More government not the answer

(My Clovis News Journal column for March 25, 2016)

Want to mess up something? Stir a bit of government into the mix. Want to destroy it beyond all hope of repair? Try to fix the resulting mess with even more government.

We've seen this happen with health care in America. And with education, security, transportation, justice, the economy, addiction, crime, and every other area of life someone decided needed just a little government "help". Usually justified either by "safety" or "fairness".

Unfortunately, most people soon stop being able to even imagine a free market in the areas in which government has been inserted. When the trouble continues, they blame any remaining freedom for the problems, rather than realizing it's the coercion inherent in government which causes the failures.

Due to their misunderstanding of the situation, their inevitable solution is to mix in even more government.

It's like trying to purify drinking water by adding buckets of raw sewage. Or even one teaspoonful at a time. What results won't be something I'd drink.

If something is needed and people want it, they will find a way. To pretend that without government, roads (for example) wouldn't exist, is to claim no one wants good roads enough to pay for them unless forced-- under threat of violence-- to give money toward the cause. You're claiming business owners don't value roads to bring customers to their shops. That people don't want roads leading to places they want to go. That cooperation is impossible. It simply isn't reality.

When someone imposes a government "solution", it drives out innovation and keeps an even better solution from being found. If you are forced to pay for the government option it means you may not be able to afford a solution someone else has discovered. Because you are forced to pay for government schools whether you use them or not, you have less money to invest in education.

One of the crazier justifications for government intervention is that it will save money. Exactly how limiting competition, funding a huge bureaucracy, and layering on pointless red tape is supposed to save money, I don't understand. History supports my skepticism. Sure, the initial false estimates of the costs are always lower, but those are never accurate. Sometimes too low by an order of magnitude. When the bill comes due, there are always expensive surprises and unintended consequences which shouldn't surprise anyone.

With government, I suppose we should be grateful we never get all we pay for. The alternative is unthinkable.

-

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

.

Better tools

If someone can only think of one way to deal with a particular issue, and you point out why you believe their way is wrong, they can get really angry over it.

I guess I can understand. They had a tool, and you've just taken it from them- or made the argument why they should lay their tool aside.

That might upset me, too.

No one doubts aggression can be "useful". But there is always a better way- one which doesn't involve aggression. It might be harder to find. It might be harder to implement. It may not have the instant results you want. But you still have no right to initiate force.

And, if you don't think you can afford something, stealing it is a "useful"way to get it. But theft is always wrong, even if you call it "taxation", "fines", "asset forfeiture", "property codes", "zoning laws", "fairness", "common good", or various other euphemisms thieves prefer. You still have no right to steal.

If those are the tools you reach for when a problem crops up, you need better tools. And since using government to "solve" your problems is always a use of theft and/or aggression, using government against people is not the best thing to do.

My only exception to that would be when you have the chance to use government against itself. In that case, I think it's hilarious to see government eat itself. Just be very careful- anytime you involve government at all, you increase your risk of being caught up in the carnage. Just make sure it's worth it to you.

.

Libertarians telling others "how to live"

I wonder where the statist notion that libertarians shouldn't speak up on anything comes from.

I have run into this several times. I'll comment on something, and then some statist will pop up with the comment that "Oh, the 'libertarian' decides to tell other people how to live?"

Well, sure. You have no right to initiate force nor to violate private property, and if you do either one you may face consequences. I think it's nice to warn you; would you rather be surprised?

I also think it's nice to make people aware of times they may have been initiating force (or theft) without being aware of what they were doing.

After being told, the choice is yours. Learn from it or ignore it. The only silly choice is to get angry about it, or try to "shame" me into silence.

Maybe they just want me to sit down and shut up because they know they have no rational response and hope they can shut me down so one won't be necessary. Or so the lack of a rational response won't be obvious.

.

First impressions

It is dangerous to judge people by first impressions. The person who looks like a bookworm might actually just have bad eyes and no sense of fashion.

The dirty homeless guy you just walked past might be a nuclear scientist.

The person who looks sane and civilized might actually be a member of the largest and most aggressive criminal gang in America. That's right, he or she might be a government employee!

.

Bad guys like to feel good about their actions

I just don't get the hypocrisy of some people. On an old blog under new management I recently read the following:
"I served 14 years active duty in the Army and did a few tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. ... I did some cool stuff and have no regrets. I am not aware of any babies I may have killed or people of color I oppressed."

Denialism at its "best".

So violently invading someone else's home is "cool stuff" and he doesn't regret it. Nice.

He may not have personally killed any babies, but by being there and supporting and protecting his fellow invaders he helped kill them- or did nothing to prevent them from being killed by his "brothers".

And, while "color" is irrelevant, by being an invader-- financed by theft, advancing the agenda of the world's largest, most powerful State (and all States are psychopathically evil)-- who was supporting those who are oppressing and murdering babies, mothers, innocent men, and bad guys, he is still just as guilty. He may choose to not be aware of it, though, so that may still be an honest statement- but one opposed to reality.

This is not someone who has been on the side of Liberty. He may have since had a change of heart, but judging by the above quote, I seriously doubt it. He probably still believes himself to have been a good guy, "fighting for freedom".

Now, to be fair, I don't know if this guy identifies himself as an advocate of liberty. He may not. He may be happy to be a promoter of massive statism- just like his actions seem to indicate. If that's the case, it's good we have been warned.

Actually, judging by his follow up post, he is a proud enemy of liberty who sees himself as some sort of Freedom Hero for fighting for the Empire.

He was a willing hitman for the enemy. If you claim to hate the bully, but you worship his hit men, you are part of the problem.

.

You can't have it both ways

People who say they are opposed to high "taxes", anti-gun "laws", Super-sized government, and the State treating people like stupid and helpless babies, and yet who vigorously support the military and cops baffle me.

They want to have their cake and eat it, too. Well, they can't have it both ways no matter how badly they want to.

They can get very defensive when this is pointed out to them.

Cops and the military prop up all the things they hate, and all the things they hate are what enables (or excuses) the existence of cops and the military. It is a symbiotic thing. A diseased, unhealthy, symbiotic relationship.

Get with it- either admit you love it all, or come down on the side against slavery with me.

.

"Global citizen"? Citizens are slaves

I recently watched a TED talk extolling the virtues of being a "global citizen".

If you believe "citizenship" is a good thing you don't understand citizenship.

A citizen is said to be an individual who "owes allegiance to [a] government and is entitled to its protection".

How does that really differ from a slave? A slave could be said to be someone who "owes allegiance to [a] master and is entitled to his protection".

And both are expected to labor and produce wealth to the one they "owe"- the government owner will call it "taxation" and take less than 100%. But, then the slave master doesn't actually take 100% either, since he still has to feed, clothe, and house the slave.

So, if you advocate "citizenship" you advocate slavery.

I agree that you need to look beyond your local area. I don't believe it's OK to advocate stealing from your neighbors to do "nice things" for people all around the globe.

.

Power in courtroom belongs to you

(My Clovis News Journal column for March 18, 2016)

Picture yourself on a jury, realizing that even though the defendant broke the law, the law is wrong.

