The joy of being wrong

You know what? It's actually kind of exciting and fun to be wrong.

I don't usually learn too much from being right- other than how others will react to it. That's kind of boring.

But, when I'm wrong, it opens up a whole world of possibilities to learn from. How can that not be thrilling?

Some of the times I have discovered I was wrong have led to some of the best things I've experienced. Some of the most mind-blowing revelations.

How can other people seem to not feel that way about the chance to learn more?

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Dependence on state an addiction

(My Clovis News Journal column for November 2, 2016)

Don't live a life of dependence (my chosen headline)

Sometimes it seems we live in a culture of dependency. Some people are dependent on drugs, while others are dependent on prohibition. Some people are dependent on other people; some are dependent on distractions-- electronic or otherwise. And more and more people today are dependent on government.

Being dependent is the opposite of being mature; of being responsible for yourself and accountable for your behavior.

Dependence on government, or its laws, is very similar to drug addiction. The long-term solution is the same, as well. Even if drugs are all around you, the choice of whether to partake is yours. You must personally make the move to take the drugs or to use the state, regardless of what anyone else is doing. Don't blame others' bad choices for your own. Even if everyone around you is an addict, you won't be unless you make the first move.

Don't imagine this will make you immune to the mess surrounding you; you just won't be making it worse. Being surrounded by government junkies will always be unpleasant.

Don't confuse dependency with necessities. You naturally rely on oxygen, food, water, and shelter. You can't live without those things; it's not an addiction. I suspect this natural dependence gets used as justification for pretending people require other, less helpful things as well. Becoming dependent on something unnecessary or harmful is tragic. It diminishes your life in ways you won't understand until you break the addiction. Don't trust those who claim relying on government is anything other than an unhealthy dependency spawned by weakness-- they are lying.

Once you realize you are dependent on something harmful, the smart move is to begin breaking the addiction. Start now. Ask for help if you need to. Don't wait for a free society, where government has been abolished, to take responsibility for yourself and get sober. Let your new realization give you motivation to begin exercising self reliance. If you can't go cold-turkey, begin weaning yourself.

Maybe you can even help others avoid the addiction, or get clean if it's too late to avoid. To be of any help, you must take care to not let yourself fall into the same trap. How can you expect to help others if you can't keep your own life in order?

Government is coercion, and is always inferior to voluntary action. Break free of any dependence on inferior ways of getting through life. You're better than that!

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

How do you see reality?

Dilbert's Scott Adams says our brains are not good at seeing reality, but only at seeing a "movie" in our minds that is good enough to keep us alive long enough to reproduce. I'll assume that's true.

It's why different people see the same thing in such different ways.

Well, that's great but the "movie" playing in the heads of statists is incompatible with the movie playing inside healthy minds. Yes, it keeps them alive long enough to reproduce, so it "works".

I would be perfectly fine leaving statists alone to play their statism game, but they can't bother to return the favor. They are uncivilized brutes who demand everyone play the game their way or die. That just won't work.

I don't care what "movie" they see as long as they don't put it into action by archating, and when they do initiate force and violate property rights, it doesn't matter that the reason they do is because of the way they see reality. Anyone still has an absolute right to defend their life, liberty, and property from anyone seeking to violate it, for any reason.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

No one believes they do wrong

Everyone always believes they are doing the right thing.

Even as they murder, kidnap, govern, rape, steal, and trespass- as they archate.

If they truly believed they were doing wrong, they would stop. You aren't going to convince them that what they want to do is wrong-- except in exceptional cases. They have excuses and justifications for what they want to do handy and rehearsed.

So... what to do about it? (Short of killing them all, I mean.)

The best strategy I've found is to live by the Zero Aggression Principle. You may have other ideas.

(I'm adding random pictures to the posts for a while to see if it helps visibility. Feel free to ignore them.)

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link- just in case you'd like to blow it up to help me out)

All governments are vermin

The bigger a government is, the more powerful it will be.

However, the closer to you the government is, the greater will be its impact on your day-to-day life.

That's why, in practice, the town council is probably equally harmful as a one-world government.

Notice, I'm not saying either is preferable. Both are vile and evil.

This is why nationalism is as sick as globalism, which is as sick as the desire to such up to the bullies in your state capitol, county courthouse, or city hall. All are vermin.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Blind faith in States

People sure have a lot of blind faith in the States of the planet.

They seem to believe the States are the only things keeping humans from killing each other. They seem to believe people are one whim away from mass murder- and only the State keeps us from carrying it out.

What about the State does this? Its ability to punish? Its ability to watch everyone all the time? Or some other even more mystical property?

How do these people act when no employee of the State is present? Do they either cower in fear, or start running amok? Or, is it all an act on their part? A comfortable lie?

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Statist "flaggotry"- no, not Trump's

As a little bonus, for amusement purposes, (if you have Facebook, check this out: link)

Here is all that has been posted so far. I may or may not update- you get the gist:

My original post was this...

If I'm dumb enough to waste money on a Holy Pole Quilt, it is mine and I can burn it or bury road kill wrapped in it or do whatever I want with it.
In the same way, you are free to worship any Holy Pole Quilt you own, in any way you wish to worship it.
You are NOT free to dictate what others do with their pole quilts, and if you archate against anyone because of what they do with their pole quilts, you are the bad guy. And, if you get grumpy over what people do with their own pole quilts, you have upside-down priorities.

D B: I totally disagree that just anyone should be allowed to own an American Flag... and at one time this was true....

Me: "Allowed"?

D B: Right...the American Flag should not be 'for sale'...so that any PUNK can buy it and desecrate it... I am FOR severe PENalties levied for any PUNK that desecrates our Flag...

Me: Who would you have enforce that prohibition, and what sorts of aggression would you use to back it up?
(Plus, it isn't the "American flag", it is "the US flag")

D B: Schematics... and who in the hell do you think enFORCEs our laws?

Me:  "Our laws"? I have no "laws" other than the laws of physics which don't need to be enforced.
I do follow the Zero Aggression Principle, which is simply a promise from me to you that I will not initiate force or violate your property- and may defend myself from those who violate me or my property- but it isn't something like a "law" that I can impose on you and force you to follow.

D B: In 1968, Congress approved the Federal Flag Desecration Law after a Vietnam War protest. The law made it illegal to “knowingly” cast “contempt” upon “any flag of the United States by publicly mutilating, defacing, defiling, burning or trampling upon it.”

