The problem may be theirs

How rude!

Thinking back on a previous post, I got to remembering how many times in my life I've been called "rude" or something similarly negative because I asserted my autonomy. And it's a lot!

One person has repeatedly told me that by not allowing them to control me, I am forcing my will on them. I am being rude and should be ashamed.

Once I was working for a staffing service-- which was my actual boss-- when the job-site boss told me to move a stack of long metal poles from one location to another, outdoors, in the middle of a severe thunderstorm. Following the staffing service's explicit directions to not do anything I considered dangerous, I refused. I explained why I couldn't do that. I was kicked off the job after being screamed at for being lazy and useless. The staffing service supported my decision, though.

Because I don't fawn over police and military-- I don't thank them for their service when I encounter them in the wild-- I am told I am rude. I don't slam doors in their faces, spit on them, or even give them the evil eye. As long as they aren't actively doing wrong right now, I treat them as I would treat any other random stranger. But neglecting to fawn over them is "rude".

I don't often give anything to panhandlers, nor take flyers from anyone handing them out. If I say anything, I keep it to "No thanks". There have been a couple of occasions where the person wouldn't take "No" for an answer and I was more assertive, but I only push back as hard as I have to. I won't be bullied. I've been told this, too, is "rude".

I've been called "rude" for ignoring statist rituals to worship Holy Pole Quilt. So be it.

I have no respect for your favorite politician or bureaucrat. I'm not going to fake that I do. Don't press me to give my opinion unless you're strong enough to hear it. And don't call me "rude" if you don't like what you hear; what I didn't want to say in the first place.

I prefer to be civil. I like to be nice. But not at the expense of liberty or truth. You've got to have a line-in-the-sand somewhere. A line no one can push you across, using your desire to be nice as a weapon against you. If standing up for yourself (or someone else) makes you "rude" in another's eyes, the problem is theirs.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Suddenly YouTube is suggesting lots of videos for me on stupid people (their terms)-- what makes them stupid, why facts don't convince them, and why they don't know they are stupid. I didn't go searching for these and it makes me wonder if the Googleverse is trying to tell me something.

Time keeps rolling on

My mom's last uncle-- the last of a set of 11 couples (my grandmother was in a big family)-- died Monday. He was married to one of my maternal grandmother's many sisters. 

I've mentioned him here a couple of times; when his house got robbed (I believe, 3 times), vandalized, and then set on fire by a worthless dirtbag (that's the one dumb enough to get caught). 

Uncle Jay was distantly related to Daniel Boone (not a direct descendant) and looked like an old cowboy. Especially in his hat.

I have to admit, it was time for him to go. He hasn't been doing well for the past year, mentally or physically. I wasn't especially close to him most of my life, but did spend more time with him in the last 5 or so years. I'm not terribly broken up over his death. Still, it is the end of an era. 

Today would have been his 98th birthday. 

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

All it took was for an outspoken anti-gun bigot to "accidentally" shoot and kill someone (the gun "went off") for all the people who know nothing about guns to start giving their ignorant opinions with grandiosity. I've never heard so much gun ignorance in my life-- and I'm accustomed to hearing a lot of it.

"Not guilty" should be the default

Someone in my family got a jury duty notice again, but the trial was canceled before they met. But this is a good time for a reminder.

If you were a juror and had a bad feeling about the accused, but the government didn't prove its case against him, what would you do?

You should render a verdict of "not guilty" anyway.

"Not guilty" should always be the default. It's the government's "job" to prove their case to move you away from that position, but you aren't obligated to move an inch.

"Not guilty" doesn't mean you're sure he didn't do it. It doesn't mean you think he's a great guy. It doesn't mean you don't believe he's ever done anything else wrong. It just means the government didn't prove its case to your satisfaction-- or that the legislation he's accused of violating in this instance is counterfeit.

I could be on a jury and say "not guilty" but still feel the accused isn't trustworthy. I might still warn people to stay away from him because I think he's a slimeball. But I'm not going to hand the government a "win" based on my feelings and suspicions. Especially if they don't prove their case or are trying to enforce counterfeit "laws". It's your responsibility to hold them to a higher standard when you have the power to do so.

Besides, court isn't real life. It's just a ritual. Your life decisions shouldn't hinge on what happens in a court. If you don't trust someone, don't take a court verdict into account when considering whether you might be wrong about them.