Must you obey the judge's commands to consider only whether the law was broken? Or can you do more.

Actually you can, and should, do more. You have hundreds of years of legal history behind you, empowering you to do the right thing.

You should judge whether the violated law should exist, and whether the potential penalties-- even when the judge tells you to not consider them-- are too severe.

In the courtroom, all power and authority is yours.

Most judges no longer want you to know this fact. They will hide it and make you believe they are the authority. At most they are a referee, making sure the dance follows the established steps. When judges hide this law from you it is your responsibility to know it yourself. The only purpose of the courtroom is to find justice. You can't do that if someone is being prosecuted for violating a law which should not exist, or is facing a penalty out of proportion to what they did.

A jury doing the right thing and setting free the accused in spite of the State's wishes is called "jury nullification". Unjust laws in the past have evaporated because of juries refusing to punish people for breaking them.

If one person violates another-- through theft, physical attack, or trespass-- you can uphold the law he broke without guilt. These crimes are known as "mala in se" crimes; wrong because they violate life, liberty, or property.

However if you find yourself deciding the fate of a runaway slave or bootlegger, remember that the pretense of wrong in these cases lies upon someone dreaming up a law which prohibits the act. This law is counterfeit-- it imagines a "mala prohibitum" crime. "Wrong" only because it is prohibited, without an ethical foundation of respect for human rights and liberty. In other words, not wrong at all.

Of course, runaway slaves aren't quite as common as they once were-- unless you count truancy "laws". But there are a great many counterfeit "laws" being enforced. Such as all gun regulations, the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs, "vice laws", licensing requirements for business and piloting a vehicle, tax laws-- most of the laws enforced today.

Stand up for what's right. Refuse to punish people for imaginary "crimes" which have no individual victim. Nullify bad "laws". For more information visit fija.org

.

"Fun" with statists

Ah, statists. You never know where things will go if you discuss things with them long enough. It's one good reason to not drive them away too quickly when they say bizarre and insane things. Give them more rope and see what happens.

Like these two recent examples.

First, there was the statist who said that "freedom" might be OK for others, but she needs government because she wants safety and to be free of making any decisions for herself. That's right- she openly admitted that statism is a longing for perpetual childhood. And not the kind of childhood where the child is constantly pushing the envelope, but a childhood where the child is in a sort of vegetative state and can never mature.

She did begin to waver somewhat when the discussion went further and she began to see the foolishness of her beliefs, and the contradictions, but I didn't push it too far. I hope.

Then there was the guy who is OK with government threatening people with violence to enforce "taxation" because he doesn't believe anything is objectively right or wrong.

He quibbled over definitions of "ethical" and "moral" for a while, but I finally just said that whatever words you use to describe them, "Y" is something that is accepted as "right" or "wrong" depending on the particular culture; subjective. Example: Slavery was once accepted as right by most cultures. "X" is something that is "right" or "wrong" regardless of what a particular culture accepts; objective. Example: Slavery is never right, even when it is considered right by a culture.

He kept insisting that I don't understand what "objective" and "subjective" mean. And that everything, with regard to right and wrong, is subjective.

Just to be clear, since he kept saying over and over that everything was subjective and there is no objective right or wrong, I asked him "Is it wrong to rape and murder children, or is that just a subjective idea?"

His response: "Nothing is intrinsically right or wrong. Literally, nothing. Everything is a preference."

I told him there was then nothing to discuss, and he turned into the chess-playing pigeon, knocking over the pieces, crapping on the board, and strutting around as though he won. All because he believes it means I don't understand the difference between "subjective" and "objective".

Ah, statists. We need to keep a few of them around to show how absurd their beliefs are.

.

Respect

Respect is earned, not given away for free. Automatic respect cheapens it to the point of meaninglessness.

You don't get my respect because of a position or title.

If I respect you, it's because I believe you have earned it. I respect those who I believe deserve it; no one else. My respect has value.

If I act as though I respect you, I either actually do respect you, or I see that I am outgunned at the moment and believe I'd be better off faking respect, or I am mocking you. Like when I capitalize the word "State".

You can probably guess which it is if you know me.

.

Restroom rules are a distraction

"Laws" dictating which restroom anyone is allowed to use, or must be allowed to use, are both unnecessary and harmful.

 If you own a restroom, feel free to make up whatever rules concerning their use you want. If I don't like your rules, I won't use your restroom and may not do business with you.

 If you fund your restroom through theft ("taxation"), you don't own it and you don't get to make up rules concerning it. Thieves don't own the property they possess.

 If you are uncomfortable in a restroom with another person- any other person at all- get out of there. To worry about whether they "should" be in there is ridiculous.

 If attacked by anyone, anywhere, fight back with everything you've got. Again, whether the person "should" be in that restroom is a distraction- they are attacking and need to be stopped.

.

Seeking a sponsor for a project

I haven't been writing Liberty Lines columns for the local weekly paper (The State Line Tribune) for several months now. Someone asked about that a couple of days ago and it got me to thinking.

That's the only writing I don't get paid anything for, so it's the first to get pushed aside.

But... considering I have gotten quite a bit of face-to-face feedback on that column over the years, and all positive, I was thinking about seeking a sponsor here at the blog. To motivate me to spend the time and effort on writing more of them.

It is harder to get my columns published in that paper. The publisher rails against certain things government does (or doesn't do), but he has an unshakable faith that government is the answer- just not government "as is". He pretty much worships politicians, cops, the military, etc. as concepts, even while criticizing the individuals in those positions if they aren't doing what he wants. But he really doesn't like for me to criticize them at all- especially not local individuals in those positions. He always calls Muslims "Moslems" and wants the government to save the middle class and "do more" for everyone. So, you can imagine it is hard to sneak a column in that doesn't shock and offend him in some way. He has refused to publish a few of my submissions for this reason- that I questioned the legitimacy of government or some government position or action. But, I am willing to put forth the effort again.

So, if you would like to sponsor Liberty Lines columns- I am allowed to submit one per month- subscribe by any of the methods listed in the right-hand column here, for $20 per month, and tell me it is for Liberty Lines.

I won't mention your sponsorship in the newspaper, but if you'd like I could put a "Sponsored by" here at the blog when I post them.

It is just a thought. If it is worth it, someone will sponsor it. If not, then no harm done.

.

Politics, government, and the monopoly on evil

I just ran across the most horrible quote I think I've ever read: "We don't care about politics...We care about making government work better, because it's the only one we've got." (From here)

There is so much ignorant evil in that statement I don't know where to begin.

If you want to make government work "better", you do care about politics. It's apparently all you care about. You certainly don't care about the victims your government is creating with your help.

You are siding with bullies whose entire career revolves around pushing people around. "Work better" sounds like advocating efficiency in government. That is hideous. Efficient governments commit democide, genocide, slavery, theft, and every evil under the sun- and get away with it for far too long.

Would you want to make a rapist or a serial killer "work better"? That would be no worse than striving to help government "work better".