D B: I don't know who the hell you think you are but if you live and work in These United States, you must follow our laws or PAY the consequences...

Me: Human invented legislation isn't law. And writing up some counterfeit rules doesn't make them legitimate.(Also, I believe you meant "semantics" above... but maybe not.)

D B:  It IS law, violate it and you are a CRIMINAL that needs to be PENalized....
Me: Everything has consequences. If I don't comply with the rapist, there will be consequences. Your "laws" are just the demands of a gang of rapists writ large.

D B: When I don't agree with a law, I work to get it changed..I don't just IGNORE it and do what I want...that is the mindset of a criminal.....

Me: I am proud to be an outlaw, because the "law" is counterfeit. You would be one to insist that the "Black" slaves stay slaves until the "law" changed. That is evil.

D B:  Think whatever you want but burn our flag in public and you will go to prison and I for one will be on board with it. BTW, if you want to burn the flag inside your own home...go for it...just don't do it in PUBLIC...

D B:  You have the mindset of a criminal and I bet your pipe is full of whacky weed.. lol

Me: You would be wrong. I guess to you anyone who is able to tell the difference between "Legal" and "right" is a criminal. That's the mindset of a slave.

___________________________

Then, under a different thread:

D B:  Btw, Kent....if I see anyone burn our Flag, I will not ALLOW them to get away with it... understand me, boy??

Me: You and I don't own a flag in common, but OK.Yep. Threats of violence- just what I expect from statists.

D B:  Shove your labels where the sun don't shine and I don't make threats, I speak FACTS...

Me: A statist is a person who believes that governing others is a legitimate human endeavor. If that doesn't apply to you, then please say so, clearly.
And, yes, apparently you do make threats- and then lie about it. If what you say above doesn't qualify as a threat, then nothing does. I guess you are lucky I don't believe in "laws", or I'd be using them against you right now. LOL

D B: Like it or not, whilst on American Soil, you will follow OUR laws or be arrested, prosecuted and hopefully put away where you belong.. I like to see the accused make their case to a jury and get a Jury Nullification on bad laws but a law against our national flag burning is one I stand for.. for all the men and women who spilled their blood so our flag can still stand...

Me: There is so much nonsense in that I don't even know where to begin. You are deep into the cult.

D B: YOU are the non-sensible one who beLIEves you can pick and choose what laws you want to follow or not... grow up, boy... actually, I don't care what you do, you are destined for a cage IF you practice what you preach which I doubt...a computer warrior who talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk... or you would be in jail.. lol

D B: A threat is a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger.....Your own actions create the damage or danger ...but so typical of a criminal mindset to blame others...

Me: So, you believe you are "law abiding"? (You aren't.)
http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-you-commit-three-felonies-a-day-2009-9
A threat is also a statement of intention to harm someone- which you did. You are a criminal- in the worst sense of the word- in more ways than one.

D B: I am law abiding to the best of my ability... I do not go about with the INTENT to break laws... understand the difference, boy? You have a very juvenile way of thinking...and as I said, if I don't like a law, I work to get it changed whilst lazy azz punks like yourself just go about violating our laws and spew Freeman on the land, Natural Man, sovereign citizen BS... lol

Me: You're silly. But it's amusing to watch you try to wiggle out of the pit you have dug for yourself.

D B:  LOL You call this 'wiggling'?? I've danced with far more nefarious punks than you...

Me: See what I mean? LOL

D B:  NO... you and I are on the same page but we have far different ways of achieving our goals..

Surviving in a statist world, sanity intact

I often see two different views on how to live "libertarian" in this statist world:

"Don't try to change the world to be more libertarian. You can't change anyone other than yourself, anyway."

Or...

"For the sake of your own liberty-- and that of your children and grandchildren-- you should do what you can to spread the message of Rightful Liberty any chance you get."

Those may sound like opposing views, but I don't think they really are.

I think most of us go back and forth from one to the other, withdrawing into their own little world when the exhaustion gets too much, and then striking out again when they've rested and re-energized.

I know some days I don't have the energy to do anything but live my own life the best I can. But other days, I can also talk to those who are curious about how their own lives would be improved by dropping the lust to control everyone else.

I'm not going to criticize either approach- both have their time and place, and both are useful.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Craving trouble?

(Previously posted to Patreon)

Judging by movies, TV shows, video games, and other forms of entertainment, humans crave conflict and excitement. Even war.

I also see a lot of people who create drama and conflict in their personal lives even though it takes effort to do so. Things going well must bore them.

I realize the reality of day-to-day getting on with life doesn't make good entertainment, but why do people confuse "good entertainment" for "good life"?

Maybe that's why they don't want to believe a voluntary society is possible- they think it sounds boring. The conflict created by politics is much more exciting, even though it is unnecessary and ultimately harmful.

The same old, same old has been done to death. It's time for a new chapter. Or, even a new book. Not a reboot or "re-imagining", but something truly new.

Personally, I can see many opportunities for new thrills in a free society, not including the inevitable conflict with those broken individuals who will continue to want to take the lazy, evil way out. I really wish more people would join me for this adventure.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

The evil, lazy way to get what you want

Archation works. It often gets you what you want-- at least in the short term.

It gives you power, dominance, or unearned property. I would be an idiot to not see that it works.

You still have no right to commit it. Not if you are freelance and not if you are working for a gang (government).

Archation includes theft, trespassing, rape, murder, fraud, trying to control other people's private property, prohibition... basically anything that a common thug or government employee would do.

Because it works, you aren't going to stop evil, lazy people from doing it. The best you can do is to refuse to lower yourself to their level, and to defend yourself from them.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

No reason to fear liberty

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

 Don't be scared of liberty (my chosen headline)

Real liberty can be scary. It feels safer to hand your responsibilities to someone else.

Don't educate your children; hand them over to be schooled instead. Don't protect yourself and your property; live as a distracted lamb and let the police protect you. Don't watch yourself and your surroundings as you drive; depend on checkpoints, traffic signs, signals, and "laws" to catch all the dangerous people so you can drive around in a daze. Don't think for yourself or observe the world and come to difficult conclusions; let the authorities tell you what they want you to know, and how you should feel about the information you are fed. Feel better yet?

Very few people realize this is how they are living. They believe anyone pointing this out is being outrageous or extreme.