There are people on death row (often for killing home-invading cops) I would gladly hang out with and there are people who have been acquitted that I would only be in the same room with if I were pointing a gun at them.

--- Support FIJA.org and take this short quiz.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

"That was rude!"

Saturday my daughter and I went to a pet expo over in New Mexico territory. One of the booths was the local city animal shelter. As I passed, they asked if I would sign a petition to have the city "improve" the shelter.

My signature wouldn't have been valid, since I'm not a resident of the state, and I don't think government should be running animal shelters anyway. I've repeated over the years that nothing should be "tax" funded, not even if I like it.

So I said, "No, thanks".

The shocked faces should have been a warning. My daughter tells me that a kid in the booth said "That was rude" as we walked away, and someone else said "Wow!".

I was told by someone in my family that I should have just signed. 

I never claimed to have the best social skills, but I don't like being deceptive. I suppose I could have gotten into a conversation to explain my choice. I could have pointed to the cat my daughter was carrying and told them the story of his rescue, as evidence that I love animals. Would it have made a difference in their opinion of me? Does their opinion matter? 

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Taxing rich discourages productivity

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 22, 2021)

Tax the rich? It sounds like a great idea... to people without a grasp of economic reality. For the rest of us, it looks like national economic suicide.

If you punish people for being productive, you'll discourage productivity. Yes, there are some people who would keep working hard to create value even if the IRS keeps stealing it, but many would throw in the towel and live on the bare minimum they are allowed to keep. They wouldn't start businesses to benefit society or to employ people. They wouldn't buy luxuries that people create, build, and sell to rich people. There's no faster way to cripple the economy-- other than a pandemic shutdown.

You could confiscate all the wealth of every rich person in the country, even redefining "rich" so you can take more, and it wouldn't put a dent in the debt Congress has racked up. A debt they pretend is yours to pay. "National debt" is a lie.

If Elon Musk had most of his wealth confiscated to fund government, the future of space travel would be in peril. In fact, it would probably be crippled for the next generation or two, at least in America. It's too great a risk.

Even the rich people I don't like have a right to keep the money they or their parents earned. The only people who don't have the right to keep "their" money are those who get money from politics or other criminal behavior. That money should be returned to the victims, not handed to government.

"Tax the rich" is a trendy thing to say. It demonstrates how "woke" you are. As with most "wokeness" it also declares your ignorance in a loud voice.

I don't want rich people taxed for the same reason I don't want poor people taxed. It's unethical to take money which doesn't belong to you, no matter your justification. Taxation is theft, even if you would rather pretend it isn't. If your plan relies on theft, It needs to be scrapped.

Plus, I don't want government to have money. I'd rather shut off the supply and starve the beast. Taxation is apparently not even necessary for government finances since government has shown it will print whatever money it wants. Yes, this will eventually destroy the economy, but so will taxing the rich. If they are going to destroy the economy anyway, I'd rather they do so without taxation.

-

(If you use Twitter, please consider sharing this on there since I'm indefinitely suspended.)

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Beware statist rule-breakers

Being an outlaw is a noble thing. An outlaw, not a criminal. But there is a risk.

No one is "law-abiding", and especially not those who claim to be. They simply ignore and don't count that legislation they don't agree with. I do the same.

However, statists who break the rules are happy to report your rule-breaking because somehow theirs doesn't count. But yours counts... to them. Reporting you may even-- in their imaginations-- make up for their own rule-breaking. Like a serial killer turning in a jaywalker.

I don't care if someone is breaking the rules as long as their act doesn't violate someone else. I'd never report someone for breaking such a rule. But then I'm not a statist.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Excuses are easy to find

With all that's been going on, I skipped my daily walk twice in a row. I haven't done that since I started walking for "exercise" a few years ago. I have skipped a day here and there if I was doing something else laborious that day, but never twice in a row-- or even twice in one week.

I wasn't feeling too guilty about skipping the walk, but then I realized it's just an excuse.

I still could have walked, and I should have walked. But excuses are so easy to find... or dream up.

It's the same way with statism.

It's so easy to think of excuses. 

"If people aren't forced to do that good thing, they won't." 

"If you don't forbid people to do that bad thing, and threaten punishment if they do it anyway, they will keep doing it."

"It's for their own good."
"We know what's good for them."
"This is too big for people to do without government."
"They won't be responsible unless you make them."

The excuses flow like a flood. Excuses are easy, principles are hard. But they are worth it anyway.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Ever notice how people who hate guns are generally the least able to act responsibly? It's almost as if there's a connection...

In other news... (with an update)

The past 24+ hours I've been struggling to take care of a very sick 9-year-old cat (Butterscotch), and I'm too tired and emotionally drained to write anything, much less anything smart, for automatic posting tomorrow morning. 

She's had a relapse of a problem she had a little over 3 years ago when we nearly lost her. She has a vet appointment for first thing in the morning. I'm trying to prepare my daughter for what may come.

UPDATE: Butters has a chronic kidney issue (which was the problem before). The vet put her on a few medications to get her over the crisis, and she already seems to feel a bit better. I caught the problem earlier this time so she wasn't as sick. Hard to believe, as sick as she was. I just have to stay vigilant and make sure she doesn't stop eating or drinking for even a day.
As an aside-- the vet looks like Molly Quinn from Castle.

For your favorite miscreants

 I'm offering Time's Up flags again for a while. In time for holiday gifts if you order early enough.

NPCs in action

The small local park is often the target of destructive people. Largely people from a specific demographic.

I don't want government taking people's money and using it for parks or park equipment, but I also think vandalism is one of the most stupid things supposed humans can do.

If you destroy something that "belongs" to government (but isn't otherwise violating anyone the way a police car, for example, does), you gained nothing. More money will be stolen to repair or replace it. Even if you imagine the taxes will be paid by someone else, you still end up paying through higher prices on everything you buy because someone is paying those taxes.

This table has been a recent focus of vandalism. The concrete pad under the table is inscribed with someone's initials and the year "1951", but for the past year, there has been a concerted effort by certain "people" to destroy the table. It has been repeatedly attacked.

Why? I don't get it.

Do these people imagine their life would somehow be better if they just tear down everything until nothing is left? Or are they counting on others to keep replacing what is destroyed with new stuff for them to destroy? What are they thinking?

Therein lies the answer and the problem.

The people who do things like this aren't actually thinking. They don't think of consequences or of the future beyond what they feel at this moment. They act on impulse. They are programmed-- by their empty culture-- to carry out certain actions and are powerless to resist. Thinking would get in the way, so it is avoided. If they are even capable of thinking. And perhaps they aren't. Maybe the capacity for independent thought was never part of their program. It sure looks as though that's the case.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Newest new project

Just for fun, I've started posting my Quora answers over on Patreon. I answer questions on Quora mainly to poke statists. I certainly don't try to convince any of them of anything there. I'm not always 100% serious-- especially if I think the question is dishonest (as so many seem to be).

I had given up on Patreon a while back. Subscribers kept leaving-- especially after the Covid shutdowns crippled the finances of so many-- and it became more trouble than it was worth to post there. But 2 stubborn supporters stuck around through the down time, so I feel I owe them something. This is... something. Maybe something sort of fun.

Yes, I am doing this with the hope of getting some more paid supporters. If it works I'll continue. If not, we'll see what happens.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Societal cancer

Society is an expression of human nature, on a large enough scale to spontaneously self-organize. 

Just like in any self-organization event, there can be localized glitches. Problems-- cancers-- can arise inside that self-organization to threaten its continuation. Cancers, in the case of society, like government-- including police. 

The solution is to cut those tumors out to make society healthier, not to pretend they are the valuable thing in the society. Never imagine those cancers are what make society; confusing the disease for the organism.

Don't be a cancer worshiper.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

At least no one is shooting at me...

How have things been going the past couple of weeks?

"Never goes smooth. How come it never goes smooth?" -- Captain Malcolm Reynolds (Firefly: Safe)

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

The tiresome topic

I would love to never again mention Covid, the pandemic over-reactions, or the mandates. I don't want to mention those things because I'm over it all. Once you stop believing in the Tooth Fairy it stops mattering to your life and there's no longer any point in talking about it. 

And I've never seen any topic expose so much science ignorance (on both sides, unfortunately) as this one. That's before you consider whether governments have any "authority" to impose mandates and whatnot (they don't).

But the Branch Covidians aren't letting it go. They keep intruding in my life with their crazy religious beliefs.

It's not as bad on the Texas side-- although some superstitious businesses still have "masks required" signs by the door even here. And on the New Mexico side of the line, every business has the signs due to the governor's orders, but even those who enforced the signs at first have given up now. 

Any time I see any "national" perspective, though, it's still usually Covid-centric. Even when it makes no sense to insert that into the topic-- it's almost as bad as trying to listen to something "mainstream" without someone going off on a "climate change" tangent. And obviously, the US feral government is still pushing hard to get you to obsess over this hobgoblin. What a bunch of criminals.

I'm not interested in restricting such speech, though. I think it's smart to let wackjobs expose themselves for what they are. But I am tired of them and I wish they'd shut up.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

Make politicians invisible again

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 15, 2021)

You may have picked up subtle clues that my opinion of politicians is exactly as low as my opinion of freelance thieves, bullies, and vandals. It's impossible for me to dislike them more than I already do.

Still, I admit some politicians are undeniably worse than others.

My measure of how good or bad a politician is depends entirely on whether they force me to notice them. The more I notice them, the worse I consider them to be. Any politician who isn't completely invisible to my daily life is one I don't like. This not only includes their physical presence, but any legislative or bureaucratic nonsense they drop in my path for me to step in.

If they make up any legislation I might notice, they need to do better. If they flood society with minions acting on their behalf to impose this legislation on me or anyone else, they've crossed a clear line.

I want them to leave me alone, and I mean this in every sense of the phrase.

Obviously, if I notice them because they've stopped bothering me as much as their predecessors in some obvious way, I'll cut them some slack in this one area.

Yet, this wouldn't have been an issue if a politician hadn't meddled where he or she had no business meddling. Somehow, politicians have come to believe meddling is their business rather than being a crime.

It used to be a person could live an entire lifetime without ever meeting a government employee. They were like mythical creatures one heard about from mysterious travelers but had never seen with their own eyes. Much like harpies or Mongolian Death Worms.

Later, the only government employee anyone was likely to encounter was the person delivering the mail. Unless someone actually requested a government employee's presence, they were not imposing themselves in your life.

This isn't the case anymore, much to the detriment of society. This situation is as helpful to society as potholes in racetracks are to racehorses.

Worse, due to the licensing scams they keep expanding you are required to deal with government employees regularly to stay "legal". In some cases once per year, which is far too often. The number of required encounters keeps rising all the time like an overflowing toilet.

I want politicians to become invisible again. Even if their jobs don't go completely extinct, If we no longer see or hear them, it's an improvement.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Texas "Constitutional" carry-- how's it going?

Back before the Texas "Constitutional" Carry legislation went into effect, I had wondered whether it would make any difference. It seems like it may have, but I'm not sure.

I haven't seen anyone open carrying yet. I guess old habits are hard to break. I've always loved seeing regular people (not government tools) wearing a full holster on their belt, but I understand the wisdom of carrying concealed.

I had feared the "We don't care if you die!" signs would remain everywhere, and new ones would appear. That doesn't seem to be the case.

A few new signs of this sort may have shown up (I'm not quite sure), but most of them vanished. Some "Please don't open carry here" signs were posted. Also, a few places left up their old signage referring to license holders and such. I guess they didn't get the memo.

One change I didn't expect is how many of these pro-mass-murder signs vanished from New Mexico stores nearest the state line. Maybe it was only a coincidence that it happened at the same time, but it looks connected to me.

No new legislation was needed, of course; the old illegitimate rules just needed to be abolished or ignored. Yet it seems to have worked out pretty well, considering.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.

How can it be both ways?

Why would you pin your hopes on the results of the next election while at the same time believing the last election was stolen? Are you going to v*te harder next time so that no one would be able to cheat enough to beat you? How would this work?

No election is legitimate because no one can have the right to govern anyone but himself. Never. Rights and liberty are not subject to majority opinion or political "authority". That's just how it is, like it or not.

Political criminals will still kill you to prove they are "right". And that's just how it is, like it or not.

But if you believe the last election was a fraud, how can you believe your v*te will matter next time? Do you think the winners will be scared to do it again? Do you think they'll behave because they know you suspect them and will be trying to watch more closely?

Or, do you v*te with the hope that your side will cheat harder next time to pull off a "win" in spite of the anticipated cheating of the other side? Would they need your v*te in that case?

Was there cheating or will your next v*te count?

It just seems really confused to me.

-

If you appreciate what I do, consider showing it.