That chapter's end

So why no more newspaper columns?

I got "The Call" almost 2 weeks ago. I didn't get fired, and I didn't quit.

The paper's owners in Wyoming called the local publisher/editor and said to eliminate the local opinion columnists; they are choosing to go with nationally syndicated columns instead. It's cheaper for them.

The paper has been cutting expenses as long as I've been writing the columns. Going from a daily to a twice-weekly to a weekly. Getting rid of half the writers (and staff) every couple of years. Every time they did, I thought, "This is it", but they always kept me. Until now.

I rode it out to the end, just one month short of 16 years, and I'm happy with myself for doing so. I'm sadder over this ending than I thought I would be. 

Last year, I went through a rough spell where I dreaded the deadline and trying to come up with a column topic every week. I really wanted to quit writing the column. I just couldn't afford to. (On a related note, if anyone would consider subscribing to this blog, now would be an excellent time to do so because this additional setback puts me in a bind!)

I eventually got over that hump, and things have been going smoothly with the column since then. Until this happened.

The paper's publisher/editor was very apologetic and said he hated to let me go. He said I did exactly what he had hoped I would do. 

He also said they got a lot of emails about my column- mostly negative. He said I was "famous" locally and that the local officials hate me. I told him that if they didn't, I would know I was doing something wrong.

I appreciate that he stuck up for me. I got some of the hate mail he referred to. Some of it was pretty nasty. I got positive emails, too, though. Those took away the sting of the hate mail. Plus, seeing the kind of people who hate me has been like a compliment.

I thanked him for this opportunity. He wished things could be different and said if things change, he'd hire me again. (Things won't change for newspapers.) We parted on good terms, and that's that.

I'll still be posting the previous month's columns in full on Tuesday evening, as I've been doing, until they run out in a month. 

The blog continues.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Authority- the definitions

One word; two unrelated meanings; confusion intentionally encouraged in order to cause mindless compliance.

Authority- expertise. Not dependent on external factors. Voluntary; tends to lead.

(Political) Authority- entitled, thieving bully with immunity, immunity which can be canceled once a different political faction gains power. Coercive- tends to shove.

See also: The Most Dangerous Superstition and Problems with "authority"

You own your life and property

(My FINAL Eastern New Mexico News column- October 28, 2026)

Those who depend on ruling others to make money, secure their position, or to gain power won't let it go. Respecting your natural human rights isn't in their interest. It's up to you to secure your rights- to assume your liberty in the face of all those who want to rule you...read the rest...

--

You read that right. This was my last column for the Eastern New Mexico News. Details here. 

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Don't violate others – problem solved

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 23, 2026)

Why are we forced to pretend not to know the solutions? To pretend solutions are mysterious or too hard? Because government doesn't benefit from solved problems. It loses power when problems are solved and people no longer beg to be rescued. Often, getting government out of the way is the solution.

Crime is a solved problem.

To pretend that no one knows how to reduce crime is a lie which only serves the criminals- both freelance and governmental. The solution is to stop criminalizing things everyone has a natural human right to do, including both what they choose to put into their bodies, and defense of person and property with the most effective tools ever invented for the purpose.

If an act doesn't violate the life, liberty, or property of a specific individual, it can't be a real crime. Pretending otherwise is a criminal act which artificially inflates the crime statistics and causes real crime to happen. Think of the crime wave in the 1920s, caused by alcohol prohibition. "Crime" gives government an excuse to violate your life, liberty, and property to make you "safe" from those who would violate those same things, but without a government title. It's not an improvement.

Inflation is a solved problem: stop letting government manipulate the money supply. The more "funny money" the Federal Reserve creates out of thin air, the less each dollar is worth; the more dollars it takes to buy things. If you're blaming businesses, you're blaming the wrong people.

Add to this the disastrous effects of government creating enemies all over the globe with its expensive and wasteful warmongering, which causes supply problems and worse. We can't afford to keep supporting government's addictions.

Every problem can be solved by respecting each individual's equal and identical rights to life, liberty, and property. It's the only solution.

This is only a problem for those who make a habit of violating life, liberty, and property. Either through ordinary crime or through the extraordinary crime of imposing government on the population. The effect is the same.

