All have identical, equal rights

(My Clovis News Journal column for April 8, 2016)

I see politics as a flawed attempt to get along with people you don't like. Flawed, because using the violence of laws to try to make people do what you want leads them to pull the same stunt against you. It's the ultimate "an eye for an eye" opera, which never ends unless one side stops.

One sad thing I've noticed is people preemptively poking themselves in the eye-- doing their enemies' work for them-- without realizing what they are doing. They do this by supporting the political party "their people" have historically identified with regardless of how it actually treats them.

I wonder why people do these harmful things to themselves.

Why do most feminists, LGBTQs, and environmentalists support the Democratic Party, when it doesn't actually support them?

Why do most conservative Christians, gun owners, and entrepreneurs stand behind the Republican Party, when it betrays them whenever it gets the chance?

The mainstream parties are out for their own best interests, willing to use whoever they can dupe,  as long as they find them convenient. As soon as the favors are due, they get amnesia about who gave them their power. And their supporters forgive and forget.

On all these matters libertarians-- even the Libertarian Party, if you still believe politics can solve anything-- are more welcoming to all the above than either of the mainstream parties.

The only thing anyone might miss in libertarianism is the lack of license to violate others or their property. If this is your desire, you're on your own. It doesn't matter what your excuse is, how bad you want to reserve the option, how "necessary" you believe it is, or who assures you it's OK.

Libertarians know beyond a shadow of a doubt, and are willing to put their lives where their mouths are, that every human on the planet has equal and identical rights. Whether the "powers that be" respect those rights or not. Regardless of what you own, who you love, where you were born, what language you speak, what you worship, how much melanin is in your skin, or which chromosomes you have.

Unfortunately, this eliminates any excuse to use laws to make anyone subservient to anyone else. No legal favoritism and no legal hindrances. Many people can't tolerate this equality.

This causes me to reach the sad conclusion that for most people it's not enough to experience liberty-- someone else must have their liberty violated, too. Which explains why we still suffer politics and governments.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

Great and Fearful "Laws"

I'm not afraid of your "laws".

I don't honor or respect them, either.

Nor do I want or need them.

They are nothing to me. Less than nothing.

Laws never stop bad guys from hurting me, and if bad guys who use laws to violate others want to hurt me they don't need laws to help them do so.

Sure, the most cowardly bad guys hide behind "laws", but they'd hide behind something no matter what.

Respect for the law seems an empty thing to hold on to. A very silly thing.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

Statist Language Games

(Previously posted to Patreon)

Control the language and you control thought. Sometimes to the point that thoughts outside of the box aren't even possible. How can you think something when there are no words to express it? Or if the words have been redefined to the point they are meaningless?

Nowhere is this reality as obvious as in the use of "legal definitions".

Legal definitions are written by statists. Statists who believe in the State and in "laws" that create the State and prop it up. "Laws" which create "authority" and privileges and obligations... which have no foundation in reality.

Maybe in some cases they were halfway decent statists who wanted to promote liberty, but the very notion of a legal definition is statist.

When people focus on legal definitions they are being brainwashed into statism.

People who "study law" seem to get sucked into the superstition worse than people who don't. They begin to believe human-written "law" is legitimate. And "important". And somehow "truth".

At least I sure see a lot of evidence of that.

**Magical words will fix everything, if you just say them the right way.**

**Look at the words on this paper; they don't say what you believe they say, and if you know what they *really* mean, you can show this to the Rulers and they'll leave you alone.**

Stuff like that.

It's where you get the self-contradictory idea of the "sovereign citizen".

And those who fall for this the hardest get really angry at people who don't buy into their superstitions. I just had one (who was also posting links where he blamed everything on Jews, and demonstrated he doesn't have a clue what "libertarian" means) call me an idiot on Facebook. I count that as an endorsement.

But he seems to really believe that if a definition is the "legal definition", it means something more than what the word means, and it can be used to advance his agenda- whatever that may be.

Well, good luck playing a game that was rigged so that you can never really win. As for me, no thanks.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

Magical acts of statism: destroying guns

Very few statist acts are as stupid and full of delusional magical-thinking as the act of destroying guns. Either individually, or on an industrial scale. Well, perhaps the statist act of destroying ivory and rhino horns is equally stupid and delusional.

But, really. You have tools that you fear. Instead of fearing (or defending yourself from) the few bad guys who use the tools, you allow a huge gang of the worst of the worst to steal the tools, and then destroy them to "keep them out of the wrong hands".

If you are destroying guns for the State, you are the wrongest of hands.

Do you somehow believe that destroying valuable tools will change the hearts and minds of those who would violate others? You say you hate gun manufacturers, but you help keep the price of their products artificially high.

You believe that destroying historical objects is a good thing to do, just because you are too cowardly to take responsibility for yourself?

Do you believe a gun used in a crime has somehow been possessed by an evil spirit and needs to be melted down to ... what?.. burn the demon, or release it back into the wild? How dumb are you, really?

Yes, destroying guns is stupid. It is magical thinking. And yet, many of those responsible know how stupid those who cheer their destruction are, because they know what I just pointed out. They simply count of you being too stupid to see it.

Don't be their tool.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

All the world is a stage Act on it.

Everything good happens against a backdrop of liberty. Or, inside a matrix of liberty, if you prefer thinking in higher dimensions.

Nothing truly good violates liberty, and nothing evil is liberty compliant. (Liberty has room for plenty of ethically neutral acts, though.)

Even when evil people like cops or freelance thugs choose to do something good-- something which they have a right to do and which violates no other person or their property, and which benefits someone other than themselves-- liberty allows them the choice. It gives them the space in which they act.

When they choose to do wrong, that's not liberty. It is a violation of liberty.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

Hurting the bad guys' feelings

I am not an angry person.

But, I'm not gonna coddle statists, and they often see this as anger. The truth is "mean". It hurts their feelings. Well too bad. But I get it. No one wants to see that they are wrong.

What seems really odd to me is when other liberty lovers mistake truth and a lack of coddling for anger.

Maybe you want me to hold their hands and tell them "Now, now. You're not so bad. You just have a different opinion. It's OK". This might work in a few cases, but some people need to be snapped out of it, and this touchy-feely stuff won't work for them. They need to be shown exactly how horrible they are being. Yeah, they may dig in their heels, but it's still right to warn them that beliefs- especially horrible false beliefs- have consequences.

But, really, you believe telling them what they advocate is wrong isn't nice? Are you missing what they are doing to you? Would you comfort a rapist from all the mean old people who tell him he is evil? Would you get upset at the person who shoots him in self defense? Would you say we should just reason him out of his behavior, and if he doesn't want to change, "Oh well"?

Then why coddle statists?

Maybe you don't understand exactly what it is they are supporting. They don't care that they support sacrificing your property to their beliefs. If you get in the way, they support putting you in a cage. You liberty scares them, and they want bullies to control you. And if you resist any of this, they're fine with you being murdered. That is what government-- The State-- is. It is ALL it is. Aggression and theft on a grand scale. "Too big to change."

Well, it's still wrong to support The State. In every circumstance. If you're going to support evil, but you don't want anyone to call you out on it, you are going to be disappointed. Time to grow up.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.

Reading hieroglyphs

When you see a "no guns" sign do you know how to interpret that particular modern hieroglyph?

I do.

The above symbol means "The management of this establishment is so terrified of self-responsible humans that in case one of them ignores this deplorable sign and enters you'll find said manager crying like a baby, soaking in pants soiled with his own filth, under the nearest chair."

A picture is worth a thousand whimpers.

Or, maybe it really means something else altogether. You never know with anti-liberty bigot cowards.
 

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.

Statist drama overload

I get it. I'm different.

If you are going to engage in statist drama- v*ting, "criminal justice", punishment, prohibition, imprisonment, "borders" and "immigrants", and all the rest- just leave me out of it.

I am not in your cult and I don't want to be involved in your aggressive and destructive rituals. I hate them and I hate your cult.

Even if you claim it is for my own good- perhaps especially then- none of it is done on my behalf.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.

Liberty much like buffet choices

(My Clovis News Journal column for April 1, 2016)

Buffets are nice. You get to choose what you like from all the glorious possibilities offered, picking and choosing your favorites. If you see something you find disgusting, skip it and move on to the next item. No single buffet can possibly offer everything, but no one can tell the buffets what to offer. Consider them all together and your dining choices are practically unlimited.

Some people think of liberty as a buffet, but they want to be in control of what's offered so as to limit the choices others can make. They want to pick and choose between the things they personally like while claiming everything they don't like is off-limits for everyone. This is the opposite of liberty.

With liberty you can choose anything which doesn't violate another person or their private property. The popular, the offensive, the wise, and the foolish- they are all there. Things you love and things you hate. The only thing not available is the authority to tell others which selections they can't choose. Neither are you allowed to slap the choices you disapprove of from anyone's tray.

No one will force you to take part in things you don't like, but they are there if you ever change your mind. Your power lies in making the choices for yourself, not for anyone else.

In other words, you don't get to decide what is on the buffet, even as you decide which parts to enjoy.

Be warned: this liberty buffet has many choices which may offend you. Some of the offerings may even offend the majority of people. But as long as one doesn't use private property against the wishes of the owner, nor use violence against those who are not being violent nor violating someone else's property, it's simply none of your business. Being offended is your personal problem, not a license to push others around.

This is hard for a lot of people, even some who claim to support liberty. People react strongly to those things which offend or disgust them, forgetting that things they see as normal probably disgust and offend someone else.

It's painful to see someone who says they love liberty trying to limit other people's choices on the grounds that those choices are disgusting.

Respecting liberty doesn't mean you approve of everything others might do, it means you recognize where the limits of your power lie. It's an issue of boundaries.

- 

Support?

Is "Cops are scum" collectivism?

(Previously posted to Patreon)

In spite of the well-meaning-- but misguided-- objections of some liberty lovers, "Cops are scum" is NOT a collectivist statement. It is a recognition of identity.

Frozen water is ice. It doesn't matter what form it takes; whether a snowflake, an icicle, or the surface of a hockey rink. It doesn't matter what contaminants it contains or any other conditions. If it is frozen water, it is ice.

If someone is a cop, that person is scum.

Only scum would lower itself to do the things a cop must do as a part of the job.

It doesn't matter how nice Cousin Bob the Cop is at the family picnics. If cousin Bob is a cop, then cousin Bob is required to be scum while he is on the clock. Can a person be part-time scum, or does it color everything he does? Can there be good serial killers?

Now, maybe you believe scum is a necessary component of society. That's a different question altogether. I believe you are wrong, but it's a question for another day.

Saying "cops are scum" is no more collectivist than saying "rapists are aggressors". "Policing" is what someone does, not who they are. A rapist might be the nicest person you ever met while they aren't raping. They might save little old ladies from violent death. But, still, as a rapist he is an aggressor-- not a "good person" at all, no matter what else he does. And, no matter what good a cop may do, as a cop he is scum.

Saying something like "Black people are criminals" is collectivist. No one chooses his or her "race". Being "Black" or "White" or "Asian" doesn't mean anything as to the character of the person. I know people of every "race" who could disprove any collectivist accusation anyone could dream up about them, good or bad.

But being a cop is a conscious choice. It is the choice to enforce counterfeit "laws" against people. It is the choice to be a thief and aggressor. Choosing to be a cop is choosing specific actions and behaviors. You can't make that choice and be a good person.

Every good thing a cop might do could just as easily be done by anyone. Every evil committed by a cop could only be committed and gotten away with by those operating under the safety net of being a cop. Cops are allowed to commit evil by "virtue" of their job. Things you or I would rightfully be shot for doing, cops do every single day.

So, when someone doesn't like the truth that "cops are scum" being shared, and tries to make the case that you are being as collectivist as racists, just remember: "Cop" is a behavior, not a "race". To deny that some behaviors are evil is denying reality.

#CopsAreScum

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.

Letting "the law" control you

If you go out of your way to make an effort to break a "law" just because it's "illegal", you are just as much a slave to the "law" as those who go out of their way to obey.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

Statists are crazy wrong

Statists are often somewhat right about the problem, but crazy wrong about the causes and the solutions.

Crime is a problem. Real crime, not victimless "crime". But it's not as large a problem as statists believe. If they were realistic about the amount of crime there is, it would eliminate a lot of their justifications for government/The State.

They see crime and are quick to blame "illegals", guns, drugs, and whatever else their particular bonnet bee happens to be, but don't notice that the root cause of actual wrongdoing is aggression, and the biggest advocate (or "normalizer") of aggression is the belief that it can sometimes be right. Particularly if done in the name of The State.

And their "solutions" inevitably revolve around giving The State more excuses to commit aggression and theft.

Yes, they are actually that crazy. That's why they are still statists. And why they continue to be so wrong about the causes and solutions for problems.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.

Punishment addiction

I understand where the base desire for punishment comes from- it comes from the same place the acceptance of theft and aggression comes from.

But it often causes more of what it is claimed to stop. Especially when imposed by The State.

I used to be a fan of punishment. Therefore I can still understand the attraction, even though I have moved on.

