% improvement in how I feel about myself as a parent, and as a person. Yes, small sample size and zero objectivity.

I also see the same thing with regard to government schooling. People claim that they went through it and survived- and even got an education- so it must be fine to force everyone else to go through the same thing.

Well, I survived it too. And that is why I believe it needs to be abolished, burned to the ground, and bulldozed out of existence. Because "surviving" something is a sign it is probably not something to encourage more of. If you toss your kid off a cliff and she survives, is that a sign you should make tossing your kids off a cliff mandatory? What if you toss 100 kids and 99 of them survive? What if many of those who survive end up with lifelong disabilities due to the experience?

That people can go through government school and still support it only shows how good it is at brainwashing kids. It is a clear sign of the lifelong disability which results.

When you go through something like that and come out claiming you are OK, and not seeing that you claiming you are OK is evidence that you are not quite OK, I see something that needs to be abolished, not encouraged.

As in so many things, just because it was done to me- and I may have even done it to others, and I would prefer to not think of myself as a bad person- doesn't mean I am unable to see the harm in it, and doesn't mean I think it should be done to everyone.

Even if you survived it, don't inflict it on others "just because".

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Too many cops committing too many wrongs

If the cops in your town are claiming that your town needs another cop because the current cops are too busy with drug cases to do anything else, it's a sign your town cops are wasting their time doing what they shouldn't be doing. Things they are completely in the wrong for doing.

That is the excuse the local Chief Wiggum has used to inflict another tax junkie on my neighbors and me. And, yes, obviously the corrupt and cowardly city council gave in to his demands. Spineless jerkwads.

Look, I don't want cops at all. Ever. Anywhere. Period. But, if there are to be cops, they certainly should only be acting to protect rights and property. And this isn't it.

The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs is only about finding new and creative ways to violate rights and property. That's what bad guys do. If cops do that, by enforcing anti-drug "laws", they ARE the bad guys. Much worse than those they are committing their acts of enforcement against.

I don't need cops, and neither do you.

(Steemit link)

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Weekly CNJ column

It is in the paper, with the headline "Prohibition dangerous as addiction", but they haven't put it online yet.
And may not.
If they do, I'll link it here and in its own post.
If not, you can read it in a month (unless you have a subscription to the paper, then you can still read it now).

UPDATE: It's up.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Liberty Lines- Sept. 8, 2016

(Published in the Farwell, TX/Texico, NM State Line Tribune)

Drug abuse is dumb. I understand why people want programs and strategies they believe would lower the risk of someone abusing drugs. However, very often the things they grasp at are counterproductive and actually increase the risk. They are feel-good, knee-jerk reactions based on ideology, not grounded in reality.

Study after study indicates that one of the biggest risk factors involved in drug abuse and addiction is a lack of quality social connections.

One of the primary justifications for the athletic programs in government schools is that it creates camaraderie between the kids; the very type of social connection which would decrease the likelihood of drug abuse becoming a problem. If this is the case, shouldn't you be encouraging at-risk kids to get involved, rather than erecting barriers which will scare them away before they even give it a try? Programs which will end up causing greater isolation?

I understand when people pursue a chosen path in order to stay true to their ideology, but when that ideology is standing firm against science, reason, ethics, and morality they should reconsider their stance.

When a mistake has been made, publicly, it takes a big person to admit it and change course, rather than batten down the hatches and proceed onto the reef as stubborn people generally do. Correcting a mistake is the right thing to do. It takes bravery. It may cause embarrassment. But it needs to be done. Now.

The Farwell Independent Schools' "random drug testing program" is just such a mistake, and needs to be abandoned before it creates more of what the school administration and community say they want to prevent. If the school goes through with it anyway, you will then know where they stand, and why.

(Steemit link)

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Archators: "pillars of the community"

It's disheartening.

People who work for government harm people while being paid with money stolen from those they harm.

Yet they are considered "pillars of the community" and given respect.

My disgust and disappointment at this state of affairs isn't going to change anything, even if I don't participate in the charade.

What I can do is treat all people as people, based not on their "job" or position, but on how they treat others. Until someone isn't nice to me, I will be nice to them. I will give them the benefit of a doubt, as a person, even if their "job" is evil and disgusting. If someone is a jerk, their "job" doesn't change how I see them.

If they live on theft and by aggression, I'm not going to excuse them because of the position they hold. Archators are archators. I will expect better of everyone.