I've discovered that telling the truth and sharing solutions will get a person censored. Many platforms care more about the feelings and "safety" of the bad guys than about letting the truth be told. This shows beyond any doubt which side they prefer and where their loyalties lie. They don't want problems to be solved; they want them used to control you.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Building a life around politics

I've never met anyone who prioritized politics and was also a genuinely happy person. I suppose if someone gets joy from controlling those around them, and from punishing the ones who don't submit to their control, they might appear happy on the outside- while rotting on the inside. 

This doesn't mean you'll automatically be happy if you reject politics; there are many factors. Sometimes life just stinks, and people using politics against you will usually make things worse. Making politics central to your life isn't going to make anything better. It's a form of self-harm, and it spreads like a contagious cancer to those around you.

Even when politics is a part of nature- such as when wolves fight each other for dominance or over food- it isn't something we should copy. They don't know any better. They also sometimes eat their young. We can do better than that. Only humans- some humans- believe it's a good idea to allow politics to be central in their lives. It isn't.

I would rather not be one of those who makes everything political. It doesn't have to be. Only thieves, murderers, politicians, and other criminals live by politics. 

Politics is what you use when you have nothing worthwhile to contribute. No skills, no goods, no wisdom. Falling back on politics- using force to coerce others to support you while you steal, kidnap, and otherwise violate their natural human rights and try to destroy their liberty- is an admission that you can't make it in the world unless you can use theft, violence, or threats of violence against others. If you use politics, you're cheating, and you've already failed as a human.

You can choose to trade or find other mutually consensual ways to interact with others, or you can be political. There's no third option.

The weather doesn't care about your politics. Neither does your dog- unless you treat it politically by arbitrarily kicking it. Politics is completely meaningless to everything and everyone other than those you target with your toxic political ideas. And all political ideas are toxic.

To those who claim everything humans do is political, I say you've been doing it wrong. You've been a parasite on society rather than a benefit. 

And yet, political people honor other political people with statues and by naming roads and buildings after them. They act as though they are the heart of society; as though the rest of us couldn't survive without their presence. Humanity survives in spite of politics and those who employ it, not because of it.

I'm in favor of showing society how irrelevant and useless politicians and their ilk really are.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

I appreciate those who make things better

Some people actually work to make the world a better place. I appreciate them.

There's another man in my neighborhood who also feeds the stray cats- some of the same cats I feed, but he has a few regulars who never come to my house. He often has 6 to 10 of them at feeding time. (Maybe it's because he offers raw chicken.) 

We've had several conversations about the strays over the years; worrying when a sickness ravages the neighborhood cats, wiping out some of the cats we have tried to save. Wondering what happened to a regular, discussing the new kittens, or reporting a death the other may not know of. I've seen him chasing off dogs (dogs who won't stay home) who come into his yard to attack the cats. 

He's had to defend himself from threats by the local cop, who threatened to "fine" him for feeding cats, saying this made the cats his pets, and no one is "allowed" to have more than 3 cats in town, blah blah, blah. He asked if the birds were also his pets since he has a bird feeder. The cop seems to have left him alone since then.

Anyway...

I appreciate him caring for animals who have no one else to count on. 

Besides him, I notice other people making the world a nicer place just by doing what they do.

I love the delivery drivers I see frequently in the neighborhood. They'll often wave as they drive by. 

I love the cashiers I encounter again and again, doing a job which isn't glamorous and doesn't pay enough, but who still manage to do a job that is essential while being pleasant to the customers. (The unpleasant ones are a conversation for another day.) I look forward to seeing the familiar faces, even though I don't really know them.

Anyone who comes to my attention, doing things that make the world a little better with their contributions, without stepping on the life, liberty, or property of others in the process, can elicit the same feeling in me.

No government mandate was required to get these people to do helpful things. In some cases, they are doing it in exchange for a paycheck, but often people do nice things that only cost them. And a paycheck doesn't ensure good service, anyway.

Maybe it's silly and sentimental to feel this kind of connection with those who probably don't feel the same about me. If so, I'll embrace it anyway.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Angering statists is a strange hobby

Some days it feels like I've said it all before. (Which I know I've said before!)

How many other ways can I explain that to be libertarian (and thus, to be ethical) is to accept the primary human responsibility to not violate the life, liberty, or property of any other person, without exception?
How many times can I explain that calling a violation a "law" and saying it's your job doesn't excuse doing those things?

I got added to some communist's X list of "Nazis", and called "entitled" because I refuted (effectively, it seems) his argument that "land tax", which he differentiates from "property taxes" (yeah, I don't know... communism, I guess), isn't theft, extortion, or a ransom, because you "owe" everyone for any land you occupy. He made many bad arguments for his position. Then he got mad.