And "the only one we've got"? Like bullying is a precious and rare resource? Please!

The problem with government is that it isn't really the "only one we've got", but it demands monopoly status anyway. It wants you to believe it is the only one you've got, and that any others are illegitimate.

Pretending the State is the only government you've got results in driving out government that actually works: self government of the individual. How many humans are on Earth? That is the legitimate number of governments. Trying to pretend that The State is the only government you've got is a gigantic part of the problem.

-

This would be an excellent time to subscribe or donate; income in this household is way down and expenses the past couple of months are way up. Of course, you take care of you and yours first. Only donate or subscribe if you can afford it, and IF you believe you get value from my scribblings and occasional videos. Follow the arrow to the options.

.

Inherently peaceful?

One of the popular statist whines against liberty/anarchy (yes, they are the same thing) goes like this: "you apparently have the idea that humans are inherently peaceful..."

No idea why they project such a belief on those of us who are outside their cult.

And, no, I don't believe humans are inherently peaceful. I think some people are peaceful, some are aggressive, and some are easily influenced by the situation and other people around them. I also understand that people are driven by self-interest. Everyone is.

I understand that the worst people are drawn to positions of power, where they can afford to be non-peaceful with a smaller chance of facing consequences. In other words, they choose to go into the gang of government. They believe it is in their best interests to act this way. Sometimes that gang goes by other names, like the mafia, MS-13, Crips, or whatever, but all gangs of bad guys are governments, by their nature. Including the US government and every other national government on the planet. Every one without a single exception. Gang of bad guys = government = States = gang of bad guys.

For aggressive bad guys, it is in their best interests to join a gang- particularly one which has been legitimized by their victims.

If humans were inherently peaceful, it would be safe to allow governments to exist. As it is, I would rather face hordes of non-peaceful people who haven't convinced my friends, family, and neighbors that they are supposedly legitimate and safe from self-defensive actions when they attack and steal.

It is because I am not under the delusion that humans are inherently peaceful that I oppose governments.

-

This would be an excellent time to subscribe or donate; income in this household is way down and expenses the past couple of months are way up. Of course, you take care of you and yours first. Only donate or subscribe if you can afford it, and IF you believe you get value from my scribblings and occasional videos. Follow the arrow to the options.

.

Laws make problems, not solutions

(My Clovis News Journal column for March 11, 2016)

Every time someone gets a bee in their bonnet over a possible problem, you can be sure a new law will be presented as the solution.

If we have learned nothing else from history, we should have learned laws don't solve anything.

People who dream up laws ignore the reality that others will adapt and change their behavior to get around laws. While trying to avoid being inconvenienced or harmed by a law they may cause unintended consequences worse than the original problem.

The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs is just one example. As centuries-old substances were criminalized, newer, stronger, more dangerous, substances were invented. Stronger so a smaller amount- easier to hide and transport- had the same value as larger amounts of the old substances. Instead of trying to smuggle a bale, smuggle a brick.

Severe laws largely weed out the casual producer and seller, replacing them with people with more to gain or lose; willing to do whatever it takes to meet the demand. If you are forced to habitually break counterfeit laws to stay in business and out of prison, it becomes simple to break the real laws- such as those against theft and murder.

The same goes for anything which is targeted by a law.

Often laws even create problems where none existed before- such as dishonestly named "gun-control laws".

The only thing any anti-gun law has ever done is make it harder for good people to defend themselves from bad people. That's it. They never make good people safer; they remove much of the risk of being a bad guy. The fact that the very ones pushing and enforcing anti-gun "laws" are some of the bad guys should give you pause.

Even things as simple as pollution are made worse by laws. Property owners are often prevented from getting restitution from those who harm their property, because the worst polluters are either the government tasked with legally protecting the property, or its corporate cronies whom the government will grant immunity when they cause harm. At most, polluters will be coerced into paying a "fine"- the vast majority of which simply goes to fund more government rather than compensating the injured property owners.

Until people start seeing made up laws as part of the problem, rather than a solution, I don't expect this to change. Nevertheless, I will shun the law and seek real world solutions until that day comes. Will you join me?


.

Drug tests. Grrrr....

I hate drug tests for employment. I mean, I seriously hate them.

I can understand why they might be "necessary" in a few, very special cases, but for the vast majority of jobs they are simply intrusive.

I once applied for a job without knowing a drug test would be required. This news was sprung on me during the interview, and they wanted my urine immediately. "Here's a cup; there's the restroom..."

I should have simply walked out right then, but I really needed a job, so I peed in their cup.

But over the next couple of days, the more I thought about it, the angrier I became.

When they finally called and told me I passed the drug test and offered me the job, I declined, and I told them why. Any "boss" who thinks he is entitled to my urine isn't the kind of person I trust, or want to work for.

Soon after that I got a better job I wanted more anyway- without being molested to get it.

I don't abuse drugs, but I also hate drug tests.

If I show up for work impaired, for any reason, fire me. But what I do on Friday night is none of my employer's business Monday morning- as long as I can safely do my job.

I seriously doubt that drug tests would even be "a thing" if not for the government's War on Politically Incorrect Drugs, and the stigma that goes along with it. So many ridiculous policies seem to have originated with evil government programs, and keep being seen as legitimate due to government's "laws"- when otherwise no one would have ever thought of violating people in that particular way. But because The State says it's OK...

.

Hitler!

The reason all political discussions eventually come to reference Hitler, is because all politics is based on the same motives that drove Hitler.

To say you shouldn't mention Hitler in political discussions is as absurd as saying no one should mention the weather in discussions of farming.

If you don't want Hitler mentioned, stop trying to run the lives of other people. Otherwise, accept your Hitler credentials and stop whining about it.

.

Cops are scum.

Cops are scum. That is the central truth about cops upon which all else hinges.

It is why they enforce counterfeit "laws".
It's why they live on stolen money while stealing money.
It's why they shoot dogs, choke cats, stomp kittens, shoot children, strangle men, rape women, kick in doors looking for dried leaves, and generally act in opposition to society and civilization.
It's why they are cowards.
It's why they "just want to go home at the end of the shift" even if it means murdering non-aggressive people.
It's why cops hate armed people who aren't a member of their gang, The Blue Line Gang, especially those who didn't get permission from their gang first, and why they enforce anti-gun "laws".
It's why they murder people, especially armed people, in the name of "officer safety".
Most people in prison are there as a result of cops being scum.
It's why cops can't stand criticism, or people pointing out the truth about them.
It's why they threaten violence against anyone who doesn't worship them.
It's why they say absurd lies like "Busting ours, protecting yours" while protecting no one but themselves and those who control their paychecks.
It's why they accept military gear from the feds, for use against their neighbors.
It's why they hate your privacy, but insist upon their own.
It's why they believe their "authority" trumps your property rights.
It's why they'll help other bullies who insist on you getting permission to engage in trade.
It's why bullies, and sometimes the bullied, want to become cops.

"Nice cops" are only newsworthy because cops are scum.

It's why human scum becomes cops. Like seeks like.

