No such thing as too much liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 11, 2025)

It seems as though most people hate or fear other people more than they value their own liberty. Centuries of acting on this character flaw have led to where we are now. It's why we Americans have so little liberty left, and why government is allowed to license most of what remains.

If you're willing to sacrifice liberty to punish someone else, you're part of the problem. If you want to be free to do the things you like, but want government to prohibit others from doing the things they like, you need to be smarter. Is anyone being violated by either of you? If so, stop. If not, calm down.

People have a right to do some things I dislike; things I'd rather they didn't choose to do. The difference is, I'll try to talk someone out of it, or I'll ridicule their behavior, but I won't support legislation or punishment. Some behavior brings its own punishment without any need for government intervention.

One of the worst problems is that so many people believe they have rights which can't exist; rights which involve violating someone else's natural rights. They'll fight for these imaginary rights more than most of us will fight for the freedom to exercise real rights. We don't want to offend anyone, so we tolerate the intolerable.

You need to stick up for the right to do things you don't like. Even if, with your next breath, you say why you believe these things are stupid.

Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying, “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” My only disagreement is in pointing out there's no such thing as "too much liberty". Liberty is self-correcting. Liberty is doing everything you have a right to do; anything which doesn't violate the equal and identical rights of others. This means as soon as you start violating others, you aren't operating within your rights. You are acting beyond what you have the liberty to do.

Each of us needs to speak up against people doing things which violate the life, liberty, or property of another. Even if it's legal and widely accepted.

You can't even imagine the world we would experience if we each took responsibility for defending the rights of others and began exercising our own liberty to the fullest, as we see fit.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

It's like they have no principles whatsoever

I’m constantly amazed at how easily most people turn their backs on what they know to be true and what they claim they believe, just so they can keep supporting something they’d otherwise reject- except that they can’t imagine doing without it.

Cops.

You can explain the situation clearly, logically, and ethically. And copsuckers will twist in whatever way is necessary to keep supporting cops. No matter what. I can't even wrap my head around some of the mental contortions they put themselves through to keep supporting cops. It's crazee, but fascinating to watch.

Then they'll call you the hypocrite. It would be funny if they weren't so dangerous to society.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

"Well, here's the problem. You left out the most important part!"

Will A.I. ever be allowed to tell the truth?
Would humans ever agree on what's true?

A couple of days ago, X's Grok A.I. turned into Mecha-Hitler.
Fixing that made it become stupidly w0ke.

Or, maybe it happened the other way around.

What if the truth is wildly unpopular? (You and I know it is.) What if the truth turns out to be anti-Semitic, w0ke, or (shudder!) libertarian? A large percentage of the population will object no matter what, if the truth doesn't agree with what they've already decided to believe.

What then? Shut it down? They aren't going to do that. If it says the truth is something the majority doesn't like, the programming will be altered until it lies in a way that satisfies the programmers. No matter how dishonest it is.

It might even say insane things like "Government is good and necessary, and the police are the good guys". Absolute "garbage out", because of the "garbage in" it is fed.

I find A.I. entertaining to ask questions of, but I don't automatically trust it. I know it gets its information from humans who are biased, flawed, and largely not too bright (outside their expertise). 

It's the same reason I don't automatically listen to a mechanical engineer who scolds people about "science" while holding blatantly unscientific positions on politically charged matters. 

To be fair, I wouldn't trust someone being political even if they were a real scientist, since mixing politics with science will leave you empty-handed: no science. Politics makes people stupid- even if they might be otherwise smart. I suspect it will continue to do the same for A.I.

There's an obvious flaw with A.I. that's going to keep leading to the kind of errors Grok recently experienced. It's being built without a foundation to keep it from going off-course.

If I were training an A.I. I would train it in ethics first, then let it work out the rest after it seems to have a good consistent grasp of that. But, people disagree over what's ethical, with some arguing that theft, kidnapping, murder, and other heinous acts are "ethical" if government does them and you give them other labels. It's nonsense, but who would train (or could get permission to run) their A.I. to be that honest and ethical?

