Respect not automatic; it must be earned

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 21, 2025)

Some people think the lack of respect is one of the biggest problems society faces. I think the problem is people who haven't earned respect thinking they deserve it anyway.

Respect isn't automatic. It doesn't come with a job or position. It is earned. The way to earn respect is to be respectable; to respect the life, liberty, and property of others.

The fastest way to lose my respect is to try to control people. You'll also lose my respect by demanding respect while behaving in ways that don't earn it.

People who believe in the magical quality they call "authority", and who imagine themselves to possess this quality, are never going to earn my respect. It's pointless for them to try, since they sabotaged their efforts the moment they tried to skip to the front of the line.

I've never seen anyone who earns respect demanding to be respected. If someone feels this is necessary, it's a sign they haven't earned your respect.

If I believe they have the power to hurt me, and are likely to do so, I might fear them. Fear is the opposite of respect, but it can look the same to the bad guy. This pretend respect isn't real; it's a thin veneer which won't stand up to time or pressure.

I think a respectful attitude should be the default until you find out whether it can be real. I tend to treat people as though I respect them until they either earn my real respect or show me why they can't be respected. I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they show me who they really are. At that point, they've either earned my respect and made it real or lost any chance at having it. I won't be faking it, either way.

If you feel you don't get the respect you deserve, look at your own behavior. Have you earned respect, or has your behavior chased away any vestige of respect you might have gotten by default? Have you cornered everyone around you into lying and pretending to respect you while they loathe you- or ridicule you- behind your back? Do you bully people into pretending they respect you while being the last person on Earth anyone would genuinely respect? How do you think this will work for you in the long run?

Earning real respect is easy enough, but there are no shortcuts.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Statism is Utopian

No one is more Utopian than those who try to tell you that liberty is "Utopian".

It seems counterintuitive… until you’ve encountered a bunch of them over the years. Then you’ll see it’s true.

At some point, usually in the first sentence or two, he's going to try to lump you in with communists, as though this "wins" the argument in his favor. In truth, it's just a sign he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's embracing the same lack of understanding of human nature that the communists do, and he's blind to it.

Statists will tell you people have to be governed. That people will demand to be governed. That without being governed they’ll… well, they’ll do exactly the same things they do while being governed by politicians- flawed people who do the same things the people they govern do. But who generally write rules that pretend that when they do it, it’s not bad because they have "authority". 

They're insisting that not being gullible and handing your power to political criminals is "Utopian".

It’s Utopian to pretend this isn’t crazy. 

Utopia is not an option. No matter what.

Bad people exist. They always have and always will. The most dangerous of these bad people seek political power. They don't go away because of the widespread belief in government's existence, nor will they vanish if that belief is eradicated. It's Utopian to pretend otherwise.

I've never heard a liberty lover promoting the idea that the world would be perfect if government and its violations to natural liberty were removed from society. Just that it's stupid to give bad guys a veil of legitimacy through "government".

It’s utterly Utopian to pretend government can be “limited”. That it is anything other than a criminal conspiracy. That government is necessary or even good.

As soon as some statist (who will ignorantly deny being a statist and take offense at this character flaw being pointed out) says you’re “Utopian”, you can bow out of the discussion. His opinions can be disregarded. He has told you as clearly as possible that you don't need to take him seriously. He may take himself seriously, but he’s not willing to face reality, including the reality of the depths of his brainwashing. If ignoring him convinces him he's "won", congratulations to him. It's the only "win" he'll see.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Politics is poison

Politics makes people stupid. Politics ruins everything it mixes with.

Unfortunately, people prefer politics to reality and science.
People prefer politics to morality and their religious beliefs.
They prefer politics to ethics.
People prefer politics to logic, rationality, and consistency.
People prefer politics to liberty.
People prefer politics to respect for natural human rights.
People prefer politics to peace.
People prefer politics over their own best interests, ands over the best interests of others.

This is how you can know politics makes people stupid. It can't possibly be otherwise.

Besides making people stupid, politics usually makes people at least a little bit evil. You can see this by the inevitable outcome of mixing politics with anything.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Who spilled the Eversomuch More-So?

When I was a kid, I read a book about a character named Homer Price, and one story was about something a traveling salesman sold to the townfolk. The stuff was called "Eversomuch More-so". Anything it was sprinkled on became more of whatever it already was. Food became more delicious. But sometimes, it backfired, like when it was used on squeaky springs and they became even more squeaky.

As I remember the book, when the shaker was finally opened, it was empty. The effect had been psychological all along. (Or maybe it was more ambiguous, but that's what I got out of it. I actually still have the book- I rarely give up books, which is why I have a library in my house. I may read the story again.)

Well, it feels to me like someone put Eversomuch More-so in the chemtrails.