#CopsAreScum

Edited to add: Just a reminder, in case you need one, that since being a cop is a job-- a set of behaviors-- the way to stop being guilty of being a cop is to immediately quit the police force, and to resolve to never again initiate force or violate property. Not as part of a "job" nor as a freelance bad guy. That's it. This isn't to mean there will not be consequences for past bad behavior. A burglar, rapist, a murderer, or a cop may stop doing what it was that was wrong, but consequences could still occur. That's just reality. But you can change what you do from this moment forward, and stop being part of the problem.

- 

If you like what I have to say, consider supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). The various options are there to the right. I am grateful for every little bit.

Be awesome!

Look for opportunities to be awesome!

But, since those opportunities can be a little rare, don't pass up opportunities to just be cool to other people.

Hold doors open; pick up things people drop; mind your own business; do a little more than expected of you. Whatever.

Once I was standing in line behind a guy, when he took his wallet out of his pocket and a baggie fell to the floor. I picked it up and handed it to him, saying "you might want this". He was so grateful. His honest gratitude made me feel wonderful.

A few weeks ago I held the door open for a woman coming out of the post office. Her arms were ridiculously full and I offered to open her car door for her, but she said she was OK. She was still trying to get in her car as I was coming out of the post office, and I noticed she had dropped a debit card. I picked it up and handed it to her and she was very grateful.

No, neither of those examples are anything big. But I like to do what I can, so I try to watch for opportunities. I hope it makes those I try to help feel at least half as good as it makes me feel. I know when people do something for me, it makes me feel really nice.

And, imagine that: No one was forcing me to help. It was anarchy in action!

- 

Freeing slaves

(Previously posted to Patreon)

I'm opposed to all forms of slavery. That is why I am an abolitionist, a voluntaryist, an anarchist, a libertarian.

I'm not thrilled to see all the ways others try, with varying degrees of success, to enslave me. I attempt to thwart them at every turn- also with varying degrees of success.

Nor do I like seeing others enslaved.

I am reminded of Harriet Tubman's quote*: "I freed a thousand slaves- I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves."

I don't claim to have freed even one slave, and in actually accomplishing that I admire Harriet Tubman greatly.

I do, however, point out the slavery on a regular basis- many times per day. But it's sneaky slavery today. Not the physical chains and ropes of previous eras (other than with the "criminal justice system" and military, I suppose). "Comfortable" slavery that mostly goes unnoticed by the slaves.

Many people seem to get angry at me for pointing it out. Either they don't want to see the ways in which they are being enslaved, or they like their slavery. In some cases I am not sure which it is.

Their anger makes me reflect and reconsider.

Which is worse? Being a slave who doesn't know he's a slave, or being a slave who knows he's a slave?

If someone doesn't know he's a slave, are you doing him a service by telling him?

What if he's happy in his slavery before you tell him he's a slave? Is it right to make him realize his situation and ruin his happiness?

Obviously, I would hope the unhappiness would inspire the slave to free himself. Some people really don't seem to believe they can- if they even want to.

I believe the first step in no longer being a slave is to see the slavery for what it is. Only then can a person aspire to liberty. But, getting people today to see the slavery, honestly, is a dangerous undertaking. They'd much rather kill the messenger than refuse to obey "authority".
-

*As with all quotes, I don't care if the person it is attributed to actually spoke or wrote the words or not- truth isn't dependent on who said it first. I'll assume she actually said this; if not, someone else did and it's still true.

Self respect

There are some jobs I couldn't do and still feel good about myself. Such as working in a feedlot, a packing plant, or anything that industrializes death.

I'm not saying it's wrong; I'm not judging those who do that kind of work, nor am I saying I would never do it-- just that I couldn't do it and keep feeling good about myself.

Feeling good about myself- respecting myself- is important. Especially right now.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). They are there to the right. I am grateful for every little bit.

Shattering beliefs

Believing in something- anything- seems to make people happy.

Even things that are provably false.

So is it mean to tell people statism is based on a lie? To shatter their illusions? To tell them "authority" is nothing more than a superstitious belief? the most dangerous one.

Is it mean to tell them in no uncertain terms that "taxation" IS theft, no matter how much they like it?

Is it cold-hearted to tell them that "their" government is nothing but a gang of bullies? That there can never be a "good government"? That cops are scum? That the government military makes them (and everyone else) much less safe? That their loyalty and love are misplaced?

Is it like telling an excited little kid there is no Santa Claus?

Is telling the truth mean?

- 

I know you are tired of seeing this. So am I. I can't help it- I'm in a bind which would take too long to explain. Please consider all the options for supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). They are right over there where the arrow points. I am grateful for every little bit.

Liberty, like muscle, needs exercise

(My Clovis News Journal column for March 4, 2016)

This past weekend I went to Palo Duro Canyon to recharge. I wandered through the brush, over the hills, along the creek, exploring whatever caught my eye. It's something I don't do nearly as often as I need to.

The next day I could tell I had been using muscles I don't normally use.

Sometimes discomfort can be a sign you are doing something you don't do enough. Your liberty muscles need to be flexed, too. Otherwise they'll atrophy, it will get harder to live your liberty, and the day will come when you believe it's not worth the effort.

We know how to get out and walk, hike, and climb, but how does a person get their liberty exercise?

It's not hard, but you have been brainwashed to avoid it.

To begin with, don't comply with counterfeit rules.
Don't automatically believe "legal" means right and "illegal" means wrong- that is less true with each passing day.

Don't look to others to tell you what to do or not do. Work it out for yourself and accept the consequences of a wrong choice.

Politicians are the worst; attracted to positions they believe entitle them to control you. Don't listen to them; don't support them; ignore them when possible. Accept that no one can truly represent another person, and no person can ever represent thousands or millions. You don't need to be represented anyway. You know better.

Don't keep the habit of obeying people who claim to possess the magical quality they call "authority"- they are invariably bullies without a lick of sense. Most wouldn't know the right thing if they stepped in it, unless they thought someone would notice and praise them.

Don't respect the contemptible; don't honor the dishonorable. Respect and honor are to be earned, not given away cheaply. Often those demanding your respect and honor are monsters who believe they deserve to be put on a pedestal regardless of what they do. Let the pedestal topple without your support.

Don't bully others for making choices you'd rather they not make-- as long as they aren't violating an innocent person. Respect the private property of others. Keep your word, but don't feel obligated to keep an agreement the other party has already broken.
Do the right thing, even when it's not the popular choice.

It will take practice, but you can do it. With practice self-determination will come more easily. Before long, it will come as naturally as bending knee before the State once did.

.

Complying under threat

That I sometimes comply with the demands of bullies doesn't make the bullies or their demands legitimate- it means I know when I'm outgunned.

But that situation is always fluid. If you act like a bully, you are a bully, and if are a bully, you can never, ever sleep.

- 

Please consider supporting this blog and me, its author. The options are there to the right.

.

Believing as a child would

I was brought up to believe that obeying the law was good, and right, and easy.

Imagine my shock when I first realized that sometimes obeying the law didn't make you a good person.