But, you can do it! There's no reason to be scared. You can live in liberty while respecting the liberty of those around you. All the supposed protections and services you believe you are getting by handing over your rights, property, and responsibilities are inferior to those you could provide for yourself. Often, the results are the opposite of what you are told you are getting for the tax money and compliance, anyway. You can do better, or find better providers, on your own.

Observe what goes on and draw your own conclusions. Humans have been doing so with varying degrees of success for a very long time. Be willing to let go of bad ideas and false beliefs-- especially the ones with real-world bad consequences-- and accept the truth even when it upsets you. You will be fine. At least as fine as you would have been if you continued on your previous path of dependency. There are never any guarantees, either way.

Even if you don't want the responsibility for your own life, no one will force you to give up your comfort. They can't force you to be free, nor can you continue to force them to be your slave. Live and let live, in mutual consent.

If you have trouble there are people who will lend a helping hand. Surround yourself with good people who understand liberty against that day. The aggressors and thieves support one another against the outside threat of liberty to their gangs' activities; how much more helpful do you think those who actually support each other against the bad guys can afford to be?

Don't be scared. Take the first step now.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


.

Not all "minorities" are innocent

One thing that bothers me is that, in their zeal to protect minorities from violation by the majority (or, more often, from the minority with political power), some people protect archators.

This is terribly misguided.

If someone archates, they need to face the natural consequences. Otherwise, they'll never learn better. It doesn't matter why they archate.

If you archate for "social justice" or any other reason you are just as wrong as someone who archates because he wants your property or your body.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Reality vs the delusion

I would love to be what cops are imagined by copsuckers to be.

I want to be a person who is helpful to people in danger. I want to be the guy who gets kittens out of trees, and holds doors open for women and old folks (for anyone I can, regardless of any of those things). I want to protect people and serve them by actually being of use.

But I would never want to be anything like the reality of what cops are. I won't violate people for "laws" or "the common good".

I won't pretend I have the right to steal from people to finance my "service" (regardless of whether anyone agreed to pay for it or not). I won't pretend that property rights don't apply to me. I won't pretend my safety negates all other considerations.

I would love for everyone to be this way. Then all but the most delusional badge-fluffers would see their coproach heroes as the unnecessary scum they truly are.

I'll do all I can to make this the reality. How about you?

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

A Thanksgiving gone by

On Thanksgiving this year I was remembering a Thanksgiving several years ago when I was utterly alone. Just about everything in my life had fallen apart- and the worse was yet to come (it's a good thing I didn't know that at the time). Things were bad enough then that to remember that time-- and a couple others that came later-- is enough to remind me that things aren't all that bad now. Things could definitely be worse.

It's a reminder I sometimes need.

But, back on that particular lonely and sad Thanksgiving Day, my doorbell rang and I heard a car leave. Looking out an upstairs window I saw an unfamiliar car pulling onto the highway, heading toward town. The house was hidden enough that people didn't accidentally drop by (unless they were lost fishermen, and those were always on foot).

I went to the door and discovered a plate of hot Thanksgiving food on my porch. 

I never did know who left it (or even who could have known my situation- I didn't yap personal stuff to anyone), but I also never forgot what that gesture meant to me on that bleak day.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Happy Crazed Consumer Day

I have nothing against buying things, and getting a good deal when you do. But, to make up a pseudo-holiday strictly for that purpose seems a bit manipulative.

And that name- "Black Friday"! Always sounds like doom. Who would want to be a part of that?

I have never participated. Partly because I don't wish to be trampled and mauled. Partly because I've never had enough money to spend to make it worth the effort.

However you spend today, I hope you enjoy it.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Thank you

That's all, Just, thank you.

.

Stupid things

I am constantly astounded and stunned by how incredibly stupid people can be-- myself included.

It's amazing the species has survived this long.

But, I guess it means the smart things people do aren't as noticeable as the stupid things. And, in the long run, there must be more smart things being done than stupid things. Otherwise, we probably wouldn't be here.

But the stupid things humans do are quite noticeable, and have an immediate impact on my life. So I suppose it's not surprising I notice them more readily.

Statism is one of those stupid things. And it is part of a large web of stupidity. For humans to keep surviving it must mean there are a lot of smart things going unnoticed behind the scenes. That gives me hope.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

"Sweet land of..." fantasy

(Previously posted to Patreon)

"My country 'tis of thee,
Sweet land of liberty..."

Sweet land of WHAT? Liberty?

What is "liberty"?

Liberty is the freedom to do anything which doesn't violate another person's equal and identical right to do something. Or, as Thomas Jefferson put it: "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

So, where is this "liberty" in America today?

There are still some liberties you have, but certainly not enough left to call America a "land of liberty".

There are violations of your right to earn money, use your property, entertain yourself, defend yourself, live where you want, how you want. In fact, it has gotten to the point that the first question many people ask when exposed to something new is "Is it legal?"

This can't be the first response in a land of liberty. In fact, it wouldn't even be a top 20 consideration in a land of liberty.

As long as you encounter any government employee or rule at any point during the year, liberty is not a reality in your land. You may as well call "The Flintstones" an archaeological education course, because there's just as much archaeological truth in it as there is liberty in America today.

And that needs to change. Death to bullies and tyrants-- to anyone who violates the smallest of liberties.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.

Government clubs could work

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

Make liberty popular again (my chosen headline)

Why isn't liberty more popular? Every libertarian eventually ponders this question.

The answers they arrive at vary. Some are negative-- people are lazy, cowardly, don't want responsibility, and are addicted to theft and bullying. Some, slightly nicer-- people don't understand liberty because they have been indoctrinated against it, or they don't realize they lack it after a lifetime of being told they are free.

I suspect a mix of all the above.

Self responsibility is hard. The easy way is to let someone else be responsible for you-- like a child or a slave does. Liberty can also be scary. If you are responsible for yourself, who can you blame when you make a poor choice, or when something bad happens?

Some people do rely on theft and aggression. Not exclusively in government, of course, but those who are freelance face a greater risk of painful consequences. They lack government's public relations success at making victims docile.

It's time to mature. While it's up to you to make it happen, liberty offers everything you ever wanted.

Unless you want to push people around and take their stuff. In that case you are out of luck.

However, I can see a way even those people could become productive members of society. It would just take a little creativity, and presents exciting market opportunities.

There are fantasy football leagues, and mixed martial arts matches, so how about fantasy governing and "government clubs" for those who can't break the addiction?

With fantasy governing leagues, the lust to govern could be satisfied, but for the first time in history, no innocents would be harmed.