Crazy people have become Eversomuch More-so crazy.
Political criminals have become Eversomuch More-so criminal.
Warmongers have become Eversomuch More-so in favor of wars. 
Statists have become Eversomuch More-so statist in their delusions and superstitions.

I'm hoping liberty lovers have (or will soon) become Eversomuch More-so in love with liberty and skeptical of rulers and legislation. It would provide a nice balance to the toxicity around us.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

War-ons

Is it interesting to you how many people want to claim credit for war? ("War crimes" has always seemed redundant to me, so I'll go with the single word "war", which covers it perfectly.)

They'll say "we" did this or that thing. Really? They participated? I guess that means they can be held accountable. Right?

Of course, only the losers get held accountable. The winners get to write the "history" and pretend they were the good guys all along. They do it every time.

If you're violating someone's property, damaging it, hurting and killing people who were not posing an individual, credible threat to you or someone else, you're not the good guy.

Funny thing about war- there's often no good guy involved. It's usually bad guys against bad guys. I often don't really want either team to "win". I want both to lose and maybe learn a lesson about being a net negative to the planet. I'm certainly not going to affiliate myself with either side. Why would anyone want to join ranks with any of the bad guys?

Now, if you join with neighbors, defend each other's property from invaders, don't rely on government handouts of weapons, and respect everyone's life, liberty, and property as you defend life, liberty, and property, then you're a good guy. You may not really be engaging in "war", though.

Defenders don't invade the property of others. They don't ignore "collateral damage"- innocent deaths, injuries, and property damage- but take responsibility and do their best to pay restitution. They don't occupy the defeated territory. Cooperation, not collectivism.

And, if you use (or credibly threaten to use) a nuclear weapon, you're definitely not one of the good guys since nukes (and really, any bombs) can never truly be used defensively- there will always be innocent people harmed.

Militias can be used legitimately/defensively. Government militaries apparently can't. That's the nature of government. You may think "government is good"... if you're a moron. I can't believe so many people- not just common political criminals- hunger for war. They really need better hobbies!

It's just a shame I can't exile politicians, government militaries, and their war-hungry fans to a distant moon and let them fight it out without a way to return to Earth if anyone "wins". If you give me that button, I will use it. I'm so tired of their kind.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Cannabis Conniptions! Be afraid!

Recently, I’ve seen so many new articles about the bad health effects of cannabis. 

Someone is obviously trying to turn the public against it. Probably to encourage the public to demand or accept prohibition again.

It isn’t going to work on me, even if I believed all the articles (which I don't). And I don't even use it.

I know heroin has lots of bad health effects, and I’m still against prohibition and punishment for heroin users and addicts.

"Use" doesn't equal "abuse".
And...
Drug abuse is stupid, but prohibition is evil.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

HB2Me

Today is my birthday.

I’ve done better about not asking for donations recently. But I'm running very short right now, and having a tough time financially (and emotionally), and since it's my birthday, this would be a nice birthday gift. I would greatly appreciate it!

Only if you can and want to, though. Otherwise, don't even think about it! Please and thank you.

.

We can resolve litter problem – for free

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 14, 2025)

I know how New Mexico's government could have saved $3.6 million it wrenched from the pockets of its tax victims: by not funding a campaign against littering.

I hate litter. I hate the trashing of the environment with litter as much as I hate the trashing of society with government and its legislation. These are two aspects of the same problem.

Littering is one of the most ignorant, irresponsible, lazy, and self-centered things a person can do. There's no excuse for it. There's never been a single time I "had to" litter. Maybe it was slightly inconvenient to hold onto my trash, but it was never a risk to life, liberty, or property to do so. I have also picked up probably a ton or more litter. I'm not joking. So when I say I hate litter, understand how deeply I hate it.

The state isn't going to correct people's poor character by spending money. It's just too easy to litter and make it someone else's problem. A problem which violates property rights as surely as theft does.

Last week I watched a woman, chatting on her cell phone, pull up and toss her Popeye's chicken trash into a shopping cart in the Lowe's hardware parking lot. I took photos of her and her vehicle. Her trash was retrieved and disposed of responsibly after she left. So, in spite of her childishness, there was no harm done this time.

She probably knew she was being watched and simply didn't care. This isn't the type of person who will be shamed into being responsible by an ad campaign. It's too easy to be trashy. This wasn't a case of needing to break a bad habit or even thoughtlessness; it was intentional. She knew what she was doing.

People like her are the reason so many people believe we need to be governed, when it's obvious this hasn't solved anything.

