Human Nature

In some discussions I have had on some forums, I have come to the conclusion that one reason I feel anarchism is a viable "system" is that I think people are generally pretty decent. I also see that the people who feel that "freedom won't work in practice" think that people are generally just barely holding back their urge to kill everyone around them.

How do you view humans? As basically bad or basically good? I think that most people do seek out their own self interest, but not if it obviously hurts other people. If they find out they inadvertently hurt someone, they usually change their behavior. Most people also understand that it is in their best interest to not defraud or take unfair advantage of others. At least in my experience. There are obviously some truly evil people out there. Many of them seek government positions where they can use force to destroy lives and fortunes with less risk of repercussions. The others become freelance criminals (or just jerks).

There was a time when I truly thought the worst of people. I was a hermit at heart and wanted nothing to do with the rest of my species. Now I see that any negative experiences I was having were a direct result of my attitude. If you act like you expect that people are bad, they will respond accordingly. Likewise, if you expect that people are good, they will probably strive to live up to your expectations. Give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but be willing to protect your interests. In other words: Be nice and carry a gun.

This is why I see a great future for anarchism.

Hiding Behind Magical Portals

Courthouse metal detectors are designed to keep out the good people who are armed. A bad guy would just crash the door and start shooting. The best way to defend against that would be to have as many armed people inside as possible; ideally everyone inside should be armed. Obviously the people who work in courthouses and such are more afraid of honest people with guns than they are their competitor criminals. There is probably a good reason for this.

Much of what goes on behind those magical portals is rotten to the core and should be stopped. Rulings are made on a daily basis that are completely opposite of "liberty and justice for all". Juries are lied to and instructed to convict the defendant no matter how bogus the "law" may be. "The Law" must be upheld even as its fetid fluids drip down the arm of Justice. Real justice is swept aside while activist judges work to cripple any chance of freedom against the police state. It's no wonder the amoral beasts inside the courthouses feel safer with the layer of protection between them and us.

The metal detectors should be removed so that the authoritarians behind them would be more accountable for their actions. Of course, I feel that should be the case for every level of government. There is little danger of assassination if you do not spend your career destroying the lives and fortunes of the productive people in society. Since those who hide behind the magical anti-gun portals can't leave behind their life of parasitism and get an honest job, they fear us.

Demand a "Penalty Clause"

It is time for "The Penalty Clause". Recently I have read new writings from Bill St. Clair and L. Neil Smith calling again for a "penalty clause" in the Bill of Rights. The idea is that America needs a way to enforce the Bill of Rights against government predations. I have read of this idea several times and feel it is getting more critical all the time. I usually despise the very idea of any new "law". This is different. It would not affect anyone in any way unless that person chose to work in government "service". Don't want the law to apply to you; then stay out of government.

When some thug wanna-be gets a job with the government, or takes an oath to uphold the Constitution, they need to understand that they have an obligation to really obey that law. Not "interpret it" as they wish it to be, but to live and work within the very clear, plain language that sets down absolute boundaries limiting what they are allowed, under the law, to do. They need to realize that if caught violating the Bill of Rights there will be definite, personally painful, punishments. No hiding within the bureaucracy for them anymore. No hiding behind some corrupt judge's ruling that the Bill of Rights doesn't mean what it actually says.

The Constitution is by no means the "be all - end all" of liberty. I did not agree to submit in any way to the government it established. Still, it is a good way to illustrate that the monsters in DC have completely turned their backs on America and pledged allegiance the US Police State. The government hates liberty. They won't even stay within the bounds of the neutered liberty allowed by the Constitution, much less real freedom. Let's force them to show their true colors by demanding that the Penalty Clause be enacted.

Under this new system the BATFE would no longer be a dangerous threat to peaceful Americans, but would be running for their pathetic lives; knowing that their treason was no longer protected by counterfeit "laws" and collaborators in Congress.

So until we can jail the BATFE, let's starve those traitors.

Blog Anniversary

Today is the one-year anniversary of my blog. In the beginning I was very hesitant to start blogging. I didn't think there was any way I could come up with much to write about. I guess that fear was unfounded.


If you have been reading from the beginning, or have gone back through the archives, you have gotten to know me better than you may have wanted. I tried to keep my personal life completely out of the blog while I was actively campaigning. Recently, I have let that self-imposed prohibition slide.

I hope you have enjoyed reading my thoughts, whether you agreed with them or not. I also hope that in some small way, the words I have written have made someone, somewhere decide to embrace liberty in a way they would have never considered before.

Thanks for reading!

Keep Your Filthy Government Off My Child!

This past week was an eventful week, to say the least. It has been educational as well. I feel that the hospital employees and doctors did a fine job of caring for my girfriend and our new baby. There was only one think I take issue with, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of care they received. With the new baby, I see that the hospital staff makes the assumption that every child will be numbered and signed up for Uncle Sugar's handouts. Refusing completely bewilders them. They just keep pushing and pushing and then saying "Do you mind if I ask why?" Yes, actually I do mind. Why must I sign my child over to the state? When did the assumption that your baby belonged to you and you were going to take care of her by yourself die out in America?

The USA's Political Prisoners

It used to be that people in prison were there for actually doing something bad. Whether they were guilty or not is a different issue, but they had been convicted of committing some act of force or fraud against an innocent, individual, victim. Not so anymore. Now while there are still bad people in prison, the average prisoner is strictly a political prisoner, convicted of violating some nonsense "law" and "victimizing" the government which falsely poses as "society".

Things that should be treated as a medical or emotional problems, like severe addictions, are punished in harsh ways, causing innocent lives to be destroyed. Not submitting to the government's theft schemes is a big no-no today. Caesar must be given tribute. Things like peaceful gun ownership are punished with draconian penalties that would have been ridiculously unthinkable a generation ago, even though the "law enforcement culture" was not that good even then.

There is also the problem of the average juror not knowing their responsibility to judge the law as well as the facts of the case. In this way, many people who deserve no punishment are railroaded into prison by corrupt judges who work for the government; the very government which is the problem. What do they say about letting the fox guard the henhouse?

We all need to stop automatically thinking of people in prison as criminals. Now that the criminals run the "justice system", the distinction is rather dicey.

Best Laid Plans....

I am really sorry I missed oput on the Ammo Day/Exercise-Your-Gun-Rights-Day celebration. My new daughter chose that day to be born. It was a pretty nice trade off. Maybe it is a sign of her future hobby. I hope someone bought some extra rounds on my account!

I am so far behind on all the news that I may not catch up. Have patience with me, please.

Update Soon...

Due to circumstances beyond my control I will probably not blog for a few days. IT'S A GIRL!!

Buy Ammo Today!

Today is the day. Buy ammunition. You KNOW you need more. Sorry I posted this late!

Tomorrow is "The Day" - Buy Ammo

Don't forget: Tomorrow, August 28th is the day to buy ammo. Let's clean the store shelves to send the Brady Mass-Murderers Fan Club a clear message.

Societal Fairness vs. Authoritarianism

Whatever you wish to call my philosophy, libertarianism, anarchism, impractical simpleton-ism, it is the only one I have found that is completely consistent. I never take any rights or liberties that I do not also assume for everyone else. To me this shows that it is the best. There are no rivals.

I try to answer any and all objections to my views. I listen to the arguments against them, but I have never run across any argument that does not include some type of justification or exception where priviliged groups or classes of people are allowed to do things that are prohibited to other, less elite, people in the society. If the "lesser" people have been conditioned to expect this foul treatment, they may not notice it. Even if they do notice they may not complain because "this is the way it has always been done".

This strikes me as "unfair". How do you like that word? I know that life is not fair. Good people sometimes die young of terrible diseases, while a child molester may live into old age. A car wreck can kill the sober mother of three, while the drunk politician walks away unhurt. That is life in the universe. Where I expect fairness is where people make a conscious choice in some matter. The universe does not care, but people should.

When designing a political system to base a society upon, it should be set up in a fair way. A choice is being made. There should not be certain people who are officially allowed to steal while it is forbidden of others. There should not be a special class of people who can walk around with guns for the safety of themselves and others while everyone else is expected to be a potential victim, waiting to be rescued. The same rule or rules must apply to everyone in that society, from the exalted Decider to the "lowliest" gum scraper. Otherwise, keep looking for a better system.

Peace Officers or Law Enforcement Officers?