If hands-on is your style, real life government clubs could provide members-- with explicit informed consent-- the opportunity to practice all the statecraft they desire, while keeping the theft and aggression inside the club.

Each club could have a president, congresscritters, judges, scandals, and elections. If no one wanted to accept the lowly position, virtual citizens could be designed into the game. People who govern dislike encountering free-range citizens, anyway.

Government clubs could trade, use spies and diplomats and terrorists, and start wars between themselves, and no one outside the club would be bothered. It's Live Action Role Playing for former politicians and their fans.

I think it could work, leaving liberty unmolested for the rest of us. Humans could once again have a chance to aspire to greatness, unburdened by the dead weight of the parasite class. Maybe liberty would become more popular after giving the politically inclined this outlet.

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.
I need to increase my monthly subscriptions by $55 to get to where I need to be. If you are a regular reader and hear your conscience whispering that you would feel better if you returned some value for value, I won't disagree.




.

Before you criticize, look in a mirror

When I notice something I don't like in other people, I immediately look for that same trait in myself.

One reason for this is that I notice how often people criticize others for being some way they themselves are. I don't want to be like that.

For example, I know someone who says she hates sneakiness and when people talk about others, but she's the sneakiest, most backstabbing person imaginable.

Well, I don't like jealous control freaks who archate. So I try to make certain I'm not disliking people who are just like me.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

When the imaginary causes trouble

Politics, government, and "laws" are like a battle between leprechauns and fairies.

The leprechauns and fairies can't hurt you, but those who believe in them can. And do. Their whole struggle is based on imaginary things and conflicts between those imaginary things. And yet, the believers are willing to see you harmed over their hallucinations.

Government (or more accurately, The State) doesn't exist outside the human mind. This firing of neurons that makes government seem real to some people inspires the afflicted to steal money and erect buildings, send others to murder and die on the other side of the planet, and make up unnecessary or harmful "laws".

But this mental glitch has no physical reality. It's not even something that can be studied like "love".

Which is probably why I was uncooperative in "government" classes; the teachers are pretending to teach facts about something imaginary. Something completely subjective.

Now, if they'd change tack and inform the students about how people behave when afflicted with this particular mental illness, I could understand such a class. In fact, I could see a value in it-- teaching kids how to avoid this superstition and protect themselves from those so infected would be important. But instead they pretend government is something "necessary", important, and worthy of respect.

So, yes, let's revolve our lives around the battles of the leprechauns and fairies, and pretend the outcome matters to the real people and the world they live in. Beyond, of course, the behavior of those who actually believe in them. Because the actions of the True Believers matters-- always in a very negative way.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Spreading liberty

Liberty, and the Zero Aggression Principle, is a very individual thing. You don't need to wait for anyone else to join you (certainly not for a majority) to start enjoying the benefits.

However, I will admit it would be easier and a lot more fun if I didn't feel so isolated most of the time.

With that, I'll recommend again- as I do from time to time- that this would be the second best time to start going through The On Line Freedom Academy (TOLFA). The best time would have been anytime before now. Check it out and share it with others.

I have spoken to several people who have completed it, and they all found value in it. The only person I know of who didn't complete the course was a guy who had just enrolled in a military academy. I had high hopes for him, but the conflict may have just been too much.

Don't be that guy.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

One year

It's been one year.

And, to be honest, the past few weeks have been rough for me. To the point I have been having trouble functioning, sleeping, and thinking. But, I mostly pulled out of it last year, and I will again.

It's almost totally arbitrary- this idea of the "anniversary". Time isn't cyclical. But, for me, this date on the calendar now has a stain, and will serve as a reminder each time it comes up again. I feel as though even acknowledging it with this post is probably counterproductive, but this is all I cared about today.

I will say this, though. This blog and you, my reader, have given me something of a purpose over the past year. A constant reason to think of other things. Even the recent election distracted me as this date approached. My son and 9 year-old daughter (and especially her, being 9 and keeping me busy) also helped immensely.

I just want to thank each of you for sticking by me and giving me some purpose.

Thank you.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

My scheme has so far failed

Just so you know, when I become a "celebritarian" I will use my fame to obtain sexual favors from willing women. I warn you of my intention now so as to avert any scandals later.

Plus, I've admitted in the past that I'm here for the groupies (they do seem to be sorely lacking so far).

However, there will be no contracts. No possessiveness or jealousy. No threats. No gaslighting or browbeating. I only want totally willing and enthusiastic participants.

I expect things to heat up any time now. Any time...

Hello? Bueller? Anyone? Oh well.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Please reject revenge

I am not a supporter of revenge. Not at all.

However, I have been guilty of it in the past- once (years ago) I was even quite creative plotting and setting up a revenge situation, although I have no way of knowing what ever came of it. And I realize now it was wrong of me.

Actually, I knew it was wrong when I did it, too, but I did it anyway and felt quite pleased with myself. I am not perfect, but I try to do better all the time. I wouldn't feel good about myself if I did something like that now.

So, I don't advocate revenge, but I can certainly understand it.

In the same way, there are people who do things so bad that I can't help but feel a bit of pleasure when someone else gets revenge on them.

I realize I am probably wrong to feel satisfaction when a bad guy "gets his". Even when it is someone who, from personal experience, I feel "deserves" whatever he gets.

The problem with revenge is that it is an initiation of force. It doesn't matter if it is called "punishment" or "justice"- if you are not in immediate danger of being violated, you become the aggressor if you attack.

But, I will say this: in a case where the history of the victim of revenge makes me sympathize with the person who got revenge on him, he shouldn't come to me seeking my help in arbitration, because I would be biased. I know that is probably also wrong of me.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Government feeds on your fears

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

Liberty is more powerful than fear (my chosen headline)

Government needs you to be afraid.

They depend on your fear of crime, including terrorism (and, apparently clowns) to make you believe you need them. This fear causes you to give away your liberty and dignity for the illusion of security they promise. The solutions they offer are designed to feed your fears by making you focus on nearly-nonexistent threats.

Above all this they want you to fear them and their abilities. If they can also make you feel guilty, even better.

They let it slip that they are reading your emails, texts, social media posts, and listening to your phone calls, because they want fear to cause you to censor yourself. If you censor your words, your thoughts may soon follow suit.

They want you to fear what will happen if you don't ask permission for one of the thousands of activities they pretend to have authority to license. Once they stop issuing the licenses, you'll forget your ability remains.