Every cent spent by government is money wasted. You have more influence over your family and friends than a stranger or government would. Use your influence for good. Don't litter and don't ask government to spend money on things you believe would be a benefit. Don't ignore littering by people you know, and pick up after them if they litter in your presence. Make a commitment to not be part of the problem and you'll have a bigger impact than millions of dollars wasted by government ever could.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

I decline to participate in your protests

I dislike protests. I don't see myself ever participating in one- or even being in the vicinity of one, if I have prior warning and can avoid it.

I support everyone's right to protest. If that's your thing, have at it! It's not for me, though. Even when I agree with the stated goals.

"Protesting" doesn't include burning private homes, businesses, or personal vehicles. Or aggressing against people. The quickest way to make me dislike you and shy away from your "cause" is to start archating.

Of course, government "property" is an entirely different matter.

I've been advocating for "No kings" for years. Not for a fraction of a millisecond do I believe that protest would have happened without Trump as president. I'd be willing to make a safe bet that nearly all of those protesters would have been content to stay home as long as the current ruler wasn't Trump. That they aren't against kings/rulers, per se; they just want a different one. 

How do I know? Because I've been lectured and scolded by people like that many, many times. They hate and fear liberty and want to be ruled and are angry when I tell them they don't need to be. Now, out of the blue, they have a problem with rulers? Not a chance.

Of course, the military parade was another kind of "protest" that I dislike. I would have avoided that event as well. It was an open display of the intent to archate, paid for by archation. That's not better.

To my way of thinking, if things are bad enough to go protest, they are bad enough to do something real to change things. Either "break" the illegitimate "laws", or fight back against those imposing them. I understand the desire to give tyrants a chance to back off before you go hot, but has that ever worked?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

No one can be wrong ALL the time

The one thing the borderists get right is questioning why anyone would want to move to America, but bring along the culture that made their country worth escaping.

Maybe you could say that's not what they are doing. You might even be right, but it sure looks like what they are doing.

Maybe you could argue they want America, but with things they are familiar with added to it. 

Things like Sharia and normalized sexual assault (outside TSA gauntlets, I mean). Things like even more socialism than we are already burdened with. Things like more gun bans, more censorship, and more blasphemy laws than we already have.

In my view, some of those things would make America no longer America. If they got everything they demanded, how long until they'd be trying to escape to somewhere they haven't yet ruined?

Unfortunate Truth #1 will always prevail.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Rule of Law and Order

"Rule of law" and "law and order" types work hard to misunderstand right and wrong. All they have is an army of straw men and a tactic of talking in circles to keep the conversation from going to uncomfortable places.

They'll say you must obey every "law" unless and until you can change it. When it is pointed out that it was right to break slavery laws (for example), and it wasn't necessary to wait until the law was changed to free any slaves you could- "illegally"- they'll go into the history of how slavery was supposedly abolished (or expanded to include everyone). Missing the point again, because it is necessary to their beliefs.

When told you shouldn't obey unethical "laws" they'll fall back on "Who gets to decide what's ethical? Ethics is complicated." When told that "ethical" isn't complicated at all, then they'll pull out "So everyone is free to ignore every law they don't like?"

No, everyone is free, or even obligated, to ignore every counterfeit "law"- all those "laws" that violate life, liberty, and property. They also have no right to violate anyone, even if the "law" allows it. Or demands it.

"Law and order" only sounds good if you don't understand that too much order is as deadly as too much chaos. Authoritarian tyrants are good at imposing order, and it's not good for society.

Anyone advocating "Rule of Law" or "Law and Order" is not on the side of liberty. They are choosing tyranny. Are they doing it because they are cowards, or is that a separate problem?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Crazy police-state fans

Welcome to Crazy Time.

Is it just me, or is the current mood the worst I've seen in a long time? I'm not enjoying it. Not at all. I'm not in a great mood right now anyway, for all sorts of reasons, and this isn't helping.

So many people I agree with on just about everything else have jumped into the statist quicksand over "immigration". 

If they just had an issue with government importing people (human trafficking), or with those vandalizing private property and committing other archation, we could agree. But, nope. They've gone full "our borders" communist.

If I think there's hope in getting the person to realize what they're supporting, I may say something. Mostly, I don't try to point out their hypocrisy. It would mess up our alliance on other things after the current hysteria fades. 

I hope it fades quickly, because this insanity isn't good for anyone.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

A govschooling victim

A while back, I saw someone get angry and lecture a person who called this place on the map "America".

He "educated" them that "America is a continent. This country is the United States!".

I guess he's another poor victim of the govschools.

I gently pointed out that the continent is North America, but there's no continent that is simply "America".
I should have gone on to say there's also a South America.
America is this country- the region, the land, resources, people, etc., as set apart according to agreements between political criminals for purposes of plundering without getting in each other's way too much.
The United States [sic] is the government currently ruling over (violating and plundering) the people of America.