The shock was compounded when I realized that obeying the law was sometimes wrong.

Later I discovered that not only is it not easy to obey the law, sometimes it is downright impossible, what with laws that conflict and contradict each other.

This caused cognitive and ethical troubles for a little while.

But before long I realized that being "law abiding" is NOT a positive thing. In fact, it's an admission of guilt. It's proclaiming that you have no ethical foundation, but believe that the "law" is good, right, and easy. Just like a small, simple child might.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). They are there to the right. I am grateful for every little bit.

.

Scary beliefs

I don't fear races, nationalities, or whatever.

I fear beliefs. Especially false beliefs people will follow to theft and aggression. And every belief which leads to theft and aggression is false. Without fail.

It doesn't matter what those beliefs are based on- it matters where they lead.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author (that would be me). They are there to the right. I am grateful for every little bit.

The uncivilized religion

Government should operate like other religions.

I don't care what rules the churches in town or across the country make up for their members. Because (until you mix in statism) those churches don't pretend their rules apply to anyone but their members.

I don't worry about who they hire as their preacher or choir director. Their opinions on drugs, sex, rock and roll, or anything else are completely irrelevant to me.

Well, I don't belong to the Church of State, either, but the rude bullies in that particular cult believe their internal drama should apply to me as well as to their members.

 They are uniquely uncivilized.

- 

Support? It would be very nice to have a whole lot of small-amount subscribers- just in case you haven't subscribed because you can't afford much. Follow the big, blue arrow to see support options. Thanks!

Government prevents health care

Last week I got turned away from the doctor's office because I couldn't pay the fees not covered by my insurance. I was supposed to be getting the followup for the lab tests I had done about a month ago.

Now, I'm not really complaining- I don't want doctors (or anyone else) to be enslaved to me; providing their services for nothing. They don't "owe" me that.

However, if not for the DEA, FDA, and other State bullies, I could run to the store and buy my blood pressure medicine (which I have been on since my kidney stone last year) off the shelf, without seeking permission. I could ask the pharmacist for advice about using it correctly.

And that's not all.

In a free society you and I would be able to walk into any corner drug store and buy any drugs we want or need. Just hand over the money and walk out- without showing ID or a permission slip. Heroin, aspirin, Cannabis, Sudafed, birth control pills, cocaine, cough medicine, or "homeopathic medicines"- and then be responsible if we harm ourselves or anyone else due to using or abusing them. The scam of regulating drugs is evil.

Health care is a right- as long as you obtain what you want without theft or coercion. It is not an imaginary entitlement that someone is forced to provide you with.

In a free society I could search and find medical care that I could afford. It would be more affordable for everyone without the government's medical professional rationing scheme. There are ways to certify medical professionals and medications without the State being the monopoly who approves them.

When socialists decry the cost of healthcare they look for blame everywhere except for where the blame truly lies. I know where the unnecessary expense lies, and who is ultimately responsible for me not being able to afford it.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

3D printing freedom

The older (and wiser?) I get, the more I despise imprisonment.

I've detailed the reasons in the past.

If you believe there are good justifications for human cages and supporting them through theft, and that it's worth the problems inherent in that sort of thing, please ignore this.

I was recently made aware of a nearby prison's main entry key being lost. In my twisted mind, the first thing I thought of was that I hoped someone could scan the key and put the 3D printer plans to copy it out there on the internet.

Then I realized that would be a wonderful thing to do with every prison key that could be surreptitiously scanned! Just imagine if every prison key in existence were available for download.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

.

Not buying religion of government

(My Clovis News Journal column for February 26, 2016)

The Declaration of Independence says "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

How's that working for you? Judging by the current situation, about as well as any superstition does.

You might as well declare "Everyone needs good food-- to guarantee healthy crops, we sacrifice babies to the Volcano Spirit."

Same sort of nonsense, based on the same kind of lies.

Belief in government-- the State-- is a religion- the world's most popular religion. It competes with all other religions, even when the faithful believe otherwise.

You can perform rituals with good intentions, but believing those rituals cause the outcome you want, although unrelated by cause and effect, is an example of magical thinking. You are establishing a government-- the natural enemy of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"-- to protect Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Might government be a "necessary evil"? If it is necessary, it can't be evil. If it is evil, it can't be necessary. Since government can't exist without theft (euphemistically called "taxation" and property codes) and without throwing the first punch (which is what most "law enforcement" is), it can't be good.

Faith in government also shows an utter denial of human nature- although the faithful would gnash their teeth at the suggestion.

People claim that because humans do bad things and can't be trusted, governments must be established to control them. I'm not sure where the people who make up government will come from, if not from the population of people who can't be trusted to behave themselves. If you set up a club where people can steal and attack from behind a veil of legitimacy, usually without consequence, what sort of person do you believe this club will attract?

Or, do you believe human nature will magically be improved by collecting people who are attracted to power into one big group and giving them power?

In America, the Constitution was supposed to set boundaries which could never be crossed as a way to restrain the nature of government. It didn't work. The Constitution was violated almost before the ink was dry. Today there is no prohibition on government power-- as the Bill of Rights was intended to be-- which remains intact. So, what's your next big idea?

.

Being disarmed can lead to being soft and useless

Yet another observation from Machiavelli:

"But when you disarm them, you at once offend them by showing that you distrust them, either for cowardice or for want of loyalty, and either of these opinions breeds hatred against you. ... But when a prince acquires a new state, which he adds as a province to his old one, then it is necessary to disarm the men of that state, except those who have been his adherents in acquiring it; and these again, with time and opportunity, should be rendered soft and effeminate..." Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince, Chapter XX, 1513)

Yes, complying with anti-gun "laws" does often make one contemptible, soft, and effeminate. And useless. And, therefore, easier to control. Is that how you want to be? Not me.

I'm not even sure the US government and its local accomplices attempt to disarm people because they believe the population to be cowardly. In fact, I think their fears may be just the opposite; that the people won't be cowardly, but will be noble and brave and drive out the cowards who want to rule.

Which brings us to the "lack of loyalty" part, which I would agree with. But only an idiot or an evil person is loyal to evil rulers. Loyalty, like respect, is worse than worthless if it is given to those who haven't earned it. Government earns contempt, not loyalty.

So, yes, I am offended when evil monsters try to disarm anyone. It's right to be offended by harmful actions, just as it is silly to be offended by words or opinions.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

Campaign stress

(Previously posted to Patreon...
Subscriptions are as cheap as you make them! Look at your options to the right; Paypal buttons and below. A Patreon subscription gets you access to everything published there so far. Even a one-time GoFundMe donation will get you access for a month. Go ahead- jump on it!)

Sure seems like people are causing themselves a lot of unnecessary stress by paying attention to the presidential campaigns.

I get it- some bully is going to be "elected" president, and will be put into a position where he can do things harmful to you. You may believe the best way to minimize the damage is to stay "informed".

When it comes to politicians, there is no such thing as "informed". You will be misinformed in various ways, though. How your specific misinforming takes shape depends on who you happen to get your "information" from. But it's all misinformation or disinformation. Even if you get it first hand!