They make examples of some people they catch to demonstrate the cost of disobeying their directives, because they want you to fear arrest. This way you won't try to do any of the perfectly ethical things they prohibit.

It's quite a scam they've got running, yet the moment you stop being afraid, they lose their power over you. And that terrifies them.

They fear you and me more than we fear them. Consider all the ways government shows it's afraid.

Notice how many government buildings now hide behind concrete barriers and "controlled access" entrances. Look at the road closures around government facilities.

Hear what a cop actually means when he insists on disarming you "for both our safety". Here's a hint: it's never about your safety when an armed antagonist disarms you.

Stop for a moment and reflect on the level of cowardice behind "no guns" signs, metal detectors, and pat downs. They are terrified of their bosses-- you and me-- being armed, even though they have armed minions among them whom they exempt from the rules they impose on you.

They also fear you knowing what they are hiding from you, to the point they ponder killing, with drones, your champions who expose them. This isn't the way it was meant to be.

You deserve greater liberty. Stop letting anyone convince you to be afraid. Be responsible for yourself and help others who can't help themselves. Your life will improve noticeably once you've discarded the fear.

-

A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.
My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions.


.

Appreciating small "favors"

I don't v*te, so I obviously don't v*te for "the lesser of two (or more) evils".

That doesn't mean I can't appreciate when one of the lesser evils gets imposed on me instead of the greatest evil.

And, make no mistake, I am firmly convinced, due to decades of experience, that Hillary Clinton was that greatest of evils.

Just because I'm relieved the blizzard hit my house instead of the tornado doesn't mean I wanted the blizzard. (OK, bad example- I generally love blizzards. But you know what I mean.) I also don't believe it would make any difference if I petitioned the weather and requested the blizzard over the tornado. I'm better off preparing for both rather than begging the atmosphere to respect my wishes.

I'm slightly relieved when the one I believe (and it is ONLY a belief) I'm better equipped to survive strikes. I won't choose a lesser evil, but I'm glad to avoid the greatest evil.

Yes, Trump has many insane ideas which would be disastrous for liberty- "stop and frisk", a border wall and mass deportation, and "protectionism" of various sorts. However, I expect him to break those promises- as all presidents do- if he doesn't get assassinated by the Hillarites first. That's why even his scary promises don't worry me too much. I will still oppose "laws" which violate anyone's Rightful Liberty, no matter the justifications, no matter who they come from.

Whatever happens, I will continue to behave as I always do; hoping for the best while preparing for the worst.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

"Why don't they talk 'Murican?"

Sometimes it's expressed "Why don't they talk right?" or "Why can't they just learn to talk like us?"

Usually said by people whose grammar is atrocious.

Sometimes I think people see more evidence of intelligence and humanity in the look in a dog's face than in the conversations of people speaking a language they don't understand.

But they forget that window works both ways.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Cops, and my emotional response

My emotional response to cops can be illustrated by imagining finding half of a decomposing mouse in the burrito you have been eating.

My emotional response to those who support cops in any way can be illustrated by imagining watching someone eating, and enjoying, that burrito after they've discovered the rotting mouse.

When they notice me vomiting in disgust, they hate me and call me names, and get in my face to scream "You can't seriously believe society can get by without these wonderful mouse nuggets in our food, can you? That's Utopian!"

But, that's emotion. Emotion is obviously wrong to experience, and foolish to express. Just eat your burrito, ignore any strange smells, textures, or flavors, and love those heroes in blue.

-

I will say this, though: Expressing support for cops is expressing support for murder, rape, slavery, theft, and every other evil. You can deny it, and complain that I exposed it for what it is, but that is the absolute, unalterable fact. It's not emotion; it's not opinion. Cops are what they do, because "police" is a set of behaviors, not a person, and if you support them, you are supporting their acts. Yes, you really are- stop denying it. Do what you will, but civilized folk are watching you.

-
(The Steemit link for those who do that sort of thing, and would like to help without sending $$)

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.

Message for Hillary supporters (and Trump supporters, too)

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

The election is rigged

"In this case, a rigged election is largely assured. Because, as I have taught you, shenanigans always happen when you have the following situation:

1. Huge upside gain from cheating.
2. Opportunity
3. Low odds of getting caught, or low cost of getting caught." (link)

And, yet, people will play the rigged game in spite of it all. You'll get what you ask for.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.

V*ting, demonstrated

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Evil "energy vampires"

Presidential candidates and sitting politicians are a perfect analog for those "energy beings" from the classic Star Trek series- you know the ones.

The ones who feed- vampire-like- off of negative emotions and aggressive energy.

The only way to make those entities go away, or starve to death, is to stop feeding them. Stop giving them what they need to survive. Notice what they are, and how they are using you, and refuse to be used one more day.

I can't make you, of course.

But, it sure would be a nicer world if you'd laugh at them and make them scuttle away and leave everyone alone.

They are NOT legitimate. They don't deserve your respect. They are not "leaders", but seek to be rulers. They are parasites and vermin. Treat them as such. They have earned it.

(See also this video)

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

My anti-v*ting guide

Cold, hard logic would suggest that you refuse to keep playing a rigged game against professional cheaters. But if you are going to v*te anyway, here are a couple of thoughts I have for you.

NEVER Hillary Clinton. Just not ever. No way, José. Years ago I had a friend who was friends with the Clintons and he told me to NEVER trust her. His advice in every area was always excellent. He never lied to me or steered me wrong. And, believe it or not, I just googled him and he's apparently still alive.

NEVER William Weld. I'm agnostic about Gary Johnson, but William Weld is a non-negotiable toxic lump of dog crap. He's not simply not a libertarian, he is actively and enthusiastically ANTI-libertarian. He illustrates "anti-liberty bigot" as accurately as Hillary herself. To v*te for the LP candidate this time is like continuing to eat at a restaurant that serves you a giant cockroach in your meal, and refuses to apologize for it. You simply can't reward that sort of behavior, and your v*te IS a reward. Just don't- I plead with you.

You are going to do what you do. Think long and hard about it first.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Being good is right, even if illegal

(My Clovis News Journal column for October 5, 2016 - from now until whenever, my CNJ columns will appear in the Wednesday paper.)

 Dare to be a good person (my chosen headline)

What is a good person, and why bother trying to be one? I define a good person as someone who doesn't intentionally harm innocent people or their property, makes it right when they harm someone by accident, and who does their best, whenever possible, to help those who need it.