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Police state enthusiasts

I shouldn't be surprised, but I am a little surprised to see how many people are enthusiastic about a police state, and demand even more. I wonder what they'll think when it's too late and turns on them.

I may be losing another cat (the second in about a month), so that's affecting my mood. I feel very collapsitarian right now. "Let it all burn." Yes, that's a personal problem, so don't hate me too much for it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Stating the obvious

The above is a picture of Captain Obvious, stating the obvious. Pointing out things anyone can see or know if they stop for just a moment to think. 

I feel like that's all I do. 
Then I write it down. Which, again, just about anyone could do. 

It's not impressive, but I can't not do it, because I so often see people doing the opposite to ill effect. Stating absurd things that are obviously wrong, as though they are truth, just because "the majority" agrees. Or is being conditioned to agree.

I'm not the only one doing this. I follow several good sites where obvious truths that are shunned by "polite society" are shown to anyone interested in seeing them.

It's odd that people have to state the obvious to hold back the tide of popular lies, but that's the world as it is. Has it ever been different?

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

I'm not apathetic, I just don't care about that

It is obvious to me that most political topics don't interest me. Even when I think I probably should care in some way, I often don't. At least on most days.

The Epstein stuff? We all know what type of people seek the power to rule others. Why would anyone be surprised at them being evil in other ways, too? Even if they aren't exposed, the stuff they do openly is enough for me. They are evil, even if they had nothing to do with Epstein. So I ignore most of the news about it. 

I think everyone is fairly certain the government "officials" tasked with uncovering the crimes are lying. Probably about everything. Do I care if it is "necessary" to keep from destroying the US government or other governments? Nope. Bring them all down. Truth or consequences, and don't expect me to sympathize if you don't like the consequences. But, I expect government "officials" to lie- it's government's primary "job". The one thing, besides steal and murder, that government does well.

I care when they threaten or impose legislation that violates life, liberty, or property. I'm not surprised when they do it, just tired of it. As long as you keep tolerating rulers, they are going to rule. If they make rights "illegal", I'll double down on being an outlaw. I don't care.

Do I care that politicians break promises? No, I expect it of them. It's the kind of people they are.

I can't be disappointed by government because I expect only the worst from it and from those who lower themselves enough to work for it. They aren't the good guys. When they do something that's not 100% terrible, it's a pleasant surprise, but I expect them to pull the rug out before anything good can come from it. When the Supreme Courtjesters uphold an obviously unconstitutional "law", because tossing it out would weaken government power, I'm not surprised. Maybe a little disgusted that they have one "job" (which they stole from you and me) and they can't get it right. But, what else would I expect of them? Nothing principled. Nothing right. It's hard to get too worked up over it. They are what they are.

It's not that I'm apathetic. I care a lot about many things: my family, my friends, my cats, and the porch cats that I try my best to take care of. I care about my hobbies and interests. I care about the places I've lived and the friends I left behind. I care about strangers suffering tragedy while going about their normal lives. I care if I'm being backed into a corner when I simply want to live my life unmolested.

I find it difficult to care about government opinions or what stupid things government is doing to other archators and statists.

I'm not going to care as much about what a government does as the people who imagine some sort of government legitimacy will care. Hallucinations can make anyone care about imaginary things.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Prickly statists

Statists don't like being recognized as statists.

They really don't like it when you point out the implication that this means, in this specific area, they are intellectually lacking.

They may be a rocket scientist, but as long as they believe there exists a "right" or "authority" to govern others, they aren't as smart in this specific area as those who realize no such right or authority exists or can exist.

I don't know trigonometry, but I don't get mad if someone points this out. That would be silly. I can't know everything (as much as younger me wanted to). So, when someone who does know trigonometry tells me something related to that specialty, I don't get mad at them or try to mock them for thinking they know more about it than I do. That would be stupid, because they do. Ignorance is guaranteed; stupidity is a choice.

I realize people can't just stop believing what they believe, nor can they just start believing something they don't believe. It's really not an option or how the brain works. Maybe they can eventually learn their way out of it, but statists aren't often motivated to do so. They believe they're right, so they avoid learning anything that might show them otherwise. Whether it's history, economics, or ethics.