Angering bad people feels like a badge of honor. It makes me happy, and I want to do more of it. Yes, it's a personality flaw.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Alien communication

How can those of us who believe in liberty and individual responsibility have a conversation with those who don't? Often, there seems to be no common ground. It's almost like trying to talk to an alien.

It's hard to communicate with those who believe in the imaginary right to govern others. They believe humans are flawed, but politicians are somehow exempt from this. Or that when these deeply flawed humans join together, their individual flaws cancel out.

It doesn't work that way. When people join together to do something they have no right to do in the first place, their flaws compound and expand-- there's safety in numbers. That's why flash mobs of looters who descend on a store face little risk. Those who seek to govern others enjoy the same protection. They are still looters, but they use "laws" rather than bricks.

It's hard to really communicate with people who see a significant difference between the two; those who believe that governing others is a legitimate human endeavor, rather than just another category of crime. We don't really even speak the same language. I say "theft" or "extortion"; they say "tax" or "fine".

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Life is hard; it's harder if you're political

There's a quote that is commonly misattributed to John Wayne: “Life is hard; it’s harder if you’re stupid”. Whoever originally said it, it's true.

People make their own lives harder by being political. Politics makes people stupid, and it makes life much harder than it needs to be.

When one of the members of the group They Might Be Giants scolded me years ago for saying he should stop making everything political, telling me, "Everything is political", it made me see him, and his band, as stupid. As part of the problem. I had been a fan for years, but with one tweet he exposed himself for what he really was. It wasn't a flattering revelation.

Because the only way "everything is political" is if you make it that way. And only a stupid person would do so.

He was unnecessarily complicating his life, just to earn points by peacocking his irrational political beliefs. He was sabotaging his own life with politics. Making life harder for himself, his bandmate, and for everyone in society. Smart people wouldn't do that.

Life is already hard enough; it's even harder if you make it political.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

An acceptable way to be a creep?

Anyone who supports any amount of political government at all is just looking for a "socially acceptable" mechanism to use to violate the natural rights of someone else.

They can use all kinds of pretty words to hide it.

They can come up with all manner of excuses to justify it.

They can list all the things they are afraid would happen without it.

They can even recite history to find irrelevant events to rationalize it.

If you want a way to violate others, but you don't want to look like the bad guy, I hate to break it to you, but advocating for a government to do it for you isn't the way. There is no way. If you violate others, you are in the wrong. Every time. Regardless of your chosen method. And government is the most dishonest of the bunch.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Not always best to follow orders

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 21, 2026)

Most people value obedience more than I do. To me, doing the right thing is what matters...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Authoritarian government weakest of all

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 16, 2026)

Why do so many beg for a big, authoritarian government involving itself in every facet of their lives? Even when it violently destroys their liberty and violates their rights every day? What could possibly be going on in their minds to make this seem like a good thing?

Have these people not seen the results of this over at least the past 25 years? Has a bigger, more authoritarian government made life better or worse?

It appears that many people see authoritarianism as strength. I don't. I see it as weakness, relying on bullying tactics to make itself look strong to gullible observers.

If the authoritarians were actually strong, they wouldn't need to be authoritarian. Strength isn't threatened by opposing opinions. Strength can afford to allow people to live different ways; to opt out and take a different path. Strength doesn't try to censor speech. Strength does not need to spy on everyone all the time. Those are signs of weakness, cowardice, and a lack of confidence. They are an acknowledgement of incompetence.

Authoritarianism always chooses the weakest course.

I believe people who secretly see themselves as powerless, who are therefore afraid of almost everything, want a strong bully to defend them from all their hobgoblins. They are attracted to, or they become, authoritarians. Right and wrong are thrown out the window. It becomes acceptable to commit crime to prevent crime.

If you rely on a criminal gang to hold other criminal gangs at bay, you're only making the situation worse. You're shirking your personal responsibility because you don't believe you are "enough" to deal with dangerous things. You make things more dangerous for yourself and everyone around you by empowering authoritarians, believing this fixes your problem.

Whenever there's a situation and a person's first instinct is to call someone else to come save them rather than dealing with it themselves, I lose respect for the person. It's the same whether you're talking about things and events in the neighborhood or across the globe.

Then these people wonder why things keep getting worse.