I can even be talked into scratching the part about helping others as long as no intentional harm is committed against the innocent. Mind your own business and don't hurt anyone and you are most of the way there. I wish I could honestly say I always live up to my own standards.

Most people act fairly good the majority of the time. Why? Well, why do you, personally, act good? Do you behave yourself only because you are afraid you'll be punished if you don't? In that case, you aren't good, but only pretending. Being good when you are afraid of consequences is empty. If a person refrains from attacking and stealing only because someone-- whether human or supernatural-- might punish them, they aren't a good person.

But there is even more to it. Doing something just because the law says it's OK, or even required, is not good. Obeying the law has nothing whatsoever to do with being a good person; often quite the opposite. Some of the best people are outlaws, and some of the worst are bad specifically due to their support for legislation which intentionally or incidentally harms the innocent. Such as ObamaCare, or the barbaric War on Politically Incorrect Drugs-- the 21st Century version of Prohibition which they didn't even bother to make quasi-lawful this time by amending the Constitution.

Allowing laws to stop you from doing the right thing is also not good.

How many people neglect to defend themselves or come to the aid of others because they are afraid of the legal trouble they could get in? How many fail to consistently carry the proper defensive tools just because government pretends to have the authority to regulate them?

How many people comply with legislation and taxes which destroy their ability to provide for themselves or help others financially? Opening a business is good; interfering with the free market is bad. Every business which never opens due to all the government fees, taxes, licenses, and red tape is a lost opportunity for good.

Why be good? Because it works, and is always the right thing to do, even when it's illegal.

.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

The only thing you don't have a right to do

The list of things you have a right to do is an infinite list.

You have an absolute human right to smoke pot, carry a gun, be fat, act silly, trade with others, be a racist, believe in a "flat Earth", drive a car, say offensive things, have sexist thoughts, speak your mind, wear a hat, travel, learn, have mutually consensual sex, read, own and modify a home, pick your nose, or uncountable other acts.

Really there's only one thing you don't have a right to do: to archate.

As long as the thing listed above is done without archation, you have a right to do it.

Archation comes in many guises. The mugger and the IRS employee are archating. The cop and the little parasite "playing" the "knock out game" are archating. The burglar and the game warden are archating.

Archation is the opposite of anarchy. It is the use of the political means, rather than the economic means. While not limited to those calling themselves "government" it is behaving as a State acts; using aggression or violating private property. If you add archation to anything you otherwise have a right to do, you don't have a right to do it. Not that way.

And, if you try to prevent people from doing anything they have a right to do, you have become the bad guy. It is no different to use a "law" than to use a gun- if you are archating, your method is irrelevant.

You have no right to govern other people. To attempt to do so is an act of archation. Your victim has the right to defend himself (and others) from you. If you don't like that reality, stop being a thug.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Let people be wrong

If you believe in liberty, I believe that must include giving other people the freedom to be wrong. To do the wrong things. To do things they have no right to do sometimes. Things that embarrass you.

I think that includes not demanding that they not v*te, not hold a government job, stay off welfare, or whatever.

Even if they are family members.

Liberty is never controlling.

Tell them where you stand, why you think they are wrong to do what they are doing. Then step aside.

Yes, you have the right to defend yourself, but you are not always required to do so. Weigh each situation. Are they directly archating?

You are also not required to let someone violate you. Again, weight the situation. Maybe you simply need to get away from certain people. Or to put your foot down if they want to make you go along with them. To say "you may not violate me" isn't controlling anyone- although I have heard people make that claim with a straight face.

Letting people be wrong is probably one of the hardest things I ever do. And one of the most essential, when dealing with statists.

Let people be wrong. Don't hide the consequences from them- let them see the connection between their poor choices and the results. Maybe, if they mention it later, suggest a better way. You don't know who it may get through to.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Set it and forget it? Nope.

One of the sillier arguments against self responsibility (also known as anarchism) is "If you get rid of government, someone will just start another one. Humans always have and always will."

So we should never do anything that's not permanent? Like eat, bathe, or anything? If a battery would have to be recharged, there's no point in even using a device?

Yes, the tree of liberty needs to be periodically watered with the blood of statists. And your toilet needs to occasionally be flushed. It's just reality.

Almost everything in life needs to be repeated. Nothing is permanent. Even statism requires periodic elections, appointments, rituals, and the replacement of employees who finally become good government employees by getting embalmed or cremated.

If you want a permanent fix which can be done once, then ignored forever, you aren't mature enough to be responsible for yourself.

-
(If you do such things, please go "thumbs up" this on Steemit)

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.

The religious ritual of v*ting

The only reason I can see for a liberty-leaning statist to v*te for Gary Johnson is as an attempt to break the hold of the DemoCRAPublicans. He's no libertarian and his running mate William Weld is an authoritarian monster and anti-liberty bigot right up there with Donallary Clump (and actually much worse than one half of that twisted statist chimera).

But since it's all a superstitious ritual anyway, even that's a weak justification. Politics matters only to the extent you let it matter.

I will admit this, though- the v*ters are right about one thing. V*ting in and of itself is not an act of aggression.

Demanding that I go along with the results of your v*te, however, IS an act of aggression. If you would impose the results of your election on me by force, you are an aggressor. A thug. A bully.

You wouldn't want to be a thug, would you? Then have your election and leave me alone. I do not consent.

So, v*te, but keep it classy and non-aggressive. Remember that it's nothing but a religious ritual, and the results don't apply to those who aren't believers in your religion of Statism. You can't demand that atheists tithe or go to confession, and we laugh at your threats to excommunicate us. Nor do we fear your Anarchist Hell, knowing it is really much preferable to your Statist Paradise. Your religion doesn't have any hold on us.

I will not abandon my home just because the mafia moved in. So keep your "If you don't like it, move to Somalia" comments to yourself, or I'll suggest that if you love authoritarian government so much, perhaps you'd be happier in North Korea or Venezuela.

V*te if it makes you feel as though you've accomplished something, but keep your filthy government off my life. Thanks.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Hillary's weiner

Don't misidentify things

Once, in a high school zoology class, the teacher set out a bunch of preserved samples for us to classify. It was for a quiz or a test. We were to study them, and then be able to identify them on a test the next day.

I noticed that a flounder was mislabeled as a "skate" or "ray"- a completely different type of fish.

I pointed this out to the teacher.