But, if you believe you can teach someone to not violate person or property by making them suffer through their own person or property at some future time, it seems to me you don't understand people very well.

People never believe they are going to get caught. They will be the exception. So, they don't fear punishment, because that only happens to people who get caught.

And things such as imprisonment create a culture you have forced them to join- as punishment- where they can learn more justifications to violate person and property, and more skills to carry it out. It's a stupid, self-defeating "solution", even if you can't think of anything better right now. Even if you believe doing anything else means they "got away with it".

I see people who are hung up on punishment as addicts. Nothing you can say will convince them they are shooting themselves in the foot. It's something they must see for themselves, if they are to ever see it.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.

"Not to worry. I have a permit."

Ever find yourself in a situation where some bully is demanding to see a "permit" because you are doing something you have a right to do, but which some "authority" has decided to control?

Well, worry no more. You now have a permit:

Print them out and distribute them to all your friends and family
PDF here (Thanks to the Granarchist!)

Yes, Ron Swanson's permit is simpler, but as you know, some people want to do things they have no right to do. This avoids that issue.

-

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online.
.

"I've seen what a lack of government leads to"

(Previously posted to Patreon)

Government- or more accurately, The State- is always a net negative to society.

There is simply no excuse for it.

But, but...!!! What about all these people out there who claim to have seen the absence of government in various hellholes around the planet (generally while invading with a government military and therefore responsible to a great degree for the hellhole quality of the place), and so insist that government is "necessary" or "essential"?

First off, they are lying.

The places they point to are never examples of "no government", but are usually examples of competing governments. Gang warfare, between competing gangs of bullies seeking to govern the same area. In other words, not a case of "too little government" but a clear case of too much government. Like Somalia, for example.

But, they don't know they are lying. They have come to believe unless a government matches one of the templates in their head-- involving the infrastructure, rituals, dress code, etc.-- it can't be a government. So when the murder, theft, and corruption is more openly committed than by the governments they are accustomed to seeing, by people who don't look or act like they expect government to look and act, they mistakenly view it as a lack of government rather than a case of government competition.

They may point to warlords (government) or rape gangs (government) or thieves and murderers (government) violating the people of the area, and say how much better it is here. The reason it is "better" (less brutal, perhaps) here is that the people here don't generally fight back against the bullies here, seeing them as somehow "legitimate". I know- it's utterly insane! But they usually do. Their first instinct is to comply with the most arbitrary and evil demands, as long as those demands come from a government employee. Otherwise there would be no such thing as "drivers licenses", anti-gun "laws", the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs, speeding "laws", property codes, dog licenses, and... well the list could go on for page after page.

Then too, the cases where the government here murders, rapes, robs (beyond "normal taxation"), and behaves like those foreign bad guys, are carefully ignored unless it is impossible to do so. Then it's a "few bad apples", or "he should have just obeyed their orders", or "he brought it on himself". It's never the fault of government, but of the victim. It's a sick world-view.

But, if it is a gang seeking monopoly control of the people in a region, sustaining itself with theft ("taxation" or some other kind), making up arbitrary rules and enforcing those rules under penalty of death, it is a government. What is more honestly referred to by quaint people who aim for accuracy, as a State.

There is no such thing as too little government. It's like claiming a person can be too healthy. There are bad guys everywhere. What they do always involves the political means, rather than the economic means. Whether they are called "the government" or not is irrelevant. What matters is how they behave. Do they employ aggression and theft? Then they are government of one kind or another, no matter what you call them.

So, do you prefer one form of slavery over another? I don't blame you if you do. But the solution isn't to excuse the slavery because it could be worse. The solution is to hang the slavers up by their entrails and stop being a slave.

.

"Witch!"

The accusation of "Witch!" just doesn't have the effect it once did.

These days a new accusation is needed when evil people seek to destroy (figuratively, if not literally) someone they don't like.

Fortunately (?) for those people, the modern religion of HyperStatism has provided a worthy substitute. Now all you have to do is point an extended finger and scream "Child molester!" and hope it takes hold.

It finally got used against me*. Probably by a cop, but maybe just a copsucker. It doesn't seem to have stuck. This time. If I keep poking the evildoers, they may try again. Time will tell.

Interestingly, I'm not concerned. If I were, I would have deleted the comment. As it is, I'm actually calling your attention to it.

Copsuckers and their gods are really sick people. No act seems to be below them. It tells us all we need to know.

-

*It's possible someone has done this before and I just don't remember.

.

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.