(Steemit link)

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

All politics, laws lead to slavery

(My Clovis News Journal column for August 5, 2016)

Political slavery hidden in plain sight (my chosen headline)

All politics comes down to slavery; mainstream politics being pro-slavery, regardless of any denials.

The "Right" and the "Left" may quibble over details, and whether you are owned by "society" or "the State" (usually conflating the two), but they never question that you are owned.

Under politics, you-- life, body, labor, and property-- can be used against your will, and most believe you should accept your lot.

You can be prevented from ingesting what you choose. This drives prohibition-- The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs and anti-alcohol laws-- as well as laws against large soft drinks, raw milk, and experimental medicines.

Your labor can be taken against your will. One form of coerced physical labor is conscription: "the draft". We may soon see it again; this time to include young women.

You can be forced into labor to maintain your property as the local rulers demand. Do you prefer wildflowers or a garden to a mowed lawn? Too bad. Your property isn't yours; you must work to maintain your property as government specifies. Another part of your life taken against your will.

Your property can be stolen outright, as with "taxation" or eminent domain, or some of your property's value can be destroyed by preventing you from using it as you see fit. Since you spent part of your life acquiring that property, taking any of its value from you is the same as stealing some of your life. It's time you can't get back.

Believe you own your house or land free and clear? Try not paying the annual "property tax" ransom on it and see what happens. You are forced to keep working for someone else, giving them some of your property, or government steals it all.

You can also be punished for using your body in ways the state doesn't approve, such as with prostitution or gambling. Laws similarly prevent you from contracting with a potential employer outside the bounds of what the State allows, as with "minimum wage laws".

If you'll notice, all the above are interconnected- they are all the same: slavery.

I am an abolitionist; I don't want you to be a slave. I oppose slavery in all forms- even the types you might say aren't too bad, or believe necessary. I hope you realize you own yourself and can decide where your life, labor, and property go, even if you choose servitude. Please don't let any person or group of people enslave you.

-

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 helping out.

Wake up while it's still a choice

Years ago I had a really good friend I could discuss anything with. On almost every subject we were either in complete agreement, or close to it.

But, one day he got drunk and called me up, tearing into me over my opinion of cops.

I don't even know why the subject crossed his mind at that moment, because we never really discussed cops. It was more or less an untouched topic, and for it to suddenly cause anger in him confused me. I don't really remember how I responded to him at the time, though. Probably like I would respond to any angry drunk spouting nonsense.

Well, fast forward about a week or so, and he calls me again. This time telling me that he always thought I was crazy for what I thought about cops and other government, but he now realized I was right.

The difference was that the evening before, cops had shown up at his door and treated him like a criminal; threatening him and tossing accusations. It was a wake-up call for him.

Why is it that so few people can see reality before it bites them in the butt? Why do they have to be violated before recognizing that others are being violated? It's something I have a hard time understanding.

I never want to be one of those people who ignores evil until it directly affects them or those they love. I don't have to be murdered to understand that murder is evil.

(Steemit link)

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Working for government

It isn't right to work for government. Not at any level.

You probably don't want to admit that if you work for government and like your paycheck, but it doesn't change reality.

A job that comes with a government paycheck- financed with money stolen from others (or counterfeited by the Federal Reserve, as the case may be)- is NOT an honest job. No matter how good it makes you feel. No matter if you believe you are doing a good thing. You aren't.

A government paycheck is welfare, but of a type that is much more harmful than simply getting money for nothing- a government paycheck is welfare given as a reward for harming people. It doesn't matter that the recipient claims they "worked for it".

I feel sorry for those who go into denial over this and try to make excuses or point fingers elsewhere.

Why would I say that it isn't right to have a government job, knowing it will hurt feelings of people I know personally and care about? Because I do care about them and don't want to see them compromising themselves. I don't really care if strangers I don't like choose archation over cooperation. People I don't like probably suck anyway, so what else would I expect from them? But people I care about? I don't want them lowering themselves to that level. As tempting as it may be, and as rewarding as the paycheck is, it isn't right and they need to know.

(Steemit link)

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Random thoughts

Here is a selection of "status updates" I have posted on Facebook recently. This is what happens to the random thoughts that form inside my head. Some turn into blog posts, but most just fade away.

Enjoy.

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

An election is the act of choosing a new paint job for the tank which is plowing through your house and crushing your children.

-

I dislike old wives tales, and consider them ignorant and harmful.

Such as that cats will smother babies, that you shouldn't swim for an hour after eating, or that government can be good.