He said that since he only had that one specimen as an (incorrect) example of "Chondrichthyes" I needed to pretend that's what it was for the test.

I told him he was teaching the students something that was wrong- misleading them. Giving them bad information. He insisted that it didn't matter, and I needed to just go along.

I refused. I kept saying "but it isn't what the label says it is!"

He had a bit of an outburst and said I was beating a dead horse.

I dropped the matter, but didn't ignore the lie.

I don't remember the outcome, other than I refused to call it something it wasn't just to satisfy him. Did he mark my answer as "wrong"? Or, did he give me credit for the unwanted right answer?

I'm still the same way. I won't misidentify something just to make a liar more comfortable. And they still don't like it.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Taking Teddy Bears

There is a situation someone was sharing on Facebook that made me really angry.

A friend's daughter had a stuffed toy rabbit she'd had and loved since she was a baby- maybe since she was born. She is now 13 years old and still loves and sleeps with the toy.

And someone stole it, just to hurt her.

If that's not evil, then nothing is.

Her dad believes he knows who stole the toy, but can't prove it. Without proof he can't go kicking in doors and choking suspects- because he isn't a bad guy.

You might think a 13 year-old ought not be that attached to a toy. I might agree in principle- but I have to admit I can completely empathize with her. She wasn't hurting anyone. Whether she "should" be that attached to a toy isn't the point- she was, and someone violated her property and hurt her. On purpose.

That infuriates me.

I know there are others who are just as attached to other things- or even myths they mistake for things- that are harmful. Like The State.

If what they love so much didn't directly violate other people, I would say you need to leave them alone and let them keep their figurative teddy bear. The problem is, with the State, their teddy bear only continues to be as long as it is fed the blood of innocents.

These are the people who- as long as they can't stay out of the lives of the rest of us-  need to have their beloved thing ripped from their hands and destroyed. Not innocent 13 year-old girls whose beloved possession isn't harming anyone.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Presidential debates have no value

(My Clovis News Journal column for September 30, 2016- Please note, my CNJ columns have moved to Wednesdays. The paper made some cuts, and dropped some opinion columns, but I survived the cut.)

Presidential debates are trivial entertainment (my chosen headline)

Is there value in time spent watching two liars trying to out-lie each other?

A lot of people seem to believe so. They watch presidential debates, and pretend they matter.

People have been fooled into believing "it's a two-party system" and a vote for anyone else is a wasted vote, and the debates confirm this belief. So, they continue to vote for the lesser of two evils, ignoring the fact that there are multiple evils to choose from.

Therefore, one of those two debating liars will soon be declared the president-elect of the tax-farm called "The United States". This winner will be using employees who will try to force you to behave in certain ways, and using your stolen property (stolen through "taxation") against you.

So you watch the debates.

It isn't necessary.

You want to know what to expect from the next president, right? I can give you a preview of what to expect right now.

The declared winner will build upon the misdeeds of his or her predecessors in the office. Even those things they criticized while campaigning. It's easier to condemn actions before you have the power to get away with committing them. I'm sure the new president's intentions will be pure, though. They always claim so.

All campaign promises will be ignored, but it will be explained that the promises aren't being broken; you aren't smart enough to see the Big Picture. As soon as a new president is let in on all the government secrets kept by the unelected people actually in power, it becomes clear why the indiscreet promises must be forgotten. It probably concerns the superstition called "National Security".

There's still hope. While no president is anywhere near as decent as his supporters want you to believe, neither is any president as bad as his opposition claims. Presidents are simply the gunk which floats to the top of the political soup, to be scooped up and held aloft as someone more noble than the rest of humanity.

Contrary to claims I have seen, presidents are unfit to imitate. If you believe a president-- any president-- should be a role model for children, you should probably put down the bong. Or pick one up. Because whatever you're doing isn't working.

As long as you are entertained by presidential debates, and don't take them too seriously, have fun watching. I have more important things to do, such as alphabetizing my cereals and sorting my cats' whiskers by length.

-

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it's a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big "thank you!" to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn't keep doing this without you.

Here's your "stupid" sign

Around town I see a couple of signs that warn me to not spend money with certain businesses.

"Support the Blue. We do"

"Support law enforcement"

No. I won't support dangerous gangs. I don't support those who violate peaceful people, no matter what their justification might be. And I don't support those who do. It's a pathetic quisling act to go out of your way to announce your support of scum.

I will not be spending any money at any business that advertises their support for gang activities. Policing is NOT about a person; it is about a set of aggressive, thieving behaviors. Behaviors no decent person would ever commit or condone.

It's a good thing that those who love rapists, murderers, thieves, and other molesters (with badges) let me know that they support the bad guys, so I can choose not to spend my precious dollars with them. If only all thug-lovers were so open about it.

But, I'm sure they are rewarded by copsuckers far beyond the loss of my piddling purchases. It's what "polite society" does. "Polite society" worships the parasites that feed on it.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Should be embarrassed, but not smart enough to realize it

"All taxes are theft and should be abolished? That means police, firefighters, the entire justice system, the military, all public infrastructure like roads and bridges, etc. should be funded through private donations? All those generous, philanthropic Americans out there would just graciously donate money to these groups even without a tax deduction (since there would be nothing to deduct from)? That sounds like the apocalypse, and would go over like a lead balloon. But at least the 'taxes steal our money' argument would disappear because there would be no Treasury or U.S. Mint to print the money we use. There will be no Federal Reserve either, so who's going to set interest rates, people on Wall Street? The SEC? Haha! Within a decade we'll be back in the Middle Ages trading chickens for grain. Sounds awesome. And don't tell me we could just privatize the Department of Treasury since that idea is so inherently flawed that the premise itself is illogical."

This is the so-called "thinking" of a statist. Posted without shame and free of irony on social media.

The flaws in his premises are so obvious they don't even seem worth pointing out. Feel free to do so anyway, in the comments. And they are numerous. Every scenario he apparently fears is based on an utter misunderstanding of how reality works, and what the bullies of "government" do.

I'll address just one of his delusions: money.

Money requires no government. If people want it, they will create it- without a "Federal Reserve" or a "Treasury Department" making bad money and ordering them to use it. And people WILL want money for most trades. I guarantee it.

Interest rates don't need to be "set" by anyone- they'll find their balance. Interest rates are like any other price. The market will find a price range, depending on many factors. If the "people on Wall Street" decided on an interest rate that was not in line with the market for money, anyone anywhere could compete with them, and beat them. It takes a government to protect a monopoly.