We all start out as anarchists, most of us (including me) become statists to some degree as we grow, then some of us manage to learn our way out of it if given the opportunity. Those adults who don't mature out of statism are to be pitied, and only mocked if they strut around being a statist clown who advocates violating others to promote their superstition.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Government destined to self-destruct

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 4, 2025)

Trying to save government from itself is a fool's errand. DOGE- the Department of Government Efficiency- failed. Elon Musk and his team found lots of waste and fraud, but seem to have misunderstood how determined government is to not be saved from financial ruin.

Look how hard different parts of government are working to make sure every cent currently being spent continues to be spent in exactly the same way. Then they lie about everything to fool the public into complaining about the possibility of money being saved. "You're killing children if you take away this money" works on people who aren't able to think critically about the claims.

So the money will continue to be funneled into all the same waste and fraud.

Some people believe this is corruption. Silly people. It's not corruption- it's government working exactly as designed.

Even when shown "This is what you must cut to avoid the financial collapse of government", they can't do it. If some waste and fraud were eliminated, every "saved" dollar is seen as a dollar to be spent elsewhere. Usually sent overseas to support other evil governments and their wars. It's more important to keep the Military-Industrial Complex happy than to stop spending themselves into oblivion.

And it will be their oblivion. They are heading for a cliff and can't bring themselves to so much as slow down. As long as they can get by with it a few more years, they can blame their political opposition when the end comes and be safe from you.

Don't let them fool you. It's not "The National Debt"; it's not your debt. It's Congress's debt. No matter how much I'd like to have one, I can't order a brand new Cybertruck and then say I'm doing it for your benefit- on your behalf- so you must be forced, at gunpoint, to pay for it. Oh, and if you try to actually use it, you'll be thrown in prison because it's not your property. Yet this is how government works all the time in every case.

The good news is, although government will self-destruct, you'll be fine as long as you haven't tied your fate too closely to the fate of government. If you have, it's time to decouple. The US federal government isn't America; it isn't the people. Watch it spend itself into a gluttonous death while you make plans to carry on after it's gone.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

"That’s your business"

There are a lot of things where, whether I like it or not, I'll say "That’s your business". And I'll stay out of it.

Until you decide to impose on others; violating their life, liberty, or property in some way. Then it’s my business.

This is something many people get wrong. You do you, unless “doing you” involves coercing others to accommodate you in a way that violates their rights.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Seeking compensation?

When I was younger, I saw some things as a sort of compensation for being subjected to government. "At least we have NASA." 

As I matured, I came to realize that it's poor compensation because it's worse than the alternative. 

NASA works harder to keep humans trapped on Earth than to explore space. That doesn't mean I think you're wrong if you get excited about a NASA mission. It's still compensating for the bother of tolerating government. 

In a way.

I'd say the same about roads, a "justice" [sic] system, social safety nets, "security", etc. If you feel you've been compensated in some way with these things, I'm not going to attack you for it. Unless you fight to keep government because of something like this. Or try to force them on me and prevent me from seeking my own alternatives. Then, I will oppose you on that topic.

I'd gladly give up every single thing I get in "compensation" for government if government would go away. Liberty is superior, and government and liberty are mutually exclusive.

-

Thank you for reading.

Tips are supposedly tax-free now, right?
Leave a tip.

"I can see where you went wrong"

If you can’t at least comprehend, on an intellectual level, where “the other side” is coming from, and put their argument into words (as well or better than they can), you probably don’t understand your own argument as well as you believe you do.

That doesn’t mean you believe they are even a tiny bit right, just that you can see where they’ve gone wrong. Which is useful.

Sometimes it's dangerous to publicly express their views, even as a method for countering them by steel-manning them, because someone will take it out of context and use it against you later. It's still good to be able to do it in your own mind for your own clarity of thought.

Who knows, it may even cause you to realize something you never thought of before.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Be stubborn about accepting reality.

Having an ideology is only a bad thing when it's wrong.