The only thing you really need to know is that they are all nothing but bullies. Any "authority" they achieve by landing the "job" as the "nation's" primary tax junkie is imaginary. The "authority" only exists to the extent you pretend it exists.

Your life would probably be improved more by ignoring the pageant and doing things that actually matter. Such as learning skills, hoarding money (precious metals, durable trade goods, ammo, etc.), buying and training with guns, and making local friends you can trust. And, doing other things you enjoy! These things matter a lot more than which particular puppet sits at the desk in the Oval Office.

One thing I have noticed is that the predictions of doom if So-&-So is elected never actually come to pass. Yes, each president is a little worse than the one who came before him- since they all continue the bad stuff their predecessors did and build more bad stuff on top of that. But, the specific president is spectacularly unimportant to the whole process. He (or she) is a figurehead. The real State isn't going to even notice which particular bump in the road is holding the office.

And I suggest you do the same.

There are so many ways you can increase your own power over your destiny. You can't control everything, but the more you prepare, the better your chance of weathering whatever comes along.

I don't want you to be frustrated and worried. I think there are better ways to live your life. Wouldn't you agree?

.

"Touched" by a devil

As previously mentioned, I recently read The Prince. A few things really caught my eye.

"And when neither their property nor their honor is touched, the majority of men live content, and he has only to contend with the ambition of a few, whom he can curb with ease in many ways." ~ Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince, Chapter XIX, 1513)

Either this is no longer true, or bad times are ahead for the bad guys of the US, who have spent well over 100 years "touching"-- molesting-- the honor and property of everyone in America.

It's a shame that people can't be roused to action by seeing others "touched". Maybe that is part of my problem- it doesn't have to be personal for me to take it personally. If I don't want it done to me, I don't want it done to you, either. Nor to my enemy. And I will speak up.

Of course, that brings to mind another quote: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." – H.L. Mencken

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

The difference between statism and me

Guess what- there are things I don't like. Yet, I have no desire to impose my likes or dislikes on anyone else.

I don't like pit bulls. But I would never advocate banning them.

I don't like drug abuse. But I wouldn't advocate criminalizing it or caging people for doing it.

I don't like rap music. Or sports. Or "excessive" tattoos. Or loud cars. Or crew cuts. Or business suits. The list could go on and on. Everyone has a long list of "don't likes". Yours won't be the same as mine. You and I will justify our opinions to ourselves, and to others if asked, but that justification comes down to there being some things certain people don't like, but others do. It's purely subjective.

There is no right answer to "do you like...?" as long as you aren't talking about aggression or property violation. Even if you "like" to attack people or steal their property or trespass (in which case you may have a career in "law enforcement")- you have no right to do so, and your victims would be right to kill you in order to stop you.

But, everything else is just a matter of opinion. Even if your opinion is very strong and popular.

This difference was illustrated quite clearly by the case of the woman recently arrested in North Carolina for having sex with her dog. I don't "agree with" people engaging in sex with non-human animals. I wouldn't do it. I would probably avoid anyone I knew had done such a thing. But I don't support sending cops to arrest her. An "arrest" is a violent kidnapping. If you resist being kidnapped by bullies with badges you will be murdered by them. All "laws" are ultimately a threat to kill anyone who defies the opinions of ethical cripples and moral degenerates. Why can't you dislike things without thinking it's OK to rob people in the name of "taxation" and then use their stolen money to violate their liberty?

I understand the disgust certain acts trigger. I even agree in many cases. But to then turn your disgust into an excuse to violate others is really sick.

Just who do the people who applaud this woman's arrest believe she victimized? The dog? Rights aren't applicable across species lines. You have no right to not be eaten by a bear and a deer has no right to not be shot by a hunter. I don't trust people who are cruel to animals, but they haven't violated any other person.

Maybe some of them believe she has victimized herself. That is up to her to decide. Either people own themselves, or they are slaves owned by someone else. If she owns herself, then she is within her rights to use her body and life as she sees fit, as long as she isn't violating someone else. Up to and including destroying herself.

Or perhaps "society" or "community standards" have been harmed. If this is the case I'll slap you right in your aura for believing in such a silly concept.

It's not that I am arguing that sex with dogs should be legal; it's that it shouldn't be illegal. Even though I find it disgusting. I know where my boundaries lie. Apparently statists don't. And I suppose that's the real difference between statism and me.

.

Ignorance and statism

Ignorance leads to statism. The more I learn- really LEARN- the further from statism I move. Decreasing ignorance makes statism wither. I suppose the opposite is probably also true, although I have yet to actually meet anyone who gets more ignorant with time (barring a stroke or other brain malfunction), but I know lots of people who remain static in their ignorance and in their embrace of statism.

This pattern I have noticed in myself has gone on for years. Is it likely that I will eventually learn enough new things to change the pattern? To begin seeing benefits in statism that aren't outweighed by the negatives? I suppose it's possible, but not likely.

I'm not saying I know everything. Far from it. I try to learn new things all the time- whether I like the implications of what I learn or not.

So far I see no hints of things, in front of me or just beyond the horizon, that would support the idea that statism is ethical or helps humanity.

The bad things I do learn may indicate that humans are prone to statism. It might be "natural" for most of them. It may take many generations for this to change. That doesn't make it in any way good or ethical.

- 

Please take note of all the options for supporting this blog and its author. They are there to the right.

Christian liberty posters

Although I am somewhat hostile toward religion, I am not hostile towards individuals who follow religions- as long as they don't use their faith as justification for aggression and theft.

In the spirit of reaching out to my principled Christian friends I made a few illustrations to help them get the point across.

I hope they like them, and can use them. Feel free to copy and use them however you see fit.

(Yeah, this one is iffy. So many seem to believe The State- "America"- to be the source of wealth and prosperity, and worship it for this reason. I still think it works, but you may not.)

Dangerous times for truth and honesty

They say it is dangerous to be right when government is wrong.

It is also dangerous to even question whether government might be wrong, when even other liberty lovers are anxious to throw you to the wolves.

It is dangerous to point out that people are using words incorrectly, ignorantly accusing a person of something by buying into the statist definition which is demonstrably incorrect. But it won't matter because "Emotion!".

It is so dangerous to even mention this that I can't go into further details without being accused of being guilty of the same thing- because I'm seeing it happen to others right now.

I know this is frustratingly cryptic, and I apologize. But as I say, I don't feel like facing the wrath of statists AND liberty-lovers who have bought the State's lies. I just feel really bad for those who spoke up and are suffering because of it.

.

Recent protests missed right target

(My Clovis News Journal column for February 19, 2016)

The past couple of years have seen various protests against out-of-control government employees and agencies. Earlier it was the "Black lives matter" protests of deadly police encounters; more recently, ranchers protesting abuse by the Bureau of Land Management.

These protests miss the mark-- sometimes tragically.

Rule number one: When you protest, make sure you target the enemy, not bystanders.