It should encourage you to know this is what we are up against. This is how the brighter-than-average statist on the street thinks. It is also how most of those who work for government think. And this is why they will go extinct. Sure, right now they have the drop on us. They have more guns and an open season on us. That situation won't last. I don't know when it will end, but it will end.

Bide your time. Prepare. Learn. Think. Educate. Speak up in private conversations and anywhere you believe it might have an impact. There is a change in the wind, and I can smell something new.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Always move toward liberty

(Previously posted to Patreon)

You can debate whether someone's chosen path toward liberty is smart or effective, but as long as the path they follow is truly toward more liberty, I'm in support of them. And it doesn't depend on the reaction of anti-liberty bigots- you can't live your life for them.

I would say, that as far as any particular method goes, I'm an agnostic. Even if I am unconvinced, let me see it actually work, and I'll get on board (or at least keep my doubts to myself). Until then I'll try to not be too critical, but I may be very skeptical. Being skeptical isn't the same as being negative. Or, if I realize a path I formerly supported leads the wrong direction, away from liberty and toward more theft and aggression, I may try to point that out, but I can't force anyone to change course.

I saw this happen with Bitcoin. I really didn't understand the hostility some people had against it. Sure, it might not work, but it sure looked like an attempt to go in the right direction. Let the experiment run and produce some data before flinging mud at it.

Wikileaks, too. I never see it as moving in the wrong direction to expose information the anti-liberty bigots don't want known. That it endangers some of their employees just raises the cost of being a tool of the State- and that's a good thing.

Maybe the same is true of v*ting. I doubt it, based on hundreds of years of pretty clear evidence, but some people keep trying to make it work. I am skeptical it ever can, and have laid out my reasons I won't be participating, but I'd be happy to be proved wrong. Just show me instead of calling me names. Convince this agnostic.

Keeping and bearing arms is the same. I am completely in favor of open carry. I have done it a lot- but not here. The bullies here are of the opinion that they can make up rules forbidding it, and they are happy to murder those who ignore any of their rules. And I don't have enough who would defy along with me. I would be the nail sticking up- even more than I already am. I cheer for open carry activists. Yes, it may scare some cowardly statists to see a gun. It may "drive people to the other side". But cowardly statists aren't going to be on the side of liberty anyway- if you coddle them it just makes them feel their opinions are as valid as anyone else's... and they aren't. Open carry is a move in the direction of more liberty- even if the cowards want to push back. Maybe in the long run it won't work, but no one can know that for sure. And open carrying is part of liberty. Pretending that someone shouldn't exercise their liberty because it will offend anti-liberty bigots isn't moving toward liberty.

The same could be said of my blog. It may not "work" and bring about more liberty to anyone, but at least I don't think anyone could seriously suggest it is moving in the wrong direction- away from Rightful Liberty.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way. But, make sure you are always going in the right direction- it's the only thing that really matters.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


.

Competition is good!

The boots I wear all the time were good boots. They were given to me for Christmas about 8 years ago, and I wear them every day. I have climbed all over rocky canyons, walked rough mountain trails, and even crossed many a parking lot (which, in my experience is harder on footwear than anything else) in them. They have scratches, but keep holding up for the most part.

When the soles and heels start wearing out, I just run to the boot repair place and get them fixed up and ready for more years and miles. The cost has been about $25 to $40 both times I've had them fixed. Not a bad deal at all, considering what a new pair would cost me.

But, things change.

My boot repair shop went out of business a while back.

Not to worry; I knew there were more places around.

Well, now it is time for another repair. I looked and found that there were still two boot repair places listed locally. I took that information and headed out with my boots.

Then I hit a snag. The first place seems to no longer exist, and the phone number is non-working. Oops. Well, there's still one place.

So, that's where I went.

Unfortunately, they no longer have any competition in the area. What cost me $40 at most just a couple of years ago will cost me $90 this time! (I have no idea how I'm going to pay for it, either!)

I'm hoping that a lack of competition doesn't also affect the quality of their work. I guess I'll find that out next week.

Competition has benefited me in the past, and now a lack of competition looks as though it's going to cost me. I suppose the boot repair place is happy they no longer have any competition.

Competition keeps prices down, and keeps quality (and customer satisfaction) up. Just look at what happens without it- it's like government when there's no competition. Yes, I realize I still have a choice, so it's not completely government-like. I can drive somewhere else and find someone who might repair my boots more cheaply, or I can just buy new footwear, or buy something for my feet from Goodwill (Salvation Army had better prices, but they closed the local store a couple of years ago), or I can make some moccs. There are always choices, even if I don't like any of them.

I plead to the market gods- please inspire someone to open a new boot repair shop in the area! I can't afford the situation as it now exists.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Not right, not wrong, just... is

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

"You have no right to" vs "You shouldn't"

(A looser than usual transcript)

Saying "you shouldn't" is an expression of  opinion.

Saying "you have no right to" can be an expression of fact.

Don't get the two mixed up.

For me, there's a short, straight line from "have no right to" to "you shouldn't". One naturally follows from the other in most cases. But, it's not necessary for that to be the case.

No human has the right to archate. To archate means to initiate force, or credibly threaten to do so, or to violate private property rights. Basically, to act like a government or other kind of bad guy. It's the opposite of what makes up anarchy.

The Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP) could be rephrased as the Zero Archation Principle: "No human being has the right, under ANY circumstances, to archate against another human being, nor to advocate or delegate archation." This clears up any confusion as to whether property violations which involve no physical force are addressed by the ZAP. Whether or not they were in the past, they are now.

So, you have no right to archate, but does that mean you shouldn't? My opinion is that it usually does- but not always.

Yes, pushing a kid from in front of a bus is an initiation of force. You don't have a right to do it, but I think this is one of those cases where you should. If it were me, I'd take the chance and deal with any complaints from the kid later. I'd willingly submit to arbitration if the kid I saved believes I owe restitution for initiating force against him in this instance. Maybe I'd then present him with a bill for services rendered, just to even things out.

There may be other cases as well, and if you believe it's important to archate- to do something you have no right to do- in some instance, you ought to feel it's worth dealing with the consequences that come from your act.

So, yes, saying you have no right to do something can be a statement of fact, if you indeed have no right to do it, but translating that into you shouldn't do something is a less supportable position. It's merely an opinion. And not all opinions are equally valid.

-

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)