"Leave it to the professionals" is the advice of someone who wants you weak and scared. Someone who wants you dependent on them, so you'll keep handing them your liberty and your money. I say the "professionals" and their authoritarian desires for control, surveillance, and "safety" are the problem. You, living your liberty to the fullest, are enough. You've got this.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Tomahawk fun

Sic semper tyrannis!

When I'm out throwing my tomahawk and knife, I always enjoy using face cards as my target. The number cards just aren't as inspirational for some reason.

Now, I'm not a French Revolution kind of person. I oppose human sacrifice even when it's the rulers on the receiving end. But a card can be a satisfying proxy for expressing my sentiments.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Bad rules

The only legitimate justification for a rule is to make life better by protecting life, liberty, or property.

If a rule doesn't do this, or actually makes things worse, either because of the rule itself or how it is enforced, then a change is necessary. Either change how the rule is enforced so it doesn't make things worse, or eliminate the rule entirely.

I'm not opposed to rules. I'm opposed to bad rules. Harmful ones. Stupid ones. Punitive ones. Rules that make life worse.

And I'm opposed to anyone who enforces such rules.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

"Yeah, but..."

So many people are desperate- absolutely desperate- to keep believing government is good. Or at least "necessary". They'll do all sorts of contortions and gymnastics to defend their belief.

When I point out that inflation is strictly caused by government counterfeiting money, they'll say "Yeah, but even if it didn't, greedy people would still raise their prices." You see what's wrong with that, right?

It keeps playing out the same, no matter the topic.

No matter what evidence they are presented with, they always have a "yeah, but" ready. It doesn't matter how delusional the excuse is, as long as they keep believing it.

And, at their foundation, they still all come back to fear. 

They are afraid of living without being governed.
They are afraid of what will happen if other people aren't governed.
They are afraid of what will happen if "those people" get control of the government. 

They never consider that the main problem is people, like them, who believe government is necessary, or even good. 

They just can't let go. They can't admit it was a scam and has proven to be a complete failure in doing the minimum used to justify it, over and over, throughout ALL of human history, no matter how it is designed or run.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Unhealthy fear leads to government

Why are so many people so afraid? Why do they embrace their fear and use it to justify horrors?

I am afraid when I encounter a situation I don't feel adequate to handle, and when the consequences seem too big to bear. Medical situations cause me fear more often than any other situations do. This fear doesn't inspire me to violate others, though.

Unlike what I see happening around me, my fear doesn't come from not having the ability or right to control other people. 

I can see how it might happen, as in an active shooter situation. But seeing armed people- as long as they aren't wearing a badge or acting aggressively- doesn't cause me fear, or even stress. There has to also be that credible threat. And I can take measures so that I don't feel quite the helplessness others might. Which means I do have the ability or right to "control" bad guys in this way, so there's less fear than if I were helpless.

I'm not scared of people who are doing what they have a right to do.

I wonder why other people seem so afraid- afraid to the point that they want government there to protect them (even though it can't, or doesn't, do so).

They must be engulfed in feelings of inadequacy and helplessness. They must feel like Big Brother is the answer to their fears.

I wish I had the power to calm their fears. But pointing out that they have options, and that fear doesn't have to rule them, only seems to make them angry. As though they enjoy their fear and don't want to lose it. 

There are better, healthier ways to enjoy fear than imposing a government. Ride a roller coaster- if that's not enough, make sure you're not secured in the seat. Or watch a scary (or gory) movie. Or jump off of bridges- tied to a bungee if you like. Fly a Tesla Roadster over a canyon. None of those fear-inducers violate others. Using your fear to justify a government does. Don't do that.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

A bitter old Scold

 

A long time ago (in internet terms), someone invited me to join the Nextdoor site. Supposedly, it lets you connect with local people to see what's going on in your town. I never get notifications or news about this town; only Clovis.

When I comment, usually taking the side of liberty and against the police state, there's this petti old karen who scolds me, saying I don't live in Clovis, so I need to mind my own business.

She treats the site as her own little fiefdom, threatening to ban anyone who expresses an opinion she doesn’t like- especially one about cops.

She is an unrepentant copsucker; apparently on a first-name basis with the police chief and whichever officers make the news on any given day. She reposts all the press releases the cops put out, as though it's her mission in life. She praises the cops whenever they do anything, and thanks them individually in her posts. She completely ignored the cop who recently caused a traffic accident and lied about it (but was found out and disciplined for lying)- as though it never happened. She defends Flock spyware relentlessly, because "crime". She gets angry and encourages people to report people to the cops for having any fun she doesn't approve of- and there's an awful lot she doesn't approve of. And, of course, she's afraid of almost everything she doesn't like or understand (which is nearly everything).