Back when there existed the "peace officers" there was no widespread hatred of cops. Now that there are "Law Enforcement Officers" instead, there is. Why is that? The cops would probably say it is because our society has degenerated into one where no one in "authority" is respected. Or that "drugs" have made society more dangerous. Is it possible that the cops themselves, with their grossly inflated attitudes of authority, could be to blame? If you walk into an area with a swagger, hand on the butt of your gun (wearing those leather biker gloves, of course) acting like you are looking for trouble... well... why should you be surprised when trouble finds you? People generally don't like trouble-makers. On an instinctive level most people are coming to view cops primarily as trouble-makers. Trouble makers of the worst kind because they have a near immunity from the consequences of their actions. Shoot an innocent person: it looked like he was going for a gun. Kick in the wrong door: they acted on good faith that the information was correct. Examples abound. Only the most blatant examples of "bad cops" get punished in any meaningful way. And then, if there is a way to "justify" the criminal actions, it will be found. The cops who disarmed the people of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina should have been dealt with like any other violent home-invading thief. Yet they still live (for the most part) and go about their "jobs" as if they committed no crimes. Many people are also beginning to recognize the absurdity of the majority of "laws". If a law must be enforced it is probably not a good law to begin with. Those enforcing the bad laws are themselves a huge part of the problem. "Just doing my job" didn't cut it in the past and will not cut it in the future. Think about that, Officer.

Campfire Lessons

There are many hours I have spent around a campfire. With friends, my kids, and alone. From time to time I took a good book with me. I suppose some people might think I am wasting my time sitting there.... talking, daydreaming, even napping. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the way that sleep, with dreaming during REM sleep, clears the cobwebs out of your mind, these campfire times clear the garbage from my soul.

There is something about a campfire that reaches a primal part of your being that nothing else can. I take it a step further by usually wearing buckskin clothes, only using primitive methods to start the fire, and surrounding myself with things that I enjoy. I had built a wikiup beside the river, behind my house. In front of its door I had a small firepit and some driftwood logs arranged around the fire to sit on. There was a tripod I set up to hang my rifle and whatever else I had with me upon. Truly a sanctuary from the dreary aspects of modern life.

I remember the day 10 years ago when I was sitting at my fire when a friend of mine came up and told me that John Denver had died in a plane crash. I had just been riding along in a car the day before singing his song "Grandma's Feather Bed" with my sister.

I watched the year 2000 come in while dressed in buckskins beside my fire. I wouldn't have known when midnight arrived except that I began to hear gunshots and fireworks. That was the best way I could think of to bring in the year 2000.

I had heart-to-heart talks with both of my kids there. Times that are precious to me for the simple fact that they were forced to stop so suddenly. I used to make up silly stories for my daughter that she still mentions occasionally.

There were a few times that sudden rain made me retreat into my wikiup, where I usually fell asleep. Snowstorms - I either sat in the wikiup or just let myself get covered. The voles who also enjoyed my wikiup were like slightly annoying friends when I was napping.

I had some fun times with girls beside the campfire (and in the wikiup), too. I'll spare you the details. ;)

My friends knew that when they came to my house, they should check out by the wikiup first before going to the door. They knew where I was more likely to be.

I have worked out some of my life's deep questions, and honed my philosophy of life and liberty, around those fires. I've daydreamed myself into trouble there, too. My current situation prevents me from indulging in this activity right now.... and I feel it.

Hung Up On the Details

I know, I do this too. I see a lot of people getting all excited over the one detail that is their particular "specialty". Whether it is precise language usage, knowing exactly how "X" will work in a free society, or "but what about the children/handicapped/sick?", it seems something always detours freedom fighters from the road to Libertopia. These things may be really important. The problem occurs when or if they distract us from our true goal: unfettered liberty. Am I just imagining that this is the goal? Am I speaking out of turn? If this is not your goal, I apologize for presuming to speak for you.

Why do these detours happen? Part of the reason is that, in general, freedom oriented folks are more intelligent than the average person who is content to be told what to eat, how to dress, and when to pee. They have to be in order to survive in the midst of authoritarian society. Yes, there are some dimwits among the fireflies, but they are more rare in this movement than they are in the general population. That intelligence means fireflies can get caught up in details more easily.

I get bogged down in absolutely refusing to accept any limits on my right to own and to carry any weapon I wish. Then there are those who run up against this insistence and get bogged down in worry that I will stick a nuke in my hip pocket and stroll through the mall. (How about I make the promise right now that I will never attempt to own a nuclear weapon? Now, stay out of my gun cabinet, OK?) I also get tangled in my firm insistence that all taxation is theft and is never right under any circumstance. I am sure there are more examples.


I can overlook or forgive a lot as long as you are moving in my direction. I hope you would give me the same courtesy. If you wish to stop before I have reached my destination, I will not hold it against you as long as you don't try to force me to stop when you do. You might just discover you want to come along anyway.

Toxic Toys From China

Why does no one notice that these toys come from an authoritarian country where personal responsibility has withered away under tyranny? Why is the first reaction always "More Laws! Government save us from this!"? More tyranny will make this problem go away, how? The company caught the problem and is working to resolve it. Thier reputation has been harmed by this and I can assure you they will go overboard trying to make certain this doesn't happen again, laws or no laws. The market works.

Definitions

For purposes of clarity I will put into writing some of my definitions. This is what I mean when I use these words:

Libertarianism - An absence of belief in the legitimacy of government.

Authoritarianism - The belief that some people are entitled to wield power over others, such as in a government.

Anarchy - No rulers. See also "Libertarianism".

Chaos - Either a complete lack of rules or more dangerously: arbitrary or unnatural rules. See also "Authoritarianism".

Evil - That which goes against human nature and is harmful to the individuals it is directed against. See also "Authoritarianism" and "Chaos".

Government - An organization of people who wish to tell others how to live, and enrich themselves in the process, using "laws" and rules that they establish without regard for those they attempt to control. Its defining characteristic is that it rules by force or threat of force.

Police/Cops - The enforcers used by government as the first line of control against the people.

Leader - Someone who sees a problem and offers to show others the way out.

Ruler - Someone who sees or creates a problem in order to increase his/her power and control over the local population.

War - An all-out celebration of government resulting in much chaos and evil.

Freedom - Living life as you see fit without harming anyone else in the process.

Slavery - Living life as someone else sees fit for you to live, within the parameters they have established for you, without regard for the harm it may do either to your body or your "spirit". See Rudy Giuliani's definition of "freedom" to understand the slave-owner mentality. ("Freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."-Rudolph Giuliani)

Terrorism - Attacks by free-lance or government agents against ordinary people (who are not doing "government work") for the purpose of scaring them into compliance. Attacks against government employees or installations are not "terrorism".

Rights - Something that you can do, simply because you were born human, without asking anyone's permission. Rights can never overlap, as in: your rights can never violate someone else's rights.

Personal Anarchy

In your day-to-day life, why do you behave? Is it fear of being arrested? Is it fear of being beaten by your victim? Or is it because you are mostly a good person? I don't think most of us alter our behavior on a daily basis because of "laws". If fact, I think that the main reason we obey the "laws" as far as we do is because they don't get in our way too bad. As long as we can ignore them, we do. Once "laws" become too unwieldy and intrusive - where they start seriously impacting the lives of the apathetic average person like they do the Freedom Fighters, there will be an outcry and widespread "lawlessness". Then the authoriturds will start cracking skulls even more, and by doing so bring about their own destruction.

The Road to "Here"

How did I become an anarchist or a libertarian or whatever I am? I think it was by a careful examination of the way things are, and the way things work. Coupled with a respect for the absolute rights of everyone, even my "enemies" to live free of coercion. I don't expect anyone to respect any rights of mine that I would deny others. If I want to do something I can step back and think "Would I allow someone else to do this?" If the answer is "yes", then I can do it without any guilt. If the answer is "no" then I should not do it or I should examine why I answered "no".
I think the libertarian philosophy is the best for me personally and for everyone else as well. It doesn't "level the playing field" like some other philosophies, but lets everyone choose whichever playing field or hill or valley that suits them best. Only in the absence of coercion can someone rise to their full potential.
It is also the only philosophy that recognizes that every "rule" applies to everyone. No privileged class of overseers who are immune to the rules they impose on everyone else. There is only one basic rule: The Zero Aggression Principle: "No human being has the right - under any circumstances - to initiate force against another human being, nor to threaten or delegate its initiation." This same idea has been stated in many ways by many cultures. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"... "An it harm none, do what ye will".. Same message; different words, because this is the one rule that is inborn in us all. It is why children cry "He started it" when they disagree. We all understand at an instinctive level that "starting it" is wrong.
I can't understand why it is so hard for authoritarians to get out of the way of people's liberty. Some people just have a pathological desire to control the lives of those around them, I suppose. It sounds like a mental illness to me. Is there a treatment for that? I know there is an academy where you can learn to escape the chains of authoritarianism.

Libertarianism: The Clean Slate

I believe that libertarianism is the default position of human existence; the "clean slate" we are all born with. Culture, society, your family, and your experiences immediately begin to scribble things on that slate; some are true but most are complete nonsense. We may never be able to erase everything that is written on the surface, nor may you feel it necessary. I do think you need to realize that the things written there are not "givens", but should each be evaluated upon their own merits. You may spend your life adding to the slate and erasing things that have proved to be useless. Don't leave the garbage written there; it will make it harder to read the important things. It is up to you to keep your slate as clean as possible.

Forgive Me, For I Have Shrugged

I apologize for shrugging my blogging duties a lot recently. This thing called "life" sometimes takes precedence over philosophizing. That doesn't mean that the philosophizing is less important to me, just that there is a hierarchy to life. This is what "Living Liberty" is all about.

The same old evils are still out there: activists decry self-defense, taxes are increased and collected, people are killed because of the medications they choose. Until WE change these things, they will not change. The statists are only too happy to stay on course for destruction. Yet, the simple act of living your life the best you know how has great power to defang the authoritarians. This is and always will be my core message. The state and its enforcers can imprison or kill your body. That power does not make them right, it only demonstrates how low they are willing to sink. Your mind is untouchable. The state has only the power over your mind that you give it. Psychological torture so loved by authoritarian monsters notwithstanding.

August 28th ... Buy Bullets For the "Brady Bunch"

Over on The War on Guns blog, David Codrea has suggested an action that you and I can take to combat the Brady Mass-Murder Cheerleaders "national day of protest" against guns planned for August 28, 2007. Buy ammo on that day. Yes, I realize there is already National Ammo Day, but you always need more ammo, right? Especially with idiots running around blaming you for the crimes they enable.

Religion Debate Forum

Regardless of where you find yourself on the spectrum of religious beliefs, there is a fascinating forum where you can debate with people who disagree with you. It is the "Why Won't God Heal Amputees?" Forum. Why not go browse around. Maybe you can join and dazzle them all with your brilliance.

I Believe...

That everyone is capable of running their own lives better than government can run their lives.... That there is nothing government can provide better than the market... That politics is a sad thing to waste an entire life on..... That everyone needs toys of some sort..... That a human's main job is to pursue happiness, without harming anyone else.... That work is a terrible thing to build an "ethic" around.... That love makes the world go 'round, or at least makes it worth the ride.... That good conversation is better than a great meal..... True friends are worth dying for.... That libertarianism needs to be served more gently to some people..... That the best things in life are not always free; sometimes you get what you pay for..... That something well-made and useful is more beautiful than a beautiful, useless object.... That I will never really "grow up".... That I have an almost magical ability to repel money.... That words are meaningless if not backed up by behavior.... That liberty, REAL liberty, is the best choice in every single situation imaginable and that the ZAP is always applicable.

Take the Future. It's Yours

Let's move boldly into the future; not waiting on the ponderous, peanut-brained Governmentosaurus retch to reluctantly lead the way. Government, by its very nature, cannot lead the way; it can only react by chasing the true leaders; free individuals. Technology; society; philosophy; liberty; we must take the lead in all these areas if we are to survive as a species. This means ignoring "laws" that are toxic to individual liberty and empowering to government. This means resisting with as much force as is necessary to free the 21st century slaves called "citizens", "voters", or "taxpayers". This means that each and every good person will become an "enemy of the state" because the state has become an "enemy of the decent individual". Real progress is up to free people now, just as it always has been throughout history. If humans are to reach space ahead of government, we can't wait on government to take us there. If "laws" are enacted to keep us grounded, we must fight against those "laws" as if our very lives depended on it, because they do. If humans are to invent new wonder drugs in the new dark age of prohibition, we must do the work without government sanction; beyond the prying eyes of the control-state. Great rewards come at great risk. They always have and always will. Looking to the government safety-meddlers will only kill us in the long run. I plan to leave a freer world than I was born into; not a global concentration camp. How about you?

New Constitutional Amendment

By way of The Libertarian Enterprise:

— A PRIVACY AMENDMENT —
To the Constitution of the United States of America

It shall be unlawful for any official, elected or appointed, at any
level of government, or for any government employee, or for the employee of any
company working for the government, to take the likeness—photographic, or by any
other means—of any individual, without that individual's explicit, written
permission.
The yielding of such permission may not be made a condition of
exercising any right, or receiving any service otherwise due to that individual.
Any attempt to violate or evade this measure on the part of any official,
elected or appointed, at any level of government, or for any government
employee, or the employee of any company working for the government, shall be
punishable by no less than 25 years at hard labor, without possibility of
parole, in that prison which currently has the worst record for deadly criminal
violence.

We Are NOT "Losertarians"

Unless we allow ourselves to be. We are the ones with consistent principles. We are the ones with an internal morality that doesn't rely on what is "legal" or dictated. That makes libertarians the winners. Authoritarians such as Republicans, Democrats, and other fascio-socialists sometimes resort to calling libertarians "losertarians" because of our lack of representation in the realm of electoral politics. The fact that most voters vote for the wrong people doesn't contradict this. The only way they can continue to do so is if we continue to allow ourselves to be judged according to "their" rules; in "their" game. Authoritarians have no defense for their monstrous desire to rule over the lives of others, so they try to attack us on election results. They can't honestly attack libertarians on principle; they don't know where that is. They come to the battle of principles unarmed.

"The Gang" Trailer

Courtesy of Red's Trading Post.

Sidetracked By a Statist

The title above refers to the years I spent wandering in "conservativeland" because of a statist's assessment that since I hated government, I was a conservative. Keep in mind that the statist in question was in college and heading toward a life in law offices and politics. His world view had been shrivelled by his blinders.

This person sat behind me in my "World History" class in college and I had made an impression on him because of my buckskin jacket and coonskin cap. (As an aside: It is so much fun watching a state senator twitch and squirm because of the nut-case wearing buckskin, sitting front and center in the class he has agreed to speak to! This is probably "illegal" because of the PATRIOT act now.) When I began dating the classmate's sister (future wife numero uno) he felt it was his duty to assess where I stood politically. I told him I hated government. Some things don't change, you see. He informed me that that made me a "conservative". I said I doubted it, but he assured me that was what conservatives believed, so I simply accepted this without looking into it. I wasn't too concerned about labels even then.

So I spent years watching the conservative "leaders" and wondering why they always betrayed me and made me more angry with each passing year. Had I stopped to think for myself at that point, I would have seen that I was not a "conservative", but an anarchist, or at very least a libertarian. Obviously, I have seen the light in the intervening years (Thank you, L. Neil Smith!). At least I didn't do any damage to freedom as a fake conservative. I didn't contribute anything to the conservative cause since I was fighting it from within, and wasn't inspired to be active in any way.

I am glad that I finally became concerned enough to actually step back and look at what I believed, as opposed to what someone else had labelled me.

Supporting Ron Paul

Yes, I support the campaign of Ron Paul. Do I think he would be "the best President" for 2008? No, I think I would be. However, that is the wrong question. Do I think he would be better than any other Demopublican who is running? Absolutely, with no contest! I also like the fact that he is stirring up debate and making many silent libertarians speak up. I like the fact that he is causing havoc on the internet and is exposing the hypocrisy of the mainstream media. I like the fact that he is exposing the other Demopublicans as the tyrant wanna-bes they are. I like the way his campaign is forcing people to examine their views in ways that no other Presidential campaign has ever done. All of these things are good. Still doubt I will vote for him, as I will probably write in my own name.

Real Liberty - Fear of the Unknown

Some people undoubtedly fear the changes that will come with true liberty. As unnatural as that seems to me, I do try to anticipate these fears.
Evil government thugs and bureaucrats may fear the loss of being able to order others around; the loss of power, control, bribes, the protection racket, petty meddling, and just generally being "above the law". Recognize these miscreants and don't let their fears or fear mongering stop us. After all, criminals always fear strong individuals. They prefer prey, because prey doesn't shoot back.
Some weak or overly emotional people will be afraid of living without the false security of the "safety net" that government pretends to provide. Point out the failure of government to really help the weak and the sick, and educate them on the true costs of relying on an inefficient bureaucracy versus the charitable nature of people when they aren't being coerced. Also show them what they can do with 8 times more wealth in a free market.
Those who have been brainwashed into believing that they can't protect themselves may fear freelance criminals running amok after the state sponsored criminals are gone from the landscape. Take them out shooting. Teach them the importance of paying attention to their surroundings (this enriches life exponentially, anyway, while scaring away thugs).
Life is too rich and too short to put up with government. Don't let your fears, or the fear of others, hold you back.

Trying to Keep My Blog "Polite"

A lot of libertarian blogs are filled with language that offends some people. That is OK with me, of course. Use any words you want in my presence. I don't really believe that some words are "bad" and I am not offended by anyone's language usage. (Well, that may not be totally true as some people's disregard for others can offend me at times. That isn't what I am talking about, though.) I think the FCC's rules for broadcast "standards" are complete nonsense and should be flushed back to where they belong. Back to my blog: Out of respect for readers who might not wish to expose their families or prospective libertarians to those words, I choose to not use them. I don't delete them from the comments, however, so tread there at your own risk.

I would like for people to be able to direct anyone to my blog without fear that my language would turn them off before my ideas have had a chance to shock and offend them. If you have friends or family who you think might be interested in libertarian philosophy, but who don't want to see "the F word" in every post, send them the links to this blog and my website. Freedom needs all the supporters it can get. Maybe later they will come to realize that it is pointless to fear certain arrangements of letters. Then they will be ready to visit some of the more colorful blogs.

That being said, I still am way more crude than the rest of my family. Such is the role of a black sheep.

US Department of Laughs

I'm not sure if I have ever posted three blogs in one day before, but I just had to pass this along. Here are "warning signs" from the US Department of Laughs. They are real signs that are confusing at best. The helpful USDoL has written new interpretations for them. I may be twisted, but I laughed til I cried!

Two by "El Neil"

Here is an article by L. Neil Smith, published by JPFO: Living Off the Interest, and a link to another article by L. Neil in a similar vein: Unanimous Consent and the Utopian Vision. These are the kinds of things that make me certain that we MUST attain a free world. Read it for yourself and see why I feel this way.

"It Has Never Been Tried Before"

The most pathetic argument against a stateless society is the one that whines "It won't work because it has never been (successfully) tried before". So? Every new invention "has never been tried before" either. Would you insist on staying in the stone age because the alternatives "haven't been tried before"? What's the difference?

I think it is time to try liberty. And not in some half-hearted "limited government" kind of way, either. Supposedly that is what the Constitution was about. Nope, this time we should try all-out freedom. No government other than self-government. Glorious anarchy instead of government-induced chaos. No badges for the criminals to hide behind. No "laws" setting up mini (or not-so-mini) kleptocracies. No tiny-souled bureaucrats taking out their frustrations on productive people anymore. We wouldn't even need to punish those who would inevitably keep trying to establish a government of some sort. Keep them around to remind ourselves what has been tried and seen to fail time after time, for thousands of years. Study them like a smallpox virus. They are in reality much more deadly, but only if we choose to follow them.

"Supporting My Brothers"

I was reading an exchange between someone who is joining the military soon and some other people who were commenting on his decision. He was asked whether he supported the government or its war in Iraq (among other places). He replied that he did not. He said he was not joining the military in order to fight for the government or to "fight for freedom", but to "support (his) brothers" in the military. So, who are his "brothers" fighting for? If they are all just supporting one another then everyone is chasing their own tail. Someone somewhere is fighting for the government. After all, that is the organization which is signing the checks.

There are better ways to support your brothers. How about trying to get them home alive? Signing up for a war that serves only government interests does not "protect freedom" in America or anywhere else. Staying in America and fighting against the implementation of the US police state does. Bring your "brothers" home and then all of you surround DC to contain the malignancy that is centered there.

Need Evidence That I Am Crazy?

Here is a little "human interest story" for all of you Kent-watchers out there.

Dimensional shift makes man feel like he's not alone
Jason Offutt
The Examiner

Time is not always as it seems. The human invention of chronicling time by
the movement of the planet fits well with our linear lives, but sometimes things
aren't so linear.

Kent McManigal lived in his pet store in Gunnison, Colo., the spring of
2004 when he experienced something he couldn't explain.

Now, I will say there are a couple of details the reporter got wrong: The catalogs in question were for different, unaffiliated companies. The web address from the missing knife catalog was in my generic "favorites" folder but I had not moved it to its specific "favorites" folder yet. That was also confirmation that it was the newest "favorite" I had added. I don't know what the reporter means by this making me feel I am "not alone". I never felt anyone did this to me. As I have said before, I have never seen a report that got everything right.

Now, did I imagine this? Am I lying about it? All I can say in my defense is that I do not believe in supernatural occurrences, but I got the strangest feeling as soon as the odd events started to unfold. I don't have any explanation for what happened, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a rational explanation. At least I would never base national policy on or start wars because of bizarre events.

TOLFA: The Next Step

I have finished my studies with TOLFA (The On Line Freedom Academy). I think it is a very good concept, plus I enjoyed it. I really think that this could be a major help in educating people about the ideas of liberty. The more of us who go through this, the faster government will lose its veil of legitimacy. For my part, I pledge to keep encouraging people to "enroll". Please consider trying it out. If you have wondered what you can "do" to promote liberty, well, this is one thing. Let me know if you decide to try it.

"Get Your Filthy Government Off Me!"

I don't wish to have any coercive government in my life. It is completely unwelcome. I am expected to feed it; house it; obey its whims; excuse its "messes" and the "accidents" it leaves everywhere. I'd rather have a spoiled 4 year-old with a gun in my home than the "nicest" government agent or employee within sight of my house.

I don't need or want government's "justice system", "law enforcement", "services", or whatever else it tries to convince me I can't survive without. I would rather take my chances with free-lance criminals I can shoot at in a free, "anarchist" world than have government forcibly inserted into my life. I am fully capable of taking care of myself and of controlling my behavior. I do not depend on government to dictate my morality. Neither do you. Admit it: you know right from wrong, and if government suddenly dropped dead (happy thought!) you would not go on a killing spree would you? What about the truly bad people? You know, the ones not included in the governmental "dropping dead" mentioned above. You and I would be able to end a criminal's career if he foolishly thought that without government there to protect him he could get away with aggression, wouldn't we?

So, when do "we" start driving government from our lives? When does the foreign, occupying force known as government get handed notice that it is no longer welcome? The sooner the better. Don't you think?

Don't forget: Starve the terrorists of the ATF!

Owning Private Property

In a recent exchange, someone told me that they have similar views to mine except that they do not believe in "private property". He referred to himself as a "left anarchist" (there are those seemingly mutually exclusive terms again!). I invited a discussion since this is such a bizarre concept to me. Sadly, I have yet to hear back. I wanted, and still want, clarifications. Does he mean any kind of private property or only real estate? Does that mean I can live in "his" house with him? Or at least set my tipi up in "his" yard if I want to live there? Can just anyone use "his" car if they wish to? What if I browse around "his" house and take what I think I need? Does he really mean that nothing can be owned? How can you consume food if you can't own it? Where does that leave the foundation of libertarianism: that we each own our own bodies and lives? Can we even say "my own body" if we hold this belief? What would make someone come to this rather odd conclusion?

To be honest, I have always considered this type of argument to be the whinings of someone who doesn't own everything they want, so they declare that they are against private property for everyone. It is what makes a communist a communist. I concede that I could be wrong. I would like to own a lot more than I do, especially real estate. I feel it would be phony of me to be against private property.

Shunning: Exercise Your Right of Association

In my call to Starve the ATF, all I am suggesting you do is to exercise your basic right of association. You have the right to associate with anyone you want. You also have the right to refuse to associate with anyone you do not want around you - for any reason. You own yourself and you can (and should) choose who to let into your life. Your reasons may be good, or they may be stupid or racist, but the right is still yours. Others also have the right to choose to not associate with you, so don't engage in foolish shunnings lightly. Government tries to violate your right to associate with whom you choose in every way possible, usually by forcing its minions upon you. Shunning does not violate the ZAP in any way. Even if you choose to shun the family members who may be enabling the jack-booted behavior of ATF terrorists.

Some have suggested to me that to capture the agents' actions on video to shine the light of day on their behavior is a better, nicer, method of dealing with these vermin. I think surveillance can play a part in bringing them down, but I don't feel it is enough. You do what you feel is right of course, but please, do something.

Assume Liberty

In day-to-day situations we should be able to assume the default position of expecting liberty to be respected. This should be obvious. The problem is that under the US government and its local co-conspirators, liberty has become the aberration instead of the norm. Presumption of guilt has become the default setting. Instead of putting a gun in your pocket before going out of the house, you may worry about whether such a standard, common sense action is forbidden by the "authorities" in your area. Instead of simply doing some repairs to your home, you may feel the pressure to beg for a permit first. This is unconscionable. How was this allowed to happen? I don't know, but I do know it has got to change.

Not everything about the present day is bad, nor is everything about the past good. You have the power to recognize what to pick and choose from the glorious buffet of history. Toss out the tainted oysters of tyranny. Assume that liberty will be acknowledged and respected, and soon it will be again.


And don't forget: Starve the deviants of the ATF!

Tyrannofascism In America

Isn't it funny how the government twists the language to suit their agenda? They make up new nonsense words and phrases like "islamofascism" (which is self contradictory) and they redefine other words like "patriotism" and "insurgent" to mean the opposite of what they have always meant.
On the other hand, freedom fighters try to do the same thing, but without the help of the big media conglomerates who fall all over themselves to spread the newest government word. The word "hoplophobia" has been around for decades, but won't be heard on the nightly news or read in any big newspaper. It doesn't fit with their agenda.
We can have fun with this anyway. A few I have made up include "jabbut" (from the commonly used "JBT" or "jack booted thug"), "tyranny deniers" (those who refuse to see tyranny in the actions of government agencies, especially the IRS; as a counter to the phrase "tax deniers"), "counterfeit 'laws'" (any law which seeks to control something other than actual aggression), and "law pollution" (the state of having so many laws that they all become nothing more than clutter). The word "tyrannofascism" in the title seems very fitting to describe government. I am not sure if anyone has used it before; I couldn't find it in any online searches. It seems very self evident to me. I don't expect any of these to find their way into common speech, at least not with their original meaning.

Libertarian or...? So Many Labels!

After my screed on Left Libertarians and such I keep seeing debates about what labels we may choose to put on ourselves. I see so many trying to claim they are not a libertarian because.... well, they have their reasons. Still, they act like MY definition of a libertarian. Labels divide us. I suppose I am a clumper. When asked, I consider myself a libertarian, an anarchist, a sovereign individual, a self-governor, an abolitionist, and probably more that I can't think of right now. I can find common ground among conspiracy theorists, minarchists, right-wing gun owners, environmentalists, and gay rights advocates. Where our "common ground" ends is where any group member calls for government "fixes" for their pet cause, or if they call for force to be initiated against another person. The only "fix" is to get rid of government so it can not continue to divide and conquer our liberty.

I usually simply stick with L. Neil Smith's definition of libertarianism: a libertarian is someone who lives by the ZAP (does not aggress upon others). Some people don't like this definition and have their own favorite. I know a fellow firefly (freedom outlaw) when I meet one. That is the important part.

"US Department of Theft" Loses Another One

Here is some good news in the fight against the US Department of Theft (also incorrectly known as the IRS): IRS Loses Challenge to Prove Tax Liability!

America's Problem: The US government

America has a drug problem. It is the DEA. By the same token, the only "gun problem" America has is the BATFE and the mindset that government has the authority to regulate guns in some way. I guess what it really comes down to is this: America has a government problem. Enabling the problem are those among us who believe government is necessary for civilization, instead of recognizing that civilization exists in spite of government. Even worse are those, like a certain Republican Presidential candidate (Rudy G.), who says "freedom means obeying the authorities". America is a great country, but it is being held back (and held down) by buffoons calling themselves the US government. America does not need the "USA". America needs to give freedom a chance. It is what we were promised; it is time we took it.

Starve the ATF! Part Two

Why target the BATFE (Barbaric Anti-Truth and -Freedom Extremists) when there are so many government agencies deserving of abolition? Because we have to start somewhere. They brought it on themselves by kidnapping Wayne Fincher and by trying to destroy Red's Trading Post. The malignant octopus that is government needs to be crippled by lopping off its tentacles, or by removing its head which controls them. The "head" being the sick notion of government legitimacy; it will take years for most people to awaken to this core problem. Government was a bad idea that has outlasted its time by several millennia. We don't have the luxury of time anymore. The ATF must be brought to its knees and then destroyed while it is down. This is an agency which by its very nature and every part of its "mission" is completely illegal in America (according to the highest law of the land: The Constitution). Shun everyone associated in any way with BATFE! (Here is a good start: Linda Young, the ATF agent who has been "investigating" Red's) There is no more deserving group of criminals than the ATF, except, perhaps the IRS. They're next.

Starve the ATF!

I almost never tell you what I think you should do. So you should listen closely this time as I make a plea for your action. Because of the systematic harassment of Ryan Horsley of Red's Trading Post, I suggest that everyone immediately cease doing any business at all with any ATF agent, clerk, secretary, or their family members. Don't sell them food, clothes, gasoline. Nothing. That's right. Let's starve the monsters to death! In the old days it was called "shunning" and was used when unrepentant people would not turn from their unacceptable ways. They became "dead" to the rest of the community; sometimes for lack of food and shelter, they died for real. It is time to bring that tradition back. If you know of anyone who works for ATF in any capacity you should refuse to have any dealings with them whatsoever. Unless their immediate family members publicly renounce their corrupt relatives and join in the shunning they too should be shunned.

Why am I calling for such drastic steps? Because of the extreme actions of the ATF agents involved in trying to drive Red's Trading Post out of business. They have been actively harassing Ryan and his staff, and have recently resorted to accusing him of harassing and intimidating them - for simply shining the light of day on their criminal behavior! Talk about "the pot calling the kettle black"!! They are trying to forbid him from blogging information about their criminally punitive "inspections"; forbid him from allowing customers or supporters to photograph the monsters during these "inspections"; demanding a blackout of publicity of any kind regarding the "inspections. They are using tactics straight out of the old Soviet Union's playbook. Hide from public review while harassing and destroying their moral superiors.


These are the same festering hemorrhoidal hominids who have kidnapped Wayne Fincher for owning guns that scare them (when in the hands of the rightful bearers of arms, that is).

David Codrea at The War on Guns blog is keeping an eye on the developments. Ryan is still blogging about the case, at least until they "get" him. Where is the NRA? Don't let this criminal gang get away with it any more. Look, we vastly outnumber these whoresons. Isn't it time we let them know who is in charge? I'll answer the question for you: Yes, it is time!
___________________________________________________
Update: It has been pointed out to me that some family members would have nothing to do with the evil ATF employee's career choice and should not be punished, even if they do not denounce the bad guy. Also, that the ATF vermin may have friends and neighbors who help support them through any shunning and who would be spared in any such action. I realize that this solution is not perfect. So, do what you think is right.

Government Of, By, and For the Defectives

I am not into debating about, or comparing my views to, the libertarian thinkers and philosophers of the past. I don't try to decide which economic "school" I follow or which conspiracy is "the One" which will bring down the Ruling Parties behind the scenes. Strange as it may seem, I am not a very political person. Why do I do this then? Because I care deeply about individual people and their freedom. I want liberty for all! I want, as much as possible, a "politics-free" world. I want people to not need to worry about ridiculous regulations inconveniencing them (or worse). Perhaps I am a simpleton for operating this way.
I don't need any government. In fact, about the only way to become my enemy is to get government involved in my life. I can work out my differences with other people without calling in the enforcers. So can just about everyone else. The ones who can't are defective. To structure our entire society to accommodate the defectives among us is insane.
I don't like unnecessary complications. To my way of thinking, that is all government really is: unnecessary complications. Busy-work on a monumental scale. People know how to get along without nonsense "laws", and they normally do just fine. They also know, at an instinctive level, what "justice" is. Only when you stir in a little "government" does the whole thing get murky.

Watch Me On Video... If You Dare!

I have mentioned my meet-up and interview with Eric Sundwall previously. Well, here is the video that resulted: Kent For Liberty! Now I will sit down and watch it, too!



Enjoy your day!

It's a Conspiracy!

But I don't have tHe patience or attention span to really look into it. Any time two or more people plan to do something evil to advance their agenda, it qualifies as a conspiracy. I have bEen reading a lot of conspiracy theory information this past week. People have clearly done a lot of research to find this stuff. The thiNgs they have uncovered may be true. I don't know. What i do know is that there are "open conspiracies" (like victiM disarmament, the IRS), "secret conspiracies" (like, perhaps 9-11, JFK assassination, Roswell), and outright lies and bumbling incompetence (like everything else); all of which are pandemic throughout government at every level. Whether any particular event was carried out by government agents, allowed to happen to advance tyranny, or simply used to facilitate the US police state after the fact does not alter my perception of the authoriturds at all. Keep researching, though. Your labors may be what is needed to finally convince someone who can really make a difference.

Don't "Do Wrong"

If you think something is wrong to do, don't do it or don't compel others to do it. The problem occurs when you think something is wrong, and you try to force people who do not share your opinion to go along with you. You hate guns? Fine; don't own one. Think abortion is wrong? Great, don't have one or don't force your pregnant girlfriend to have one. Where I think most of the conflict arises is when you try to force your views on others. Your hatred of guns does not give you the right or the authority to impose your disarmament scheme on everyone around you. Does that irritate you? Too bad. If you are really afraid of being shot, take precautions like wearing body armor. Think that is extreme? It isn't as extreme as trying to force society to accommodate your mental issues.
To me this is the basic difference between the mindset of libertarians and that of authoritarians. Libertarians realize that we are fallible and do not have all the answers. In our awareness of our ignorance we are opposed to forcing everyone to go along with us. Authoritarians do not recognize their ignorance for what it is and blindly demand that do as they say, or else. You can't force people to be free, but you can force them into slavery. The US police state is evidence of that.

Safety Zombies

Craving safety above all else is a horrible depravity. Especially when you victimize others to feed your craving; when you force your ideas and standards of safety on others. I get really disgusted at people who spend their energy trying to keep everyone else "safe". Safety is an illusion. There are risks, both acceptable and unacceptable. To be human means you evaluate your own risks and decide which ones are acceptable for you. Government nannies have no place in an adult's life. Grow up. Make your own informed choices and deal with the consequences. Help your children recognize and evaluate the risks instead of looking for someone in government to "protect" them. Nothing worth doing will ever be accomplished if "safety" is your only concern. Forget the cry of "if it saves even one life". Where is the concern for the lives cheapened, the dreams crushed, by the brain-eating, soul-withering zombies who run around trying to force their "safety" on us all?

Eric Sundwall Meet-Up

I just had the pleasure of meeting, live and in person, Eric Sundwall. He had told me a month or so back that he would be passing by here and wondered if I would like to meet. I jumped at the opportunity.

I suggested a park near here where we could meet. He got there early. I am not the most punctual of people, I suppose. To his credit, he didn't hold that against me. We talked about campaigns, libertarianism, and life. He gave me some things to think about for the future. He pulled out the ol' video camera for a while to save some of our meeting for posterity. Maybe I should have worn a nicer hat!

Our time ran short as he is on is way to an LP function in Pittsburgh. He seems like a genuinely nice person, and I am glad to have had the chance to meet him and talk for a while.

Thanks, Eric!

Quicksand

There are some issues where agreement is just not possible. Where even civil discussion is extremely unlikely. Abortion and evolution are a couple of these, but not the only ones. How can you discuss something with someone who thinks that you are completely, absolutely dead wrong for holding a different opinion than they do? I recently went through a discussion like this where the mere fact that you hold an opinion that the other person doesn't agree with is grounds for all kinds of accusations. Even when I admit I don't have all the answers, it is not good enough. I can explain that with my current understanding I have formed an opinion that diverges from the one they have formed with their current level of understanding. Unless you acquiesce to the other person's "genius", you are a hypocrite, or worse. I do not expect everyone on Earth to agree with me on every issue. I don't particularly like it when my agreement is demanded by others. With some questions, at our present level of scientific or sociological understanding, there are no answers. Sorry, but that is just the way it is. There are other subjects, that because of religious views or whatever, you will not reach agreement. Ever. You can scream and stomp and demand that everyone accept your view, but you just look desperate. In these areas, I ask those who disagree with me to look at the consequences of their beliefs instead of just at the beliefs themselves. How would it affect freedom if you were to impose your standards on society by way of "law"? Would it increase individual liberty, or would the implications of your position require new privacy invasions, bureaucracy, and punishment enforcements? That may not settle the question, but it usually silences the argument.

Question for Democrats, Republicans and other Authoritarians

Where do you draw the line? If you believe that people should be controlled, how much control is too much? With libertarianism I know where the line is (initiation of force), but with authoritarianism it seems to me that each person or even each new day can draw a new line. I think any government is too much, unless it comes from within (as in "self control"). Yet I see people debating how much government to allow. How do you keep any "OK amount" from ever expanding? What is an acceptable amount of cancer? I know that the human body can fight off many cells that have become cancerous without the person ever knowing it has happened. Perhaps the same could be true of government. Is it worth the risk? For what benefit?

I know that most, maybe all, of the readers of my blog are libertarians or libertarian-leaning. Still I think the question is a good one to keep in mind. Many people will try to trick you into agreeing to some amount of government in response to their hypothetical questions. Don't fall for it.

Help! Our Future is Shrinking!

Our future seems to be getting smaller by the day. Instead of flying cars and cities on the moon, we have iPhones and flatscreen TVs. Is it a good trade? I'm not sure. Maybe for some people it is. Not for me, though. This isn't the future I agreed to when I was a kid. Instead of laser guns, we have "security" cameras and metal detectors. Instead of a wide open frontier in space, we have encroaching tyanny that seems determined to keep us on Earth and subject to its out-of-control governmental power trips.
If humanity is to have any kind of a future that is worth living, we must move beyond this infantile authoritarianism that poisons our present and causes our future to be still-born or stunted. I want the big ideas of the future that was predicted; not these small teasers.

"You Can't Just Make Up Your Own Rules!"

Why not? Who says? The people who "just made up" the current mess of rules, that's who. The arbitrary rules that are imposed on us, as opposed to the real rules like "don't murder" and "don't steal", were made up by someone, somewhere. Making up rules isn't necessarily a bad thing; judge that by the results and unintended consequences of the made-up rule. The ZAP is a rule that has been made up, but instead of stifling human life, it liberates us to be free from coercion. It keeps the prohibitions against real crime, while showing why counterfeit "laws" have no moral basis. The danger to the autoriturds is that the ZAP punches holes in the mala prohibita "laws" that they depend upon for their monopoly on power. It shows the festering fraudulence that fills them and their institutions. For that reason, if for no other, all libertarians and true anarchists the world over should promote the ZAP far and wide, inserting it into every discussion of law and punishment, government, and morality.

Kent's Unfortunate Truths

In the course of my life I have come up with a list of "unfortunate truths" that tend to explain a lot of what I see happening around me. They are somewhat negative, hence the word "unfortunate". I don't exclude myself from being subject to these rules. Don't take personal offense at any of these, as I don't mean them in a mean-spirited way. I am sure you are the exception to the rule.

Unfortunate Truth Number One (UT1): People are idiots. (as I say, I definitely include myself here)

UT2: People rarely do what they assure you they will do. The more insistently they assure you, the less likely it is that it will occur.

UT3: Nothing is ever as important to the other person as it is to you.

UT4: Entropy and adversity forever increase.

UT5: People don't want to hear the truth; they want you to tell them what they want to hear, and then make it true.

UT6: Any solved problem creates new problems.

UT7: Politics makes people stupid, and usually at least a little bit evil.



While I would like to come up with a list of "Fortunate Truths" someday, the above list probably explains why I haven't.

Religion on Sunday

I don't really care what you believe as long as you don't try to force me to join you in your beliefs, and as long as you don't commit atrocities in your god's name. If you feel you must, you can "educate" me with your logic and reason, but don't get angry if I don't come to the same conclusions that you do. If you begin passing "laws" based on your ideas of what a deity wants, even if you have an ancient book to use as a reference, don't be surprised if I ignore your rules. Show me how your way is better, how the world is made better, through your actions based upon your beliefs.

When you begin to justify torture, theft, "wars" on medicines, slavery, victim disarmament, or other abominations in the name of your religion or your god you will have declared yourself to be the enemy of all that is good; and my personal enemy. Your "god" will have taken on the characteristics of what I was told was called "Satan". If you refuse to open your eyes and look at what is happening, you are guilty of helping to implement hell on Earth.

It is said you will know someone by the fruits they produce. What's in your farmer's market?

A Day at the Park

I went out today and exercised my freedom muscles just a bit. It is a very pleasant day, so I went to a park (ick! But it was close), sat under a tree and played with sticks. I nibbled some plants (what you might call "weeds"). I walked along a dry creek-bed and took note of the animal tracks in the drying mud. I watched people going about their lives. Living in America. Not thinking about wars or taxes or government. Just walking with their loved ones and their dogs (and their loved dogs). Coaxing along their oblivious children. I didn't see anyone shooting at anyone else, or beating anyone, or robbing anyone. I didn't witness a single violation of the ZAP. Nope, it was glorious anarchy in action, just as it should be. Nothing but consensual interactions wherever I looked. Cherish the times like these that we still have. They may, or may not, be running out. Amazingly enough, I did not see even one enforcer show his face while I was there, although I stayed away from the crowd, yet chaos did not break out in the absence of government control. Government needs us, we don't need them.

Jim Davidson Weighs In

A recent exchange on the Free State Wyoming forum produced a lovely piece of prose from Jim Davidson. The question was, basically, when does the fight against tyranny justify killing the oppressors, and how do you reconcile that with a moral prohibition against murder. With Jim's permission, I post his response here:

Excellent question. I believe that each individual has to answer this
for himself, to his own satisfaction. It is simply not possible to answer
for another.
I believe that God created us in His image. I believe that God has
free will. I believe that the substance of this Scripture is that people
have free will. Since we have free will, we are not only free to choose
what actions to take, each one of us is necessarily responsible for his own
actions.
I believe that the passage in the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus tells
His disciples that, although they were previously told to go out and preach the
Good News without worldly possessions, now each one who had a cloak should sell
it to buy arms. Now that there is a flock to defend, the good shepherd
takes up arms to defend it.
I believe that each of us is free to use up to deadly force to defend life,
liberty, and property as in our own judgement we see fit. Yes, I spell it
judgement, to emphasize that you have to be the judge.
Is it time to just shoot the b@st@rds? Claire Wolfe said it was
justifiable to do so, and she said so back in 2004. So it is well past
"Claire." But, she's also pointed out that she gets lots of enthusiastic
readers who write in to say that they'll follow her anywhere, and all she has to
do is identify some pesky bureau-rat or politician, and they'll happily go slay
that one - to which Claire is rather gob-smacked, and to which she always
responds very carefully to the effect that she isn't going to do anything of the
sort.
But, look, using deadly force is not the only way to deter crime.
Presenting deadly force is often sufficient. For example, I was in Chicago
back in 1991, to speak at the World Science Fiction convention there. I
was walking down the street. A young man of athletic proportions was
tasking passersby for money. I found his language and attitude to be
threatening. So, when he was about fifty feet away, I looked him in the
eye, stopped in my tracks, reached into a pocket in my suit jacket, and took
hold of my pistol. I held it just between the lapels. He looked at
me and was coming up, when I glanced down and back up. He followed my
gaze, and stopped, turned, and left. It was completely clear that he saw
the gun and took seriously my willingness to use it. Indeed, he shouted at
several passersby, "That guy has a gun!" as if such a thing were too amazing to
ignore.
Solzhenitsyn wrote in The Gulag Archipelago that if people had
resisted when the thugs came around kicking in doors, if even ten percent of
those thugs never came home, then there would have been none left to do the
jobs. The others would have been too afraid to take up the work of
bullies. I think there's truth to that, and to the obvious consequence of
that point: if people in Wyoming have guns and show up wearing them all the
time, those who are determined to enslave and bully others are going to think
twice about it.
My point here is that there are lots of things one can do far short of
using deadly force. One might make bureau-rats and politicians look
foolish. One might selectively vandalize the property of the most
egregious. One might ostracize and refuse to do business with socialists
and thugs. One might use various technologies such as auto-dialers to
create mischief. One might buy a billboard or erect one in a prominent
place to provide true information of a damaging nature about some thug or
twit. One might interdict the delivery of tax payments in some really
creative way. Many of these things are criminal in nature, and some are
"mala in se" attacks on persons or property. And I'm not advocating any of
these actions - I'm simply pointing out that there are lots of things one can do
which don't involve killing anyone - justifiably or not.
Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God. Why is that? In my
view, God is the only authority. When a man sets himself up as a tyrant,
he is usurping God's place in the natural order of things. Bowing down
before a man is therefore a poor choice.
But, resistance to tyranny does not only consist of killing tyrants and
their minions and agents, but also includes doing other things. Educate
yourself and your neighbors. Teach your children. Recruit your
friends. Be an effective defense force for your home, family, property,
and neighborhood. Elect sensible people in your community to serve you
rather than to rule you. Do things to avoid paying any more tax than
absolutely necessary or required. Do things to make the jobs of those who
enforce idiotic "mala prohibitum" laws a bit harder. Shun those who write
tickets for a living. Be open about why you would do so. And
consider whether the times and the circumstances actually warrant other sorts of
mischief.
Remember those who do more. Commemorate the dead at Mt. Carmel from
April 1993. Commemorate the dead at Lexington and Concord from 1775.
Remember Carl Drega. Remember Vicky and Sammy Weaver. Watch for news
of Ed and Elaine Brown. Honor those who are willing to stand up for
liberty.
Yes, I believe a time is coming when the choice of freedom would mean
choosing to fight. I believe that those who mean to rule us and make us
serve them are going to make it impossible for decent men and women to shirk the
conflict. And, I think war is inevitable because those who refuse to work
very hard, who demand that others work and pay taxes so they can live easily,
are going to push and push until they have decent men and women forced against a
wall. Which, on the whole, is not that bad a thing as defensive postures
go.
And, I say, let it come. Let the war that is coming come, and
let it come in my time, that my children may know peace.
I believe that this war is coming here, to our homes, to our home
towns. I believe that it is about power and control, about a world
government, about the banking cartel, and about numbering the slaves. I
believe that the nature of this war is that it is going to be fought in homes,
on streets, in front of our children. It is not going to be on some
distant battlefield we can see on television and tut-tut about at the dinner
table. War is sinful, it is ugly, it is brutal, it is the flames of
perdition unleashed on Earth.
At some point, "war is the only way," as the Continental Army colonel says
in "The Patriot." That does not mean it is the only way for everyone,
though. Some won't be convinced without seeing atrocities before their own
eyes. And it does not mean that war is the only way now.
Indeed, I think we currently have a number of very interesting
technological and economic alternatives to war. Since war is, in my view,
another form of politics, I think it is unlikely to produce very beneficial
results. And, on those rare occasions when some war of liberation, such as
the American Revolutionary War, has produced benefits far outweighing the costs,
it has still imposed very high costs on those who fought and bled and
died.
Resist tyranny. Disobey authority. Teach your family, friends,
and neighbors. But be wise. Be as deadly as a snake, but appear as
gentle as a dove. Be as careful and as clever as you can be.
Remember that it is ignorance which puts people into slavery. It is
understanding the truth which makes us free.
Regards,
Jim

The Cruelest Slavery

The cruelest slavery, and the most difficult for me to escape, is that which originates from my own mind. It is comparatively easy to ignore the stupid edicts of the state. I am not emotionally bound to them or to the state from whence they ooze. The limitations imposed by my own mind, possibly based on scars from my past, are much harder to overcome. Some of this is probably due to upbringing. Some is definitely due to things that have happened since I became an "adult". Yet almost all of it is due to processes that go on in my head that feed the guilt monster. I am also an incredibly lazy person; at least if it is something I see no point in doing. I can work like a maniac on something I want to accomplish, something that I can see the point in doing, but give me busywork or a task where I see no chance of success and you'd think I was in a drug induced daze. I realize I have no one to blame other than myself, and that makes me angry... at me.