-

If America really were the "home of the brave", then it would still be the "land of the free". In fact, not in myth.

"The brave" would never have allowed politicians with their laws and their cops to get America in the stranglehold it is in. They would have shot them long, long ago, and stood up against them then and now.

Pseudo-bravery fought for the state. With the state. And supports the state and all its trappings. Pseudo-bravery is cowardice.

Real bravery withdraws consent and lets the state collapse without support. In spite of what others say about it, or threaten to do to you.

-

Among a population which believes in "authority", box cutters become weapons of mass destruction.

-

Some behaviors are wrong. Such as violating someone's life, liberty, or property.

If you engage in these behaviors you have done wrong. If these behaviors are a daily part of your life, you are a bad guy. If engaging in these behaviors is a condition of you keeping a particular job, the job is evil and you are a bad guy for holding that "job". Period. There is no wiggle room there.

Pointing this out isn't "collectivist", or a refusal to understand why it is done. It isn't extremism to notice and call attention to this fact. It isn't "throwing out the baby with the bath water".

You may not like it. You may block me for calling you out on your inconsistency and hypocrisy. But it doesn't change reality just because you don't like it.

-

The "State of Texas" decided to certify a 15 year-old murder suspect as an adult.

If he can be "certified as an adult" in order to give the state what it wants, why can't others be certified as an adult when it comes to sex, or alcohol, or whatever it is the state doesn't want them to have access to?

And, since he's been certified as an adult, can he now do all the "adult things" with official approval, or is this a case of where it comes with only the penalties and none of the benefits? We both know the answer to that one.

Government is so bizarre.

-

If it isn't possible to remain ethical/good and defeat evil, then good is a losing position and will be wiped out regardless.
Because once you stop being ethical/good, good has lost anyway.

-

There is reality, and there is the opposite.

Those who rely on the opposite of reality want to make you feel bad about choosing reality.
They'll try to say things to make you doubt that reality exists.

Or they'll try to insist that their "reality" is just as valid as any other.

If all else fails they'll say "We'll just have to agree to disagree". That's the sign that they are simply not going to entertain reality- it offends them.

Reality doesn't care that some people choose to be offended by its existence. It just is.

Strangely, rejection of reality seems to not be as fatal as you might expect. I guess that's a lucky break for most humans, and a sort of tragedy for the rest.

-

Most drug abuse is simply dumb. Not evil, just dumb.

But there is one kind of drug abuse that is evil. Using the fact that drug abuse happens as an excuse to violate people to "prevent" that abuse is an abuse of drugs.

Prohibitionists are the most vile drug abusers possible. They are the truly evil drug abusers.

-

Whenever I see someone complaining that a situation was made worse by "government's failure to act", I know the reality is somewhat different.

The situation may have been made worse by individuals foolishly waiting for government to act, rather than taking it upon themselves to do what they know needs to be done.

The only way government can actually make a situation worse is by doing something- often by preventing others from doing the right thing. If you believe otherwise, you may have mind problems.

Maybe government should do exploratory surgery inside your head to fix it. After all, you wouldn't want government to fail to act, would you?

-

I am so disappointed in the people of this town.

I opened our little weekly paper and was so upset at what was inside I couldn't even keep reading.

First of all, the town thieves are hiring a third badge scum. That's the last thing any town needs. More cops means they will "find" more "crime"- they'll have to justify the stolen money they receive, after all.

Then I read that the school superintendent is implementing a random sexual molestation program at the school. They are calling it "random drug testing", but it relies on urinalysis, and if they watch the kids pee, they are molesting them- and if they don't, the kids will beat the test.

Why are these evil idiots not being run out of town on a rail, after being tarred and feathered? I know- because the people of the town support archation.

It makes me physically sick that people can be so dangerously ignorant.

-

So this election season, the "Libertarian" Party nominated a Republican archator and a Democrat archator, while the Republican Party nominated a Democrat archator, and the Democratic Party nominated a Neocon archator.

Notice a theme there?

Why on earth would you v*te?

-

What is the opposite on an anarchist?

It's not a statist, or even an authoritarian.

Nope, It's an archator.

Archators include statists, authoritarians, muggers, rapists, kidnappers, nice government employees, nasty government employees, cops, DemoCRAPublicans, malicious trespassers, borderists, copsuckers, flag wavers, slavers, banksters, the mafia, street gangs, nationalists, and anyone else who archates.