She's a busybody of epic proportions, inserting herself into almost anything, whether it's her business or not. It seems like the things that are none of her business excite her the most.

She's a really nasty piece of work.

Usually I ignore her, because she's not worth my time. (I've tried to mute her so I don't see any of her posts, but that hasn't worked.)

Recently, she got her panties in a wad because there's a "pot farm" next to the hospital, using "major water". (She's probably upset she can't report them to the cops!) I'll bet she doesn't have an issue with any Big Government project using even more water. Fortunately, several people knocked her down a notch, but I chimed in anyway. 

I asked, "Why is this any less legitimate than anything you do with water? There’s nothing unethical about farming."

I guarantee you that if she responds, she will be snotty about it and have some excuse about "the children", or that it used to be illegal, that she believes it's immoral, or that her cop buddies don't like it. (Even though the cop I knew best used to steal it from people and smoke it with his friends.)

I just can't relate to people like her. She disgusts me in almost every way possible. People like her are the reason America doesn't have liberty.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

The Statist fraud

Government is supposedly established to secure the rights to life, liberty, property, and "the pursuit of happiness".

It didn't work. Government has become the primary violator of those rights.

Abolish it.

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary", but somehow we're to imagine that those same non-angels become better individuals when given the power to "legally" violate others with very little risk to themselves. 

That doesn't work. The worst people among us are drawn to positions of government power. Government isn't necessary, but is clearly contraindicated under the same conditions used to justify it.

Abolish it.

"But if you'd just read this treatise, laying out why government is good and essential, you'll see why you have to accept it and work with it to get whatever scraps of liberty it is willing to let you have."

No. Delusional people writing down justifications for their delusions hold no interest for me. Liberty is superior to any system seeking to violate it. Even if it's a government you like and want to excuse.

Abolish it.

I know, abolishing government is hard. Maybe impossible (for now). So, in the meantime, at least stop pretending it has any legitimacy. Treat it as you would treat any freelance criminal gang. Do what you must to avoid being murdered by it. Protect your property from it in whatever way you can. Exercise your liberty in secret if it's too dangerous to exercise openly.

And don't buy the justifications that the statists are trying to sell you. It's fraud. It's a scam. Buyer beware.

-
Thank you for reading.

Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Feel free to assume your liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 14, 2026)

Assume liberty.

Most people have been trained to automatically ask what government allows; what the rules say. They assume they don't have liberty; otherwise, they wouldn't wait to see what someone says they are allowed to do...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

You know what's best for you

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 9, 2026)

I don’t know.

What don't I know? I don't know exactly how you should live or every detail of your situation. I don't know how to solve every possible random problem in the world. I don't know what complications might arise. I don't know solutions I can’t see or haven’t thought of. All the variables; the consequences of any potential solution. I don't know how, or if, society should be run.

I don’t know, and I accept it.

While I'm comfortable saying I don't know, there are also things I do know.

I know that no one else knows those answers, either. If they claim to, they are being dishonest. Those who make up legislation are often even more ignorant about the topics they legislate on than the rest of us. They are imposing a bad solution, forged on an anvil of ignorance with a hammer of imaginary political authority, and they'll hurt you if you choose your own path. They will punish you for knowing your own situation better than they do, and acting on the knowledge.

What kind of horrible person would do that?

I also know that no one has the right to govern another. I know there's no justification for violating other people's natural human rights.

I know real rights don't conflict. When they appear to clash, it's because someone is advocating so-called "positive rights"- the belief that someone owes you simply because you exist. Health care, for example, is a human right only if you're talking about treating yourself or reaching a deal with a provider. No one, including the DEA, FDA, or other government regulatory agencies, has the right or imaginary authority to interfere. Nor is healthcare something you can ethically force others to provide for you; that's slavery.

Those who hate the thought of everyone's liberty being fully respected will often ask me to explain, in minute detail, how to solve every possible situation which might arise. I can't. I don't know. The problem is, their favored solution fails if put to this test, too. They are careful to never let it be examined, but quick to turn the tables to hide the failure of the system they prefer.

It's dishonest, but you should now be able to see through it.

It's OK to not know everything, and to admit it. You can still know when something is wrong. These are two complementary sides of self-awareness.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?