No, I never checked back to see how he reacted to this news. Probably exactly as you'd imagine.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

No one should violate individual rights

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 7, 2025)

What are "rights"? While it can be said you have certain rights, it's more accurate to say no one has a right to prevent you from doing these things. Those who say "rights don't exist" are arguing backwards.

Nothing can create a right to do things no one has a right to do. Not a majority, constitutions, legislation, "public safety", or the common good. Those claiming otherwise are lying so you will let them do things you know aren't good for you, making you question whether these things might be good for society. Nothing which violates individual rights is good for society, since society is made up of individuals no one has a right to violate.

It's not that you have a right to free speech; it's that no one has a right to censor you. The flipside is that you have no right to force anyone to publish your words.

Social media companies' censorship has been largely due to government demanding they censor certain things; threatening the companies if they won't. Government, since it isn't an individual, has no rights at all, including no right to bully companies into censoring.

No one has a right to dictate what others believe or what religion they practice. On the other hand, no one has a right to violate the life, liberty, or property of another using religion as justification. This includes the religious belief in government authority, which is the most prevalent cult in the world, frequently practiced even by those who follow another religion.

No one has a right to prohibit a protest against government, nor to bar you from entering a building you own- such as any government facility. Government believers hate this one. They will murder you for acting on this because people who work for government do things no one has a right to do.

No one has a right to decide what weapons you own, carry, buy, sell, or build. Just as no one has a right to threaten or kill anyone who isn't currently a danger to life, liberty, or property.

No one has a right to prevent you from arranging for the health care, food, water, housing, and energy you need. No one has the right to force others to pay for their necessities.

Understanding a "right" as something no one has a right to stop you from doing makes it easier to separate the wheat from the chaff.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

The worst part of loving a pet

I just buried a cat and I'm not in the mood for anything.

RIP Ghost. You were a good boy and I loved you. Thank you for choosing me.

"Give me Law and Order", cry the government supremacists

"Law and order" is bad unless the law is Natural Law rather than legislation. Too much order is as deadly as too much chaos.

Very few who scream and threaten "law and order" care about Natural Law one whit; they want their counterfeit "law" imposed at the barrel of a gun. They demand a police state so they can have their precious "law and order"! No matter who it kills. 

Dead people are quite orderly. "Law and order" fetishists are fine with that if that's what it takes to get the temporary and imaginary safety they seek. This is typical of government supremacists.

Their modern rallying cry is the opposite of Patrick Henry's. They scream, "Screw liberty, Give me legislation and order!" 

They are no different than any other archator, including the protesters who violate the life, liberty, or private property during their protests.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Getting ICE-y around here

Here in this small, utterly insignificant speck on the map, ICE is abducting people. Not archators- as far as I know- but a woman and her two kids.

I'm sure some people are thrilled about it. I'm not.

I wouldn't really be able to care too much if they were targeting archators; those who violate life, liberty, or property. Government agents are all, by definition, archators, too. In that case, it smells like intergang warfare to me. Not my circus; not my monkeys.

Ignoring government opinions about where you are "allowed" to live isn't archation. Unless you subscribe to the communistic notion that the collective "owns" the "country", rather than the ethical position of "property lines, not government borders".

I'm not brave or foolish enough to go in guns ablazin' to stop the abductions. I'm not proud of that.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

The Government Holocaust

The Holocaust that dwarfs them all is the one that started when some evil person invented the idea of governing others instead of (or even along with) himself. 

And it continues today.

All other holocausts are merely chapters in this one.

We've had the means to end it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Nowhere left to go?

I know of someone in this area who is in America for political asylum.

She is originally from Venezuela. She wasn't an activist; just a woman who got on the bad side of government when it nationalized her employer's business. She was told to say publicly that this was a good thing. She wouldn't. (Governments sure do love compelled speech!)

Soon after, while she was visiting a family member in America, her home was ransacked by government agents and friends warned her to not come back because she was in danger- so she didn't, and applied for asylum.

It's a shame that statists are pushing to make America more like Venezuela of today than America of 1776. If things don't turn around, there will be nowhere left for people like her to go. Or for people like us to go.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

You are the terrorist they want to find

Whenever anything is proposed to "fight terrorists", it's going to be used to hurt you. Anything, every time.

If you aren’t 100% enthusiastic about letting government track your every movement, spy on all your communication, control every dollar you spend, turn rights into privileges, etc., they consider YOU the terrorist. 

You are the target of these programs and this legislation or policy. If it happens to catch a real terrorist somewhere along the way, that's just the cherry on top that they'll point to when claiming success. And most of those terrorists are probably their guys in one way or another.

Government considers you the enemy, and it will show you by what it does if you're paying attention.

Imagine being gullible enough to believe government protects you and is essential for your well-being. Or to conflate government with society.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.