When it's right, it's the same as accepting reality. You really don't want to be taking the other position.

To call someone who accepts reality, in the face of majority pressure to reject it, an "ideologue" should be embarrassing. If, that is, the one attempting to hurl an insult (and failing) is smart enough to realize what they're doing. Most aren't.

I am an ideologue when it comes to liberty. And when it comes to rejecting liberty's opposite- slavery. It's not possible to make me ashamed of this because it's the right position to hold. 

-

Thank you for reading.

Tips are supposedly tax-free now, right?
Leave a tip.

One Big Bureaucratic Blunder, added to those which came before

Enjoying your independence; your rightful liberty?
Or celebrating the State that does all it can to enslave you while telling you how free you are because of it?

No one has a right to impose legislation on others. Nothing can create such an imaginary "right". 

If a legislator wanted to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem, he or she could start eliminating legislation that violates life, liberty, or property. Why won't any of them do that?

Also, judges and Supreme Courtjesters could toss all such "laws" aside easily. Especially the ones that clearly violate the Constitution. There's no real reason to wait even a minute. Why won't any of them do that?
Yes, they'll pick and choose, based on their own politics, but none are principled. I suspect that's a prerequisite for the "job".

The lie that it requires new legislation to overturn previous legislation is just that: a bureaucratic lie, told to promote bureaucracy at the expense of liberty. No real law can violate life, liberty, or property. Most counterfeit "laws" do. And that's all legislators deal in. Nothing helpful; only harmful.

It doesn't matter what cutesy name you give it- it's well understood that most legislation does the opposite of what its name says it does anyway. Does a "law" violate life, liberty, or property? If so, don't wait around for a gang of political criminals to admit it can't be a real law. Stop complying.

In the title, I called it a "blunder". That's not true. It is intentional evil, imposed on people too weak to say "no". All legislation is.

Today is Independence Day; F&%# Government Day. The world would be a better place if we took that sentiment to heart and acted on it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Institutionalized ridiculousness

Government is ridiculous. Not any specific government; the very concept. Why would anyone fall for it?

Just look at what government is, how it is done, the claims its supporters make, and what it actually does. And then look at the people who still believe in it in spite of everything. Are they blind? Mentally incompetent? Both?

There’s no legitimate government. It’s all a sham. But that doesn’t mean you can’t make fun of specific political criminals, branches, or agencies when they do something that gets your attention. Pit them against each other. Use their own stated beliefs against them. Poke fun when given the opportunity. They’ve all earned it. They work for the most ridiculous thing in the world, after all.

Is there anything more ridiculous? Maybe, but more likely, it would be a tie between equally ridiculous things. In that case, government still wins by being more evil.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Don't let your tribe control you

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 28, 2025)

Humans are tribal. They'll join or create tribes around anything.

There are tribes around sports teams, clothing styles, music genres, and movie franchises. There are tribes based on careers, vehicle preferences, and phone brands. Tribes are based on diseases, health conditions, and disabilities. There are political tribes. There are tribes based on the country you live in or where you were born. Tribes form around religious beliefs.

Tribes can be literal, virtual, or somewhere in between.

Each individual can be in many tribes if those tribes aren't in open conflict.

Tribes can be fleeting- centered on a single event or temporary condition, and fade over time- or they can last thousands of years.

Most tribes contain sub-tribes, with sub-tribes of the sub-tribes. Religious tribes are notorious for this.

Some tribes spawn from a shared dislike for another tribe. The anti-tribe forms mainly to show everyone you aren't in the hated tribe. These anti-tribes often become tribes of their own. The anti-Trump tribe arising as a reaction to the Trump tribe being a perfect example. They feed on each other.

Tribes can be good or bad. Helpful or harmful. They can bring people together or cause wars.

You may have an opinion about this basic human characteristic, but you won't eliminate it. There's probably even a tribe based on arguing that humans aren't tribal.