Be decent. Don't archate.

-

Hey, Chief Wiggum.

I don't find it comforting or helpful that you drive around the school looking for victims to rob. Your presence is a distraction to the drivers and you make the kids less safe while you seek victims.

Go away.

-

Nationalism is incompatible with reason, ethics, decency, and sense. It turns people into vile, murder-lusting robots.

-

Learning should be FUN!!
Government schooling turns it into a chore.
When you make something unpleasant, you will get less of it.
Government schools cause ignorance, and create a life-long aversion to learning in most people.

-

Is it "apathy" to refuse to beg politicians to not violate you?
Sure doesn't seem that way to me, but people who want you to "take political action" frame it that way.

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

See what you miss out on if you aren't "friends" with me on Facebook?

(Steemit link)

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

10 years of blogging

As of today, it's been 10 years since I began this blog. I can hardly believe it. I never dreamed I would have enough to say to keep a blog going for even a week. And yet, here we are.

So much has happened since then. Some good, some horribly bad. As I type these words I am only about 7 blocks from where I sat when I made the very first post- even though I didn't actually live anywhere near here at the time.

In spite of what some people want to believe, I have changed many of my views and opinions in that time, and you can see some of those changes if you read the early embarrassing posts. After all, the only reason I began to blog was because I was running for president, and another Libertarian Party presidential hopeful signed me up for the blog and sent me the link and password and "challenged" me to blog. I thought at the time it was an odd challenge, and probably pointless. But, it wouldn't cost anything other than a little time. Right?

That was a strange experience. I had begun my campaign, but never claimed to be running as a Libertarian Party candidate and didn't really expect anyone to notice me, but someone from the LP found me and ... well, it was quite a ride while it lasted.

I believe the blog was the best thing to come from that experience. So, thank you for that, Gene Chapman. Although, I also found some really great people as a result, too.

I don't know what the next 10 years will bring. I should probably be grateful for that. I remain hopeful.

I hope you'll stick around and see where this goes. Even though 10 years is a nice round number, I don't plan to quit just yet.

(Steemit link)

-

A big "thank you!" to those of you who support this blog, with your visits, shares, or money. If you get any value from my writing, consider a subscription or a one-time donation to keep this blog going. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during the ten years this blog has existed, and believe I have more to contribute, help me keep writing without the added difficulty of having a boss to offend.

The appeal of statism

(Previously posted to Patreon-
Please consider subscribing. You can subscribe for 1 penny per month. Seriously. Is it not worth 1 cent per month to read the Patreon posts?)

Don't ever imagine that I don't understand the appeal of statism.

Statism can be warm, comfy, and cozy. Snug like a baby's blanket. You don't need to worry about what to do. Just do as you're told. No responsibilities. No doubts. You don't need to think for yourself. Just let the nice man take care of you. Reality is what you are told it is. Just believe.

All that is required of you is that you ignore the archation- the initiation of force and the violation of property rights- which is the defining characteristic of statism.

In a way statism is like a good drug. Just go with the flow, and enjoy the feeling, without fear.

It covers every situation so you don't need to bother yourself with thought.

It's funny because one complaint I have often heard about libertarianism is that it claims to cover every situation. That it leaves no space for nuance. That it takes away your need to consider every situation separately, to see if it fits.

Well, do you really need to agonize whether you should stick your tongue in a light socket every time you see one? Or might you have already worked out for yourself that it's not a good idea?

You probably also expect that if you release a brick over your foot, it will fall. It may hit your foot, and if it does, it will probably hurt. Do you really need to start from scratch each time you are holding a brick, wondering if it would fall this time?

Guess what- you have no right to archate. You either figured it out on your own or were told that by a libertarian at some point or you wouldn't be here reading these words, but if someone told you, I hope you didn't simply accept it at face value. I hope you instead examined why it is true.

Once you figure out why it is true, and why it remains true, you don't need to stress over it every time the issue raises its head. Once you figure it out for yourself, you see there is no need to worry yourself silly every time you find yourself in a situation where you have the opportunity to initiate force or violate property. You have no right to do so. Not ever. But you can choose to do things you have no right to do if you think you must; and then pay the price. And, it always comes at a price.

So, I guess statism is easy, and the opposite is hard. Abolition / Voluntaryism / Abolition / Libertarianism requires you to think. To have principles. To live by those principles. And to accept responsibility. It's no wonder statism is more popular.

It's still wrong, though.

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.