While I agree "Black lives matter", I couldn't support the protesters when they vandalized, looted, and burned the property of those who were not their enemy. The residents affected by the protests came to fear the protesters, who instead of laying siege to the police station and courthouse, attacked the property of people who were not the problem. They alienated potential allies, causing them to beg for more police in the area. Just fanning the flames. Targeting the innocent is aggression, and cheapens your life, whoever you are.

Rule number two: Be consistent. I agree that the Bureau of Land Management is an abusive, rights-violating gang of bullies. Its buildings-- occupied by the protesters-- were built on stolen land with stolen money. But you lose credibility when you protest under the flag of your enemy; venerating your enemy's symbols.

So, although the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge protesters had the right target, they fumbled on principles.

The only aggression in the attempt to reclaim the wildlife refuge from the agency was committed by the government enforcers, who ultimately committed the only homicide to result.

In both protests, death came at the hands of government employees, and the killers got away with it. How would it turn out for you or I had we done the same thing?

Ranchers have a long history of being abused by government, sharing this common ground with residents of poor neighborhoods who have also experienced a long history of abuse at the hands of government employees.

Both share a common enemy, and I'm sad neither of them notice they should be on the same side. If only they'd move past the divisions which have been manufactured to keep them from uniting against the real enemy. And keep their protests free of hypocrisy and aggression.

Don't copy the behavior of the bad guys. Be above it. Join with others who have been similarly violated where you can find common ground. Together, we outnumber them. Let them come to that horrifying realization, and maybe things will improve once they know they can't get away with it anymore.

.

Legitimizing the enemy

No, I am not a Trump supporter. Nor even a presidency supporter. I don't "need" a president. I don't want a president. And- funny thing- I am old enough to have noticed presidents don't actually affect me in any way. No matter who they are.

But, I'm still enjoying watching Trump's campaign.

One of the most fascinating things about Trump's candidacy is how it is bringing out the absolute worst in those who oppose him. With their behavior they are doing more to advance his campaign than his supporters could ever hope to do without their help.

Basically they are making his point for him- whatever it is his supporters believe his point to be.

This illustrates why you'll never see me out protesting "government"; screaming and waving a sign in the face of pro-government extremists. Don't give your enemy legitimacy. Don't give him something to point at and convince his supporters to fear- something he can promise to protect them from.

.

Everyone is "liberal"

Just as silly as "Right vs Left" is the idea of "conservative vs liberal".

Simply, the "conservative" wants things to stay as they are, and the "liberal" (or "progressive") wants change.

But, there are no political people who don't vary on that point, depending on the topic.

Some want anti-gun "laws" to increase, some want them to decrease. Some want "taxation" to go up, some want it to go down, and some want it to be recognized as theft and go away. Everyone is a "liberal"- no one wants everything to stay exactly the same.

There may be some who are truly "conservative" on an issue or two, and who want that one thing to stay the same, but even these people want "progress"- however they might define it- in other areas.

Now, some want things to go back to "how they were", or to how they imagine them to have once been. That's not conservative, either, since it still involved radical change.

Me, I'd like to take the best things from the past, keep the best things from the present, and add the best things the future can come up with to maximize human liberty and minimize aggression and theft. Yes, that's very liberal and progressive, so unlike the statists who call themselves "liberal" or "progressive" but are really just statists who only want to change things toward more draconian control of everything that they fear or hate.

.

Welcome to the Zombie Apocalypse

In a lot of ways it feels as though I am living through a personal Zombie Apocalypse. But no one around me is experiencing things the same way I am. (That's always going to be true, regardless.) To panic would look odd to observers.

I am living in circumstances that test me. Circumstances others, perhaps, wouldn't think anything of.

When I can view it as a survival situation- honing my skills, etc.- I do OK.

Other times it is overwhelming and I am tempted to give up and let the zombies eat me. These are the times I have no corresponding skills to use. I need new skills.

Fortunately, it's not all one or the other, but a combination. And, if anyone wishes to help blow the heads off a few of the pursuing Zombies, I will always appreciate it.

And, it makes me realize others are being chased by zombies I can't see. Zombies that maybe I can help them fend off. If they'll ask.

A lot of people seem to see election season in this way- I wish I could help them see those zombies are an illusion. Or give them the tools to use to behead the zombies if they are real. We all fear the zombies we have no weapons against, and laugh about the ones we know can't touch us.

And we all see only our own zombies.

.

"Anarchist!" Not an insult

(Previously posted to Patreon. Please subscribe!)

That moment when a statist calls you an anarchist, thinking it's an insult rather than an admission you're a better person than he.

I was trying to remind people to not hate supporters of presidential candidates, but to pity them. They are, after all, pitiable creatures; tying their fortune and reputation to demonstrably evil, lying people.

Somehow the conversation turned to hating cops, or not, based on the specious claim that cops are people too, with good or bad, just like everyone else.

I pointed out that it is the cops' actions that make them bad. If there can be "good cops", then there can also be "good rapists". The act is what defines the label; nothing else. And, while cops and rapists both, by definition, violate people to be what we identify them to be, rapists don't demand thanks and respect for doing so. This makes rapists ethically superior to cops.

This didn't sit well with one particular guy.

Quickly the rhetoric was escalated. In a flurry of posts I was asked whether I want the Constitution, or law enforcement of any kind. (No, I don't!) He also made the fatal statist error: If I don't want cops, then obviously I don't want accidents to be taken care of and removed from the roadways. I don't want roads or emergency medical response or fires to be fought. I don't want anything associated with "protect and serve". I don't want anyone to help anyone else.

After I wiped the tears of laughter from my eyes, and reminded him that cops only protect and serve themselves and the bullies who steal the money to pay their salaries, I asked why he believes only tax junkies can respnd to emergencies.

But it was too late. He had called me an anarchist and blocked me.

He believes "anarchist" to be an insult!

Because I don't believe I have the right to enslave, nor the obligation to allow myself to be enslaved, I am somehow bad? Because I respect the property rights of others, recognizing that no imaginary "collective rights" can override them, I should feel ashamed? Because I neither agree to rule or be ruled, I am the bad guy?

Statists are insane.

.

There are only two options here

I am not religious. I don't believe you'll find scientific facts in the Bible beyond the understanding of the people of the era in which they were originally written. I don't believe in anything supernatural.

Yet, I still don't believe Romans 13 means what statist Christians want it to mean.

If it does mean what they claim, then it would mean the Bible is a lie. It means it sides with evil and against good.

If it doesn't mean what they claim it means, and if the supernatural parts of the Bible are true, they'd better stop taking God's name in vain and ask forgiveness.

I fully support the interpretation of my friends, the liberty-loving Christians, in this case. Maybe because theirs is the correct one; maybe because the alternative would be too painful.

.

Lost in translation

Often, when I read things written by others, I am forced to engage in ongoing translation. It's as if they are writing in a foreign language. Actually, that may be closer to the truth that I know.

When they write the word "leftism" I normally know I have to translate it as "statism". When they write "freedom", I can usually tell from the context if they really mean "liberty". And so it goes.