Resurgence of Prejudice

Is it just me or is it becoming more and more popular to be prejudiced, and to be loud about it? Just as long as you are prejudiced against "the right people", of course. If someone doesn't speak English, was born in another country, looks middle-eastern, or whatever the "target of the day" may be, it is OK to make jokes about them or to tell them to "go back where you came from". This sick behavior is just as bad as making people use separate restrooms or sit in the back of the bus, or as classifying them as "mentally ill" for being themselves.

Instead of hating people for things they cannot control and that hurt no one, try condemning people for things they can control; things that hurt everyone. Things like choosing to be a parasite on civilization, such as being a death trooper in the BATFE or DEA or the narcotics squad of the local thug hive. Things like agitating for racial strife and bigotry, while hiding behind the title "Reverend" or "Father", like the two anti-gun-owner bigots in Chicago have been doing recently. Disgusting things like trying to control the lives of others who are harming no one but themselves with their personal lives. People who actively engage in evil, harmful acts of government and control. Those are the things we should shun people for doing.

Smouldering Backlash Against NRA Sell-Outs

Here is a fine essay from L. Neil Smith by way of JPFO: The NRA Disgraces Itself -- Again. He is trying to think of a plan to get a message across to the NRA "leadership" that gun owners are fed up with being betrayed by our supposed friends. I will let you know when I find out the plan. Hold onto that NRA membership until then.

Immigration

I have seen people make the comment that the natives who lived on the land that is now America had no immigration policy, and "look what happened". I don't think this is a good analogy. I would agree that the natives owned the land that became America. The land was not "owned" individually as it is today, but was "owned" or occupied by the tribe. This is what the US government wants us to think the case is now: that "The United States owns America". It does not. I do not think the natives were under any obligation to "share" their land with the immigrants. The reasonable thing would have been for the immigrants to purchase or rent land from the original owners if an agreement could have been worked out (just as today's immigrants do). I don't know if that would have worked back then, because I doubt there would have been an agreement among the natives about who would receive the payment, since the territories were more fluid than today. There was also more of a tendency in those days to view anyone who was not of your culture as less than human. (That mental defect still appears in some of the loudest people today, unfortunately.) Even the natives did this among the different tribes or nations. Their name for their own tribe always meant "the people", and their names for the other tribes were usually not very complimentary or even insulting. The immigrants thought the natives were "backwards", "heathens", or "savages". Thinking in this way made it easier to justify killing the others. The resultant massacres were horrible. Both sides, the immigrants and the natives, committed terrible atrocities. The land was stolen and the less technologically advanced native people were subjugated and stripped of much of their culture and way of life.
The past cannot be repaired (which is a terrible tragedy). The best that can be done is to learn from past mistakes so you do not repeat them. Looking at how the USA is dealing with immigrants, especially those from Mexico, today, I don't think most people have learned from the past. Many people still try to think of these newcomers as "less than human" and don't see that they are paying rent and purchasing their land. They are not invading and stealing the homes and land. Yet, hearing the dabate, you would think they are. Once again I say, get rid of the welfare culture and you will remove incentives for people to move to America in order to be parasites. You will also pull the rug out from under the class of traditional, from-one-generation-to-the-next, parasites that has formed here since the welfare culture was created.

The Philosophy of Liberty

I was recently made aware of this good flash-animation presentation from The International Society for Individual Liberty that explains The Philosophy of Liberty. If you have the computer capability to watch it, I recommend that you do.

World Liberty-Aid

Why can't we have a world-wide concert event to highlight the looming, ever-growing disaster of government? If the environmentally conscious can have a world-wide extravaganza all about the environment, something that is mostly out of our control, then the politically conscious could surely have one about government, something that is totally under the control of people. Plus, since governments are the biggest enemy of the environment, it would fit right into the current theme. I suppose it is out of the question, since the loudest environmentalists are really, first and foremost, just socialists who use the environment as an excuse for more government controls of human activity. Or am I just being pessimistic?
The fascinating thing is that there are enough anti-government songs and films and books out there that you really could have a world-wide Liberty Woodstock (Libertystock?) of massive proportions. When people found out some of the side benefits of liberty they would flock to the events. It would only take a certain percentage of humans on earth to get riled up enough and we could rid ourselves of the scourge of government completely, at least for a while. I'd donate to that cause with my time and non-existent money.

Healthcare a "Basic Right"?

In my daily internet cruising, I ran across something somewhere (I can't find it now, of course) that asked why libertarians don't recognize "an obvious basic right to healthcare". Simple answer: because it doesn't exist. At least not in the way the "compassionate" socialists think of it. Most "healthcare rights" advocates think government (using stolen money) should provide the healthcare, or at least, force doctors to provide it. Nothing can be a basic right if it involves forcing someone else to do something against their will. A basic right can only be met by getting government out of the way. Allow people to self-medicate with whatever they see fit. Don't allow a government agency with a political agenda, and with favors to repay, to be the authority who decides which medications or procedures we are "allowed" to choose.

In a free world, healthcare would be a basic right. You would have the right to buy whatever healthcare you were able to afford, just as you do now. The difference would be that without government standing in the way, your choices would be greater, medications more plentiful and much more affordable, and you would not be forced to pay for the healthcare of anyone else. A similar example is that I have a right to own a fully automatic AR-15 even though the government interferes with this right through counterfeit "laws" which raise the price of the gun, and would punish me for owning one without their permission. Even if you disregard the "laws", no one has an obligation to provide me with the rifle. I can buy the gun I can afford, which may only be a yard sale BB gun. If someone decides to give me an AR-15, without being coerced into it, I would accept it. No one is forced to provide anything to anyone else, even if it is a basic right. It is only wrong to stand in the way of the free exercise of rights; not to refuse to subsidize someone else's rights.

...Governments Should be Afraid of Their People!

Guess what. They are! Do you think all of the draconian control-freak laws are imposed because the government wants to protect you? Hardly. They pass those laws to protect themselves; the parasites who attempt to rule over us. They are scared to death that Americans might get fed up and grow a backbone again. You and I are the ones that the authoritards want to protect themselves from. So they pass enabling acts "authorizing" huge illegal power grabs. They declare that free speech is treason and seek to insulate themselves from it. They "outlaw" any guns that might be highly effective in thinning the herds of jabbuts, while they demonize the rest. They try to convince you that voting is the only proper way to change America while ignoring that the anti-government rebellion in 1776 wasn't fought in the voting booth. Freedom is never won, and almost never increased, by voting. Government knows this and is outlawing true freedom as fast as it can get away with. Even a "good" ruler should never sleep well at night, but wake in terror at every sound. Watch them building their fortress of laws to protect themselves from the individuals in America. See their actions for what they truly are: panic that they may one day be held accountable.

Libertarian Friends

I love my friends. They do not understand me, though. I sometimes think it would be so nice to have some local libertarian friends to talk to and hang out with. I'm not even talking about having deep, philosophical discussions (though that might be nice, too) , but simply having friends who do not look at me oddly if I display one of the "quirks of libertarianism" in public. I have had aquaintances who called themselves "anarchists", but when you really looked at their beliefs, they were socialists in anarchist clothing; they hated the current regime, but only wanted to replace it with a new, socialist regime. I have had friends who loved guns, but who cheered the military slaughter of muslims, or advocated the beating of homosexuals. I have had friends who hated government sanctioned oppression and war-mongering, but stated that "there is no reason to have guns; they should all be destroyed". I have had some friends who have too much invested in the status quo, such as a dependency on welfare or family members in brutal government agencies, and so can't see the government for what it really is.

I have looked for MeetUp groups without success. It would be difficult to attend, since my statist girlfriend would insist on coming along. Sigh. What is a libertarian/anarchist to do?

Have a Happy, FREE, Independence Day

Enjoy the one blatantly anti-government holiday that is still officially recognized, although its message has been obscured and diluted. Don't wave the US Federal flag of stars and stripes on this day; instead proudly fly the American Gadsden "Dont Tread on Me" flag or the Time's Up flag. Declare your independence from the authoritarians and from the outdated notion that government is legitimate. It is not! No one is fit, morally or intellectually, to rule anyone other than themselves.

Spend the day exercising your rights. Don't limit yourself to the ones listed explicitly in the Bill of Rights. Explore those rights hinted at in Amendment IX. Now get off the computer and get out there! Have fun and survive for the coming new battle for independence.