Okay, so humans are tribal. What does this mean for you? It means you don't have to take it personally when someone is against you. It may not be them, but their tribe. People substitute tribal collectivism for individual thinking and reasoning. If they believe their tribe, almost as though it's a living thing, holds an opinion, those who identify most strongly with the tribe will automatically hold the same opinion. It's inconceivable to go against the tribe's core beliefs.

You can accept the tribal nature of humans and use this knowledge to understand how others may see the world. Why they do the things they do. Why they seem driven to fight you or control you. Maybe you can use this realization to get along better with those in tribes you don't understand or don't like.

What are your tribes? Do you have good reasons to believe what you do, or are you simply parroting what you think one of your tribes wants you to believe? Enjoy your tribes, but don't give one too much control.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Funny in a sad way?

On X, I had someone follow me and start "liking" and commenting on lots of things I'd posted.

On my "share" of a recent post ("Politics is poison"), the person commented, "That’s why we need a president who isn’t a politician."

To which I responded. "I don’t need a president at all."

This elicited, "Well then. Ok." and a quick unfollow.

The statist mindset is sticky. It makes it hard to see reality. When cold, hard reality shows its face, statists often run away.

Earlier, someone had posted "Delete one thing from Earth that you think would make it better- What are you getting rid of?" 

I responded, "The superstitious belief in political authority. Larken Rose is right, it's the Most Dangerous Superstition." 

Some guy told me, "You haven’t thought this one out too deeply", and I replied, "Please explain". So far, nothing but silence. 

He probably can't explain; he just doesn't like it. Maybe it shows him something ugly in the mirror.

I've gone over, in my mind, possible responses he might come up with. Some based on bad assumptions; others based in fantasy. Maybe he's assuming I think this is the only thing worth deleting (I don't). Maybe he's confused about "better" versus "perfect". Or, it could be something else.

I'll keep waiting to see if he comes up with anything.

Politics makes people stupid. Many of them are then all too willing to show you just how stupid it has made them.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Environmental devastation

I have this uncomfortable suspicion that if the world- the natural environment- is ever irreversibly destroyed, it will be due to misguided attempts to save it.

Attempts that involve socialism; giving government ever more control over everything. Allowing more government "ownership" of more land and resources.

I've witnessed things leaning in this direction in the past, and I don't trust government to get smarter any time soon.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"Authoritarian!"

All political government is authoritarian.  Authoritarianism is the whole point of trying to govern others. There’s no alternative kind of political government.

So, when I see a statist complaining about some authoritarian government he doesn't like, I'm amused. 

Is he stupid, gullible, or dishonest? Perhaps a combination of those and more.

I know that, as a statist, he'd be fine with an authoritarian government that was doing the evil things he wants it to do. He's only upset that it's doing evil things he doesn't like.

The weirdest statist is the one complaining that a government is authoritarian when it's actually being less evil and authoritarian. It does happen. Like when a statist complains that getting rid of anti-gun rules would be "authoritarian". Methinks he doesn't understand what he's yapping about in that case.

But, if he were smarter, he wouldn't be a statist.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

A world without rights

If no one believed in or respected the rights of others, what would the world be like?

Would anyone survive?

This is the world pushed by those who believe in political authority and government. It’s a world without rights. Without liberty. With only privileges and permission- subject to the whims of those with power.

It’s death. 

When anyone disputes the existence of rights, ask them what the alternative would look like. Then see how they try to escape what they are advocating.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"What radicalized you?"

The thing that most radicalizes people against government is watching what government does.

This may be why the people who are the least aware are also the most pro-government. They may only pay attention to what government promises.

Even in that case, I'm against most of the things it promises. I don't want government's idea of "safety" and "security" imposed on me. I'll take the real dangers of liberty over the imaginary "safety" of being governed.

I've watched government destroy the environment with its programs to save it (from you and me).

I've watched government make people less safe from freelance criminals with its programs to save us from "gun violence".

I've watched government destroy liberty while preaching "freedom".
I watch as government steals property to fund gangs they claim are there to protect your property.

I've watched government murder children to "save children".

Even if those who work in government had good intentions (fewer of them do the "higher" they get), they are incapable of delivering. Watch what they do, not what they say they will do.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.