If I can do this with others who love liberty but who use different words than I do, I should be able to do the same when reading things written by anti-liberty bigot statists. But that's even harder.

How do you communicate when you have so little common ground that they not only call an act of The State something other than slavery, but actually believe this example of slavery is OK. Their ethics are inside out, upside down, and in an altogether different dimension.

It's amazing there's any communication between us at all- and that's why there usually isn't any.

.

Me, my flaws, and Liberty

(Previously posted to Patreon)

I'm ridiculous. I'm absurd. I've been told I'm smug. I'm definitely stubborn. I won't bend when I think I'm right- especially after I have thought it through from the other guy's perspective and concluded, in spite of various objections, I was right all along.

I've done bad things. I've done things I don't think were bad, but others would. I've done good things that turned out badly. Occasionally I may even do something good that goes well for me.

I've stuck to my principles. I have violated my principles. I've accepted consequences and I've complained about consequences. I've felt powerful and I've felt helpless.

I dress funny. I don't fit in. A former wife said I only refuse to dress like everyone else for attention. Maybe she was right.

I have succeeded and I have failed miserably.

I haven't been able to liberate my relatives as much as I wish. I hate seeing them hurting themselves just because they are afraid to have something better. Or, even worse, because "it's always been this way and it's not going to change". That's the saddest excuse of all, even worse than when they use their religion to justify support for The State. I have come to grips with the fact I can't be responsible for the choices others make- no matter how painful or embarrassing they are.

And in spite of all that, liberty works for me. Personally. In the day-to-day real world. Not perfectly, by any means, but better than the alternative that everyone else seems to settle for. Liberty, when put into practice, just works.

If it can work with all my obvious shortcomings, it can work for you.

You just have to live it.

Sure, I could be a better spokesperson for liberty. I could shave, cut my hair, and wear "professional" clothes. I could ditch the hats, the 19th Century clothing, and get up-to-date spectacles, or contacts. I could learn to speak better, maybe even without sounding vaguely Bullwinkle-ish. I could take courses on "How to win friends and influence people"; on persuasion. I could get a "real job" to show that liberty doesn't necessarily mean being broke.

Those changes might make me a better liberty spokesperson, but I wouldn't be comfortable- well, other than having more money. And what good is liberty if you can't enjoy it?

I could be more polite in the face of bullies and their rules. I could be nicer to those who advocate bullying me and taking my property- they "mean well", I am told. I should respect their opinions more.

On the other hand, if those are changes you believe I should make, perhaps you should consider being the me I can't be- better than me. Be the spokesperson for liberty you wish I could be.

You might be the missing element. The catalyst. You might be the one to make the difference I could never make with all my flaws. You'll never know until you do it.

So, do it.

.

Even government’s right sometimes

(My Clovis News Journal column for February 12, 2016)

I have discovered- to my horror- there are still people who believe the Earth is flat. To compound my dismay, I see some justify their belief by saying government promotes the "globe Earth" theory, so it must be a lie.

Government conspiracies aren't imaginary; many are carried out openly, often in front of news cameras. If there's opportunity, an advantage, and low chance of being exposed and embarrassed before the lie has served its purpose, government will lie. The Gulf of Tonkin "incident" and the Tuskegee experiment should be evidence enough.

But, government also promotes-- or accepts and uses-- "2+2=4". A stopped clock is right twice a day- although this was more true before digital clocks.

Earth was known to be a globe long before NASA came along to "promote" the idea; millennia before any current government existed. This reality was discovered independently by various people throughout history, using experiments they were able to think up and do for themselves. Experiments you can do, if you care to.

If you don't want to measure angles to the stars or do other physical experiments, you can engage in thought experiments to the same end.

For example, look at "flat Earth" maps. The farther you move from their center, the North Pole, the worse they get. According to those maps, in Australia you would have to walk much farther to cover the same distance east or west than when walking north or south. I pointed this out and was told the maps aren't a true representation and distort the shape of the Earth, "just like maps of a globe Earth".

Yes, because the Earth isn't flat. Being nice, I suggested they make a flat Earth map without the distortion. It should be extremely easy. The problem in making a flat map of the world comes from trying to represent a spherical surface on a flat one; something will be distorted, usually near the poles. A flat Earth wouldn't have this problem and would fit easily on a flat map; a simple one-to-one transfer of points, without land or ocean distortions. Yet they can't do it.

You can approach their claim from multiple angles and keep getting the same result: a roughly spherical Earth.

When data from many different observations keep pointing to the same conclusion, you can be confident you've found truth.

Skepticism and an open mind are good, but falling for any hare-brained notion which sounds appealing isn't enlightenment. Even if it means you and the bad guys sometimes agree.

.

My first knife

This is a photo of the very first knife I ever owned. Yes, I still have it.

It is a Robeson "63251". I got it while I was in 1st grade- I can't remember who gave it to me now- and I carried it with me all throughout my kinderprison days- right through high school graduation. At school, every day, regardless of whatever the rules might have been. Not that I even have any idea whether it was "allowed" or not. I didn't care, so I didn't bother to see if I were breaking the rules.

And I never stabbed or attacked anyone with it. Not even the few times I ended up defending myself from bullies.

Of course, I graduated to bigger, better knives- even before I stopped carrying that one. A couple of times, when I knew I was facing a threat, I even took bigger knives with me into the adolescent zoo, just in case.

No "rule" can ever forbid me the tools of self defense. Of course, I also know every decision has consequences.

-

I was reminded of this by a post over at Joel's blog.

A Bunkerville lesson learned

If the feds have actually started an organized roundup of the Bunkerville defenders, there is a lesson to be learned.

And that lesson is...

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you have to resist being molested by government employees, especially with weaponry, you might as well go all the way. Because they will come after you eventually anyway.

You read that right. If you are in a situation where you have to be armed to avoid being immediately kidnapped or murdered, the bullies of The State can't let that go. So, unfortunately, you may as well get as many of them as you can.

That's not my "rule", it is theirs. The anti-liberty bigots have made their beds.

It shouldn't be like that. If The State were civilized it wouldn't be like that. But States aren't. Instead, the most they will do is regroup to wait until they can get you in relative safety. Government employees are cowards and ethical cripples. Otherwise, they wouldn't be government employees.

Again, this is another application of the truth that when the enemies of life, liberty, and property raise the stakes and make the penalties high no matter how you act when you ignore their counterfeit "laws", you have nothing to lose by going all the way.

.

It doesn't mean what I thought

It is disheartening that here in this region of Texas- and to a lesser extend, this part of New Mexico, too- you can't go anywhere without running into unwelcoming signs. They are beside almost every door of every business you might want to enter.

With all the real concerns out there, why the focus on guns? Mere tools. The focus is never on acts. You never see a sign prohibiting robbery, murder or rape- only pictures of guns. How idiotic and cowardly.

But, I guess I should be comforted that those idiotic, cowardly signs apparently don't mean what I had thought they meant.

I thought they meant "no guns". Well, it's good to know that ridiculous symbol only means "guns must be handled appropriately". Whew! Good to know!

Still, this sign says that in a much more adult way: