Iverfiction

The Big Lie, part ??

The "news" story about how rural Oklahoma hospitals were turning away gunshot victims because of all the Ivermectin overdose cases-- "horse dewormer", LOL-- was obviously a lie from the beginning.

Rural areas don't have many gunshot victims. We aren't like Chicago or the other anti-gun places. A gunshot victim around here is news because it's rare. Now, just over the state line, in the town big enough to have a "bad part of town", it does happen every couple of months or so.

Otherwise, if it happens, it's probably either a bad guy who got shot by an intended victim (in which case, "Did you learn anything?"), and the story is soon forgotten because no one really cares, or it is someone who was stupid enough to call the cops, who then came and shot the caller (again: "Did you learn anything?") in which case the story will be memory-holed to protect the reputation of the Blue Line Gang.

It's not surprising that people who live in dystopian s##tholes would automatically believe something like this without skepticism. It reflects the world they've made for themselves that they live in every day. And they want to force this life on you, too.

But the Oklahoma story? Anyone with any sense knew it was fake before the retraction-- there was a retraction, right?

The delight shown by Branch Covidians over anyone who might suffer for not being sufficiently Of The Body is sick. It is literally, no joking, a cult.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Crunch!

Don't worry. Not me.

A couple of days ago I was sitting in the car, kitten-sitting while everyone else was in the mall, when I heard a loud car-crunching sound. I looked behind me to see a car partially up on the curb, its front corner against a brick wall. 

The parking lot curved around the front of the mall, the driver hadn't curved enough. She drove the passenger side of her car (I hope it was hers) over the curb and into a brick wall that separated a dumpster accessway from the sidewalk. 

I watched as she backed off the curb, turned on her hazard lights, and got out for a walk-around to see the damage. The passenger-side headlight was freed from the shattered grill, the fender and that corner of the hood were crumpled, and lots of debris was falling off the car. She looked at it for a minute, looked resigned and confused, then got back in her car and slowly drove off.

Who knows why she drove into the wall. Surely she was distracted. Texting? Something else?

But, remember that these people are out there. All around you. They will not be responsible, so it is your responsibility to watch for them. 

My mindset when I drive, bike, or walk is that every other car or pedestrian is a wind-up robot with no conscious control whatsoever. Just a mindless object moving randomly and if an accident is to be avoided, it's completely up to me. So far that has served me pretty well.

I'm not saying I can't ever be distracted, but that by making that my default mindset, I've been able to avoid problems most of the time. I know how easy it is to get distracted by something. 

I'm not going to get caught thinking it's someone else's responsibility to not run into me.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Government has no right to mandates

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 4, 2021)

New Mexico's government may be flirting with Covid 19 mandates again. Did you think government would just step aside when it became obvious it keeps doing pointless things?

I will not accept this "new normal" of endlessly recurring threats of mask mandates, shutdowns, and lockdowns. You do what you want, but I'm not going to accept going backward.

I hope businesses don't get targeted this time. I feel bad for business owners forced to choose between betraying their customers by enforcing the state's illegitimate mandates or risking punishment from the state.

Yes, an individual business owner has every right to require masks or even proof of vaccination, but I have the right to shop elsewhere. Which I will. I will not support those who help government violate people. The new Jim Crow era can't be allowed to stand.

I was more forgiving last year. Even though no one has the right to impose mask mandates or shutdowns, there were many unknowns in the beginning. But not now. At some point, the people have to say "I will not comply", whether it's as a customer or as a business owner.

Government is not your boss, you are its boss-- if you choose to employ it. Recent history has shown government doesn't accept this situation, but that's just how it is.

If enough people simply refuse to comply, government has to back down. It's how the worst aspects of alcohol prohibition came to an end in 1933-- there simply wasn't enough compliance, and even juries refused to convict scofflaws. In the case of mask mandates and shutdowns, there isn't a constitutional amendment nor even legislation, backing it up. You aren't in the wrong if you refuse to comply.

I don't care if you want to wear a mask. I do care if you force others-- even children-- to do so. I don't care if you accept an experimental vaccine which doesn't prevent the illness and doesn't prevent the vaccinated from spreading the illness. I do care if you demand others take the needle.

I understand that the vaccine may make the symptoms less severe which might reduce the risk of complications and hospitalization. However, I also understand no one can have the right or the imaginary political authority to force this vaccine-- if it can honestly be called a vaccine-- on others.

The mandates will end for good when enough people say "No, I won't".

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

A mountainman tale from the past

Years ago-- sometime in the mid '90s-- I was at a mountainman rendezvous in the Rockies. One day somewhere in the next meadow over, a group of modern campers set up and started shooting semi-autos all day.

That was really no issue for us. After all, we had black powder contests going on all day (and most of us also had semi-autos in our bedrolls, but don't tell anyone). Some of the guys decided to play a little prank on the greenhorns, anyway. 

Super early the next morning, before dawn, they hauled one of the camp cannons (but only one) over to the modern guys' camp, and set it between their tents. According to the tales told around the breakfast fires that morning, the resulting "BOOM!" brought them out of their tents really fast.

But they had a great sense of humor about it. They even came over to visit our camp later in the day and got the VIP treatment.

Fun times...

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

I like canteens

Not that I think this is in any way important stuff, but I like canteens, or any water storage vessels, really. I always have. I don't know why.

I have a hard time passing them up in thrift stores. Even those ubiquitous metal water bottles are hard for me to ignore.

I've had to fight the compulsion to buy kerosene lamps most of my life, but canteens come a close second. 

My first canteens were plastic toys, but they worked (just not very durable). I later (and briefly) had an aluminum military/boy scout-style canteen that did unsettling things to water-- sometimes making it fizzy! 

I've had beeswax-sealed wooden canteens-- which usually leaked badly until the wood swelled enough to make them water-tight, after which they only leaked a little. This left a refreshing wet spot on my side where the canteen rested. The water from these always had a pleasant woody/honey taste. All of those have disappeared over the years, though.

That gourd canteen above has served me well for a long time. Probably 30 years or so. But it is more fragile than the rest, so it doesn't get used too often.

The blanket-sided canteen above holds a gallon. It is plastic under the skin and originally leaked terribly. But I fixed it and it was worked well since then-- for 15 years or so now.

The Revolutionary War-style metal canteen was a thrift store find a year or so ago. It has a slow leak in a bottom corner, but I sealed the leak with melted spruce sap (in staying somewhat primitively correct) and it's fine now. Although I suspect the metal is historically incorrect stainless steel. I'll overlook that problem. It cost $10 and for that reason, I almost passed it up, but I'm now glad I didn't.

You might have noticed that leaks are a common denominator with many of my canteens. That's life.

If I see a canteen-- especially if it's a style I don't already have-- I'll check the price if nothing else.

At least, canteens are useful. And I sometimes even find them being given away-- as was the case with the plastic military canteen in the above photo that I found at a yard sale that was packing up and quitting when I got there.

I've found myself out on a walk without a canteen many times in my life. In such cases, I've sometimes ended up drinking water that you probably shouldn't even rinse your feet in (before water filtration straws). So, having a full canteen is something I value. I just think they are interesting.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

R.I.P. El Neil

I heard about the death of L. Neil Smith a few days ago from the Rational Review newsletter, but I needed time to process the news before I wrote anything. I wanted to take time to think about what I'd write.

The only way to sum it up: It hurts.

He helped make me who I am. In fact, he's the reason this is the "Hooligan libertarian" blog.

I've written before that I didn't know what "libertarian" meant before I kind of accidentally found his book Lever Action through an NRA magazine-- a lukewarm book review written by someone who was completely bewildered by the book and just didn't get it at all. But something about it struck a chord in me, anyway. I cut out the blurb and kept it on a table by my couch for months until I had the spare money to order the book. I've never regretted reading it.

I wish so badly that I still had that book review-- or knew where I have it stashed. It was from some time before the end of 2002. A muddled time in my life, for sure. L. Neil hadn't known about the review and wished to see it after I told him about it. I never was able to help him with that.

Anyway, before I read Lever Action I thought I was a "conservative"-- that's what schooled people had told me I was all my life, since I didn't like government. I discovered I had been misled. I finally felt like I was on the right track. I also began the long task of examining all I believed and tossing away the stuff that just didn't fit. A task that continues.

I spoke with Neil on the phone a few times over the years and emailed him even more often. I am more glad than you know that I was able to tell him how much he meant to me. A few years ago I asked if I could mail him my treasured copy of Lever Action to be autographed and he was happy to oblige. It has been priceless to me ever since.

When my older daughter died, he sent personal condolences and donated (as did so many of you) to help me travel to her funeral.

He always made me feel important; that I mattered. That my opinions mattered.

He had a stroke a few years ago, and I feared the worst. I was glad to see him get back to writing before too long.

The only thing we ever really disagreed over was Trump. He was a supporter, I wasn't. I understood where he was coming from, though. I never argued with him over the issue and it never came up when we wrote to each other. It just wasn't that important. 

Through it all, he always meant a lot to me.

I don't have heroes. I'm not sure I've ever really had a mentor. But he came really close to being both for me. I miss him already.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

The Constitution is a Trojan horse. It's been disgorging political statists who hate liberty into America for 230+ years.

Got your blood kayak ready?

Get ready for the roads in Texas to turn into rivers of blood today, as we have been repeatedly warned will happen. 

This is the day that Texans will be slightly more free-- our rights will be violated just a little less. Yes, today "Constitutional" [sic] carry is in effect.

Today I will be slightly less of an outlaw than I have been in decades.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Banned for not lying

Alex Berenson wrote, "It doesn't stop infection[1]. Or transmission[2]. Don't think of it as a vaccine[3].

Think of it - at best - as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy[4] and terrible side effect profile[5] that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS[6]. And we want to mandate it? Insanity."

There are no lies there. 

You could substitute food for the assumed topic of the tweet to remove the triggering issue.

1- One meal today won't stop you from starving to death a year from now. 

2- No matter how well-fed you are, someone near you could still starve to death, especially if you steal all their food. You could "transmit" starvation even if you are well-fed.

3- Don't think of food as a vaccine against starvation.

4- At best, it is a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy. If you eat once, the starvation is only held at bay for a while. You'll have to eat again to keep from starving. 

5- You can get food poisoning, you can choke on food, you can break a tooth, you can have a fatal allergic reaction. For those who suffer these mishaps (especially those who die), this constitutes a terrible side effect profile. No one says everyone will have this experience.

6- You also have to eat before you die of starvation for the food to do you any good.

But this doesn't mean food is useless. To ban someone for pointing out these facts is a terrible disservice to society.

Alex didn't even explicitly say which non-vaccine he was referring to-- although we can assume we know. 

Herr Twitler (or a minion) claims this tweet is misleading and he imposes the Twutter version of the Final Solution on Alex and those like him for saying these accurate things.

If Twutter is a "private company", Twitler has the right to ban anyone for any reason or for no reason at all. If. It's still an incredibly slimy thing to do.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

One person's dystopia is another's Utopia. They'll fight to keep the dystopia that's killing you because it's their Utopia.

Is "long-haul Covid" confirmation bias?

Almost everyone in my family has had Covid. Of those, all recovered, including those with multiple serious co-morbidities, even though one developed "long-haul Covid". 

But here's the problem with that.

Her "long-haul" issues were in the same category of problems she's had for years. The only thing that makes it "long-haul Covid" is that she was diagnosed with Covid a couple of months before she the problem developed again. Before, it was just "You're not a particularly healthy person", but then it became "OMG! You've got long-haul Covid!" 

Hence, my skepticism.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Government won't save you from being conquered

Why is it that people who fear "we" are going to be taken over by the Chinese (or whoever) always seem to think government has the solution? That a stronger government will prevent such a thing, rather than to help it happen?

Government is the problem.

Want to take over another land? 

If it doesn't really have a central government you're looking at decades of fighting to conquer every individual who doesn't want your "help". Do you really want it that bad? Is your cannon fodder really that dedicated to getting you what you want?

But if that land has a government you only have to defeat those willing to support that government. Then you slide into the bureaucratic infrastructure (and don its veil of "authority") and continue business with barely a hiccup.

If you rely on government to save you from being taken over by someone else, you've hitched your wagon to the mule that will walk you right into the enemy camp and hand you over.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Let rich give humanity new frontier

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 28, 2021)

After Sir Richard Branson and Jeff Bezos both went to space-- depending on how you define "space"-- within days of each other, in rockets built by their respective companies, outrage activists got upset.

Were people angry when Henry Ford first rode in a Ford automobile, or when Alexander Graham Bell made his first phone call?

It's not a matter of how wealthy Branson and Bezos are. It was their responsibility to ride their rockets.

When your company builds rockets, you, as the head of the company, need to put some skin in the game. How could you ask anyone else to ride if you're not willing?

I'm not envious of their wealth, anyway. Other things bother me more.

I'm not a fan when Elon Musk's SpaceX takes government payloads into space or seeks FAA permission to launch rockets or built a tower. When government hallucinates the authority to "allow" or "forbid" business, and backs it with threats of force, you do what you have to do. I still don't like it.

Don't suggest they pay more taxes, either. Only the economically ignorant want government to tax corporations more-- or at all. All corporate taxes are, and must be, paid by the customers, like every business expense. I can't afford to support government by paying more than necessary for things I want and need.

In space flight, as with anything else, the early users are going to be those who can afford the immense price. I'm not envious. Other people buy more expensive cars, bigger and better houses, and take nicer, longer vacations than I can afford. For me to envy anyone who can afford things I can't would be pointless.

In this case, they are also taking the greatest risks. By the time the cost of space travel has dropped to the point where people like me can afford a ride, most bugs should be worked out. I'm glad others are going first.

Building rockets to take people into space is essential for the future of our species, even if you don't want to go. NASA had its chance. Now others have stepped up to do what government failed to do.

The envious can't see that money spent on space travel is helping everyone on Earth. This money is better spent than most charitable donations, if you're looking at long-term benefits. Humanity needs a frontier more than most people realize. Let them give you one.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Those who see details are more likely to also understand the Big Picture than "Big Picture people" are to grasp the importance of details-- which they are too busy to notice, anyway.

Hallucinate hard enough and government doesn't look like a failure

I asked a Right-statist what "not failing" would look like to him.

His main concern is the protection of everyone's property ("handling crime") and things "too big" for an individual to do on his own. And he wants it all to be done "efficiently". So, I guess, as long as a state does those things it is not failing in his view. 

But...

The primary violator of everyone’s property is government; much worse than freelance criminals. More on that when we discuss crime below. Also, if political government exists, I want it to be as inefficient as possible. Efficient government would be a nightmare for the people, plus it can trick them into tolerating it longer. It's the worst-case scenario.

Roads: First, I'll say I don't know how things would work out in a free society, the best I can do is come up with voluntary solutions I can think of. The actual way it works out could be much different.

Who would build the roads? The same contractors who build them now. Who would pay the contractors? The same people who pay them now-- you and me. How would they be paid? Not through taxation.

One possibility-- businesses would want roads so you could get to their doors. Those roads would also have to pass by your house to be of any use to them. You'd pay for the roads when you use the business, so toll booths would be unnecessary.

The difference between "managing a project" and government is the same as between sex and rape: consent. The structure can be the same, but it's a totally different act.

As far as agreeing where the road should go. Keep the roads which already exist. But new ones? Often a new development will lay out and build the new roads, then hand them over to government when they're done. Just skip that last step.

If a big project is actually wanted, people will chip in. Those who don't value it don't have to. If they then decide to use it after it's finished, they'll have to pay a user fee or chip in as though they were there from the beginning. Any project that can't get enough voluntary funding to survive needs to die anyway.

Traffic lights (and other traffic signals) make travel more dangerous. Maybe a few informational signs would be good, but most of that stuff needs to go away.

And that's assuming roads would still be as necessary in a free society. They might not, since flying vehicles would become more common (and most likely, affordable).

Crime: Cops now steal more property than freelance thieves, and have for several years running. Even before you factor in fines or the taxation which funds police. And that's only one small piece of the whole. 

If "we" are paying government employees to deter crime, we are getting screwed.

Police don't protect or defend you or your property. Warren v. District of Columbia settled that question. 

When inmates are asked what they fear most, it is never the risk of being arrested-- it is armed intended targets. The job of defending yourself and your property has always been yours, even if you imagined you had hired someone else to do it instead. If you want to hire someone, I wouldn't stop you. Just don't make me pay for it on your behalf and if your employees harm an innocent during the commission of their "protection", let them be held fully accountable (and you, as well, because you are their employer).

I don't want government courts judging criminals. It's a conflict of interest any time government is one of the parties. Do they recuse themselves in that case? Nope. 

Justice isn't about punishment (revenge), it is about restitution. Incarceration prevents restitution and robs the victim again. Prison is a racket. My dad worked in prisons-- they are totally illegitimate and only serve to train criminals to view themselves as apart from society and give them more excuses to target "others". They also operate as Criminal University. If someone is too dangerous to be walking free, let his next intended victim (or a bystander) kill him and solve the problem. Prison only makes things worse.

Again, "Would each person [protect] their own property?" If you aren't already doing this you're failing your responsibility.

"Who guards my stuff when I want to go fishing or to play cards with friends?" Security systems, neighbors you've built a relationship with, etc. The cops don't do that now, why worry that they wouldn't be there to continue to not do it in the future?

If you'd rather have "pros" protect you, go ahead. Just leave the rest of us out of it. As long as I'm allowed to opt out and not pay for them on your behalf, what you do won't violate me.

Government is an automatic failure, from top to bottom, front to back, side to side, and beginning to end. A free society couldn't possibly fail any harder. At this point, clinging to The State because you can't think how the alternative would work is just a mental problem.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

For future reference, remember: a high "social credit score" is a sign of a rat-faced suck-up. No offense meant to actual rats, which are intelligent creatures, unlike those humans who will have high "social credit scores".

Reality is a bully

In a Quora answer, I mentioned that people have responsibility, whether they accept it or not. 

A political libertarian-- responding to the question, not my answer-- asked what "responsibility" means. I told him that everyone has the responsibility to not archate. 

He responded that he agrees, but refuses to have this responsibility "assigned" to him. That's weird. But I pointed out that responsibility just is, like gravity. Does he resist gravity being "assigned" to him?

He said "[I] don't want it assigned to me. If gravity had the audacity to tell me that I was to be subjected to it I would spend my life working on opposing it."

Antigravity, here we come! I assume he's been working on it his whole life. Right?

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #5

Whiskers is a furry ball of dynamite. Full of energy, and so playful. He is really sweet (even though he looks vicious, killing my hand in the picture above).

The other cats are still less than impressed, but Ghost, the outcast cat, loves to wrestle with him. They get a little rough and I have to step in sometimes, but at least Ghost has someone to play with now.

We take Whiskers on adventures almost daily. He loves car rides-- more than the destination. He prefers paved paths over grass, but we're working on that.

His right eye hasn't changed in several days-- as far as I can tell. It is still cloudy, but the surface seems smooth. If he'd hold still long enough for me to get a better look it would be helpful. I think the ointment did the trick. I don't think a cloudy eye would need to be removed, so I'm hoping that surgery has been avoided.

We still have to deal with the hernia. Maybe we'll find out more about that next Thursday when he goes for his follow-up appointment. I'm hoping for good news on the eye, at least.

I've still got his GoFundMe up and running to cover the cost of the hernia surgery and follow-up vet appointments. Please share that link if you want to help. Thanks.

.

 A person would have to be a real festering pile of slimy feces to sign up to be an enforcer of legislation.

"He's stealing from the government!" is one of the least inspirational rallying cries I can imagine. The murderous Giga-Mega-thief is being pick-pocketed by a worthless punk. Yawn. It's not going to bring me to action.

What does "not failing" look like?

I've been thinking a lot about the "libertarianism fails in practice/in the real world" claim that I see so often.

I wonder what those who make that claim would see as "not failing".

To me, it doesn't matter what technological wonders you have, or how "safe" you feel, if you don't have full liberty, it's a failure. For this reason, I see the entire history of political government as one monumental failure from beginning to end. 

So, the disagreement must center around a difference of opinion as to what "failing" means.

This may also mean we want different things. Or, maybe we want the same things, but we disagree as to how they can be achieved.

I want relative peace. I want everyone's property to be secure. I want everyone to be free from molestation as long as they aren't violating the life, liberty, or property of another individual.

Sure, nothing can guarantee this, but the failure is built right into political government from top to bottom and side to side. That's unacceptable to me.

If the only way I can get what I want is to violate others with taxation, legislation, etc., it's not worth it. It's exactly the same as admitting that if the only way I can have sex is to commit rape, it's not worth it. Statists think violating others is "a necessary evil" if they consider it in any way negative. If it's necessary, it can't be evil, and if it's evil, it can't be necessary. And political government is evil.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce runaway slave "laws".

Be "that guy", but...

...keep in mind it's going to embarrass the Family. And we can't have that!

In the past, I've embarrassed them because I refuse to participate in National Socialist ritual pole quilt worship. I've embarrassed them on occasion by refusing to go into places with "We don't care if you die!" signage by the door. Now I embarrass them because I'm done with mask mandates.

Family doesn't want you to be that guy. They want you to go along obediently, with whatever "the Authorities" dictate. Don't embarrass them. Don't make a scene, even if you don't make a scene, by being different.

Well, I'm not a particularly obedient person. Especially when I see the harm in obeying.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce anti-gun legislation.

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce mask mandates.

When you thought you had the opposition beaten...

The headline on Reddit said "Conservatives are turning school boards into a battleground for culture wars. Struggling to push their agenda in other arenas, conservatives are bringing their buffet of grievances to schools - turning board meetings into an endless parade of ignorance, misinformation and just plain hatred."

That is a lie.

School boards have always been a battleground in culture wars. Children's minds (and futures) are the casualty.

There should be no such thing as government ("public") schools. Especially not compulsory ones. That they exist means they are automatically political through and through-- they can't be otherwise as they are tied to government. 

Someone is going to use them to advance their political agenda-- it's just that the Left-Statists thought they had that control in the bag. In the cases where their Right-Statist opponents are pushing back, the Left-Statists are squealing.

No statist faction has a monopoly on "ignorance, misinformation, and just plain hatred.". That describes Critical Race Conspiracy Theory to a "T", but the Left-Statists are happy to promote it.

The solution to toxic indoctrination isn't to let someone else indoctrinate your kids.

Abolish kinderprison. Education over indoctrination.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce taxation.

The constant companion

Whatever paths I travel down or explore, libertarianism (or, if you prefer: abolitionism, Voluntaryism, or anarchism) goes with me. It's part of the journey. 

I can't leave it behind. I can't embrace the life of an archator no matter what I'm doing. Whether it is writing on completely unrelated topics, rescuing a kitten, socializing, or shopping. 

It is part of me so it's part of all I do.

It would be just as difficult for me to leave that behind-- to believe anyone has the "right" to archate-- as it would be for me to pretend to believe in leprechauns. I would be only pretending either way.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

More in common than you think

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 21, 2021)

Even when we seem to disagree, we have more in common than you might think. I probably want many of the same things you want.

I have no respect for those who violate private property. Even less, if possible, for those who harm the innocent. Wouldn't you agree?

Then why would you and I ever be on the opposite sides of an issue?

Perhaps you tolerate methods of getting what you want that I can't tolerate. I don't believe politics or legislation is ever the right way to do anything.

If I want a car-- or even desperately need one in order to survive-- I know I have no right to steal yours. Hiring a professional thief to steal one for me doesn't make it moral.

No matter what I need, or how badly I need it, having a politician impose a tax or entitlement to benefit me at your expense is wrong. I can't have any right to ask them for this favor.

If I don't like something you're doing-- something which doesn't actually harm anyone's life, liberty, or property-- I have no right to kidnap and cage you to make you stop. Nor do I have the right to shoot you if you resist being kidnapped. Hiring legislation enforcers-- with money that wasn't mine to spend-- to catch or shoot you on my behalf in the name of "the law", when you aren't violating anyone, is no better.

If I don't have the right to do something, I can't have the right to ask anyone else to do it on my behalf. I don't have the right to ask that money stolen from you through taxation be spent on things I want. I don't have the right to stop you from doing things I don't like if they don't violate anyone. I don't have the right to ask others to impose my will on you as a way to keep my hands clean. My hands would be bloody either way.

I'm not going to gang up with others and vote to forbid you from exercising your rights, even when I dislike what you do. Not even when this is seen as legal and called a civic responsibility or imagined to be a right.

There are limits to what I have a right to do, even when others refuse to respect those limits. I'm not willing to do wrong-- to use politics-- to get what I want.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

A person would have to be a real pile of feces to enforce prohibition.

Pre-existing conditions and Covid

Covid 19 exposed a lot of people's pre-existing conditions. Not necessarily medical conditions, though.

Many people seem to have been suffering from undiagnosed cowardice, authoritarianism, obedience, and social anxiety... and Covid gave them the permission they needed to express those shortcomings fully, with fawning approval. 

Now those people expect the rest of us to manifest the shortcomings they suffer from, under threat of punishment if we aren't as broken as they are. 

I think I'll pass.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Supposedly, New Mexico is back to mandating masks indoors. I went to a few stores today and didn't wear a mask, was never asked to put on a mask, and I saw other maskless people (maybe 25%). I think the Branch Covidians are finished.

Legislation's result

Those who say "there oughta be a law", concerning anything, must LOVE outlaws. What else could explain their drive to make more and more of them?

Every "law" creates an outlaw. Or millions of them.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

"Anarchy, like communism, fails in practice"

"Conservatives" like to pull some statement of this sort out of somewhere dark and musty: "Anarchy, like communism, sounds good on paper but fails in practice."

Really?

I've never seen anarchy fail when it is followed. Not once. Of course, it's not a political system, and those who try to make it one will see it fail every time. It's like trying to use the family SUV to get to Mars. You're doing it wrong!

That's also why communism always fails when imposed as a political system. It might work OK as long as you don't try to make a government out of it-- keep it 100% voluntary and let anyone opt out at any time for any reason without punishing them. But once politics enters the picture, it's going to be bad, just like when politics is mixed into medicine/science or anything else-- nothing is left but politics. 

And why the pathetic attempt to always tie anarchy and political communism together? Might it be due to government school indoctrination? I'm sure it is.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

It's up to you, every day

In the old Twitter thread with the anti-gun bigot I've talked about several times, a pro-gun, but also pro-cop, "conservative" justified his support for police (and legislation) by saying, "I don’t want to have to protect my life & stuff *every* day."

Well, sorry Bub, but that's just how reality works.

Cops aren't there to protect you or your stuff. They are there to make a report after you've been violated and kidnap your violator if your violator happens to fall into their lap. Protecting you or your stuff isn't their "job". It is your job and it always has been and always will be. Always. Your wishful thinking and bootlicking doesn't change it.

In fact, cops steal more than freelance thieves now, and have for several years. Are these really the people you think protect you?

Things like that are why I can't be a "conservative".

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #4

Whiskers finally got in to see the vet today. The news is mixed.

He still has an ulcerated cornea in his right eye. They gave me a new ointment to try to get that healed. If it's unsuccessful he may have to have that eye removed. I'm hoping the ointment works.

He also has an umbilical hernia (I had felt it but thought other issues were more important) that they say they will repair when he goes in for his neutering.

Other than that, he seems in pretty good health. He's making friends/chasing the other cats and my daughter is just in love with him. So much kittenergy!

He'll still have a few more vet appointments in the near future, though.

-

Due to the upcoming appointments and procedures, I am starting a GoFundMe, but since you've already donated to help, just share it if you care to. 

It's long past time for the U.S. to withdraw its forces from the rest of the countries it occupies. Including, and especially, America.

The good kind of progress

The nearest "PlastiCrap World" store, over in New Mexico, got rid of its anti-gun signage recently, replacing it (after a month or so) with signs saying "Kindly refrain from openly carrying a firearm".

That's progress I fully support. I'm always more willing to accommodate a polite request than a rude demand.

I wish I believed it had something to do with me calling them out in my newspaper columns-- over and over through the years-- for being designated slaughter zones, but I don't. Whatever their reasons, it's a good move.

Yes, I think it's still silly to reject open carry by others, for many reasons, but at least they are no longer demanding you be target practice for evil losers who ignore signs.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

If the (less than optimal) use of antibiotics can cause antibiotic-resistant bacteria strains, then the use of low-efficacy Covid-19 "vaccines" can cause new Covid variants. It's the same process. Any claim otherwise is a lie.

If it fails as soon as you stop propping it up with massive amounts of (stolen) money and hired goons, it was always a failure. Whether it is a political government in Afghanistan or a communist utopia.

"The Simulation": A useless idea?

I hear a lot of talk about "The Simulation". 

If we live in a simulation, but it's not possible to "hack" the simulation to get the outcome you'd prefer without going through the same steps you'd have to go through if you didn't live in a simulation, then of what use is the idea? None. It's utterly useless.

If this isn't a simulation, to have success you have to have the right idea at the right time, put in lots of work (in just the right way), and also be very lucky.

If this is a simulation you have to do the exact same thing to achieve success. There's no hidden button you can discover and push to hack the system without doing all the work. Even those who imagine there is a "hack" they've found seem to be fooling themselves about how much work (and luck) goes into the results they see.

So, either way, would it make any difference whether or not we live in a simulation? A difference which makes no difference is no difference.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Legislative damage takes time to undo

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 14, 2021)

Why are legislative messes so quick to be made but so slow to be removed once in place? After they are shown to move society further from the goal used to justify them, they should be immediately reversed.

If politicians can hide their mistakes without admitting or reversing them-- and get away with it-- that's what they'll do.

At most, cleaning up these messes is done piece by piece, as though searching for a way to keep as much of the mistake around for as long as possible.

Even the failed scheme of alcohol prohibition is still around; handed off to local governments, rather than completely reversed by the 21st Amendment in 1933. Governments are still allowed to get away with unconstitutional restrictions, taxes, and enforcement powers. The ghost of alcohol prohibition still haunts America. It's why there are still "dry counties", liquor licenses, and Sunday alcohol sales bans. If it's wrong when done by the federal government, it's still wrong when done locally.

It's happening again with drug prohibition. It hit society all at once-- not coincidentally just as the federal government was looking for excuses to keep employing all the useless prohibition enforcers-- but only gets removed a little at a time, state by state. Never enough to stop the prohibition-fueled violence.

Maybe it's finally moving in the right general direction, but replacing the eased prohibitions with prohibitions on new things-- vaping for example-- isn't a net gain. Government has never had any business being involved with what people voluntarily consume.

It's the same story with gun prohibition. Sure, more states than ever have passed watered-down relief for the rights violations, dishonestly calling it "Constitutional carry" when the Constitution allows no exceptions whatsoever, but other states and the federal government keep looking for new ways to enslave Americans on the perverse altar of "public safety".

It's said people get what they vote for, but most people either voted for the opposite or didn't vote at all. They shouldn't be shackled with the bad ideas other people supported. Those who vote for something should be the only ones who have to live under it; let everyone else be exempt.

Liberty must be restored, in every case where it has been criminalized and regulated with legislation. No matter what excuses are used to keep violating natural human rights-- even those rights you care nothing about-- it needs to be stopped.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Encounter at the thrift store

I was in a thrift store this weekend and an older guy with a little "service" dog approached me with some mystery kitchen appliance and wanted to know if I knew what it was. I didn't, but I looked up the answer on my phone. He thanked me, then, out of nowhere as I was turning to leave, asked if I'm a Democrat. 

I guess he doesn't read my newspaper columns.

I said, "No, I'm a libertarian so I don't believe in any of that government stuff."

He appeared shocked. He said he likes government because it does things for us and gives us stuff. I said, "Yeah, paid for with money stolen from us, after they skim their cut off the top. I'd rather they just go away. I don't need them."

Then it happened. I've never gotten the "But who would build the roads?" question in real life, but he actually asked in those exact words.

I said, "Don't you think businesses would build roads so you could get to them and spend money?"

He said "Well, they might, but why would they build roads to...?"...and he paused. I saw the wheels turning. He said, "Oh, I guess the roads would have to go everywhere or it wouldn't work..."

I mean, has he never actually thought any of this through?

So, he suddenly changed course and started asking if I'd had the "vaccine". Normally, I wouldn't even answer such a question, but this guy was fun, so I said "No, I decided against getting the rushed-through Trump vaccine". Again, he looked like a deer-in-the-headlights. 

He finally found his voice and said, "Well, the vaccine was the right thing for Trump to do, but anyone would have known that and done the same thing and everyone knew it could be done fast." Strange, I remember hearing the opposite: that a vaccine would take years, and Trump was lying when he said it could be developed quicker. But memory is easy to re-write.

He started telling me how many thousands of people are dying because they won't get the vaccines. I said, "Why would I believe those numbers? Or anything government sources claim?" He said "But government... but why... You don't believe them?" Could he finally be getting the picture?

So then he asked, "You didn't support Trump, either?" I said, "No. Like I said, I don't support any of that".

I left him there pondering and mumbling to the air (honestly, it sounded like he was trying to reassure himself) and I went on about my business.

I was later told that local businesses don't like him because his little dog poops in the stores and he won't clean up the mess. Why was I not surprised?

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #3

Whiskers is finally healthy. His right eye (cornea) still has some healing to do, but it's no longer infected. The cough is gone and there's no more rattle in his chest. There's no excessive sneezing.

He has also transitioned into being an indoor cat, thanks to monsoon rains over the last couple of days. He's meeting the other cats, who are suspicious, but not hostile. There is lots of supervision when they check each other out.

He is extremely playful and energetic, as healthy kittens tend to be.

His life is good. So much better than when I stumbled across his sick, starving body nearly 2 weeks ago. Thank you to those who helped me help him.

I appreciate the donations toward his care and the concern shown toward his well-being.

Chasing the ball. Where did it go?

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

"'Your child will wait for another child to die.' Amid Covid-19 surge, Dallas County has no pediatric ICU beds left, county judge says." ~ Thus sayeth CNN

How many children actually die of Covid? Or even get put into the pediatric ICU due to Covid? And do none of them in the ICU recover? If not, why does it matter whether a child gets a spot in the pre-morgue? Politics makes people stupid.

Believing in the state's magic

I know there are those who hold out hope by pointing out the state's illegitimate word games and whatnot. They are playing along.

"Legal" mumbo jumbo doesn't change reality. 

Yes, government supremacists like to pretend it does; they want you to believe in their state magic. It's statist wishful thinking.

The United States doesn't own you no matter what, not even if it is a corporation named THE UNITED STATES.
It doesn't matter how your name is written on documents.
It doesn't matter about the legal definition of "person".
It doesn't matter if a flag has yellow fringe.
None of that makes an iota of difference in reality or with your natural human rights, even if states believe it does. 

Don't buy into the lies they want you to buy. You're doing their work for them if you do. None of their legalistic stuff makes you their property. None of it alters your natural human rights. Let them play their word games. If some other state plays along, that's on them. They are the fools.

You are sovereign. Act like it.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Arnold Schwarzenegger says "...screw your freedom. Because with freedom comes obligations and responsibilities". Sounds like he doesn't understand the difference between freedom and liberty. I wonder if it would make any difference if he did. Yes, freedom can include things you have no right to do, but liberty doesn't, and he's advocating violating liberty-- something no one has a right to do. Screw your mandates, Arnold.

"Eek! Liberty?! Kill it before it spreads!"

As I've mentioned, I am right on the state line between Texas and New Mexico. NM recently legalized Cannabis (Texas gov says they never will). It's not yet legal to sell it, but it is legal to use it. Legislation is so incredibly stupid.

But, anyway...

Someone from Colorado wants to open a dispensary (why not just call it a store?) right on the NM side of the state line. The town council (of the NM town) is trying to make up new zoning rules, more strict than the already ridiculous state rules, to make sure it doesn't happen.

This is what angers me about statists. They just seem to hate liberty so much that they can't stand to see it threaten to happen.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

You don't need that!

An actual, although paraphrased for brevity, argument I saw recently for banning certain guns:

"You don't need an AR15. You can use a revolver to live out your white male self-defense fantasies if AR15s are banned*. No one should have to live in a society with semi-automatic assault rifles. Society has rules. If you don't want to live by society's rules, go live in the woods in a Ted Kaczynski cabin, you mouthbreather."

Yeah, I get it. You don't like guns.

And I don't like pit bulls. Probably at least as much as you don't like guns. I see no need for anyone to own one. I've known nice ones, but that doesn't mean some of them, when kept by certain people, aren't crazy dangerous. There are plenty of other breeds you could keep, right?

So, if I were as self-centered as you, I could claim:

"You don't need a pit bull. You can still have a Shih Tzu to live out your white male dog-owning fantasies if pit bulls are banned. No one should have to live in a society with pit bulls. Society has rules. If you don't want to live by society's rules, go live in the woods in a Ted Kaczynski cabin, you mouthbreather."

Except, that I would never make that argument. I am not so self-centered that I imagine I have any right to tell others what they are "allowed" to have. It doesn't matter how much I dislike (or fear) what you have. I'm just not ever going to do that.

Yes, if your gun or your pit bull harms someone (or if there is a credible threat they'll do so), you are fully accountable. You owe restitution-- maybe more than you can ever pay. But before that happens, your stuff is none of my business. 

Yes, society has rules, the primary one of which is "Don't violate the life, liberty, or property of anyone else". Once you start deciding you can tell others what they don't need, you're violating that rule. You are being antisocial and uncivilized.

No one has the right to decide what other people need. You only need air, water, shelter, and food. You can live on Primate Chow in a sheltered cage with a dripping pipe. Anything else is a luxury. But only a monster would force you to live this way based on what they claim you don't need.

--

*At least until "Saturday Night Specials" are banned.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Hypothetically, I care about people... I promise

Is it bad that I seem to care more about a sick kitten than I do most people? Sometimes I think it is.

But, on the other hand, the kitten only cried for help. He didn't hold me at cop-point and threaten my life if I didn't help him. I'm more willing to help someone who isn't giving me an order; who isn't making threats.

Hypothetically, I care more about other humans than animals. But that hypothetical keeps running into reality-- people who advocate violating my life, liberty, and property either through freelance crime or through legislation. It's hard to care about people who demand I be sacrificed on their altar to selfishness.

However... I do care about other people, and caring about other people means it hurts me when others are violated. Never forget, advocating for the violation of one means advocating for the violation of all. 

If I didn't care about people, I wouldn't be a libertarian or an anarchist or a Voluntaryist or an abolitionist (whichever term floats your banana). But I am because I do care. Even when it's hard. Even when it doesn't show as clearly as it should.

PS: I sincerely thank the two readers who chipped in toward the kitten's expenses. It means a lot to me and to my daughter. It helps remind me that people are worth caring about.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Cori Bush got something right

I know you probably don't want to hear it, and I hate to have to say it, but sometimes a politician can be directionally correct.

Some people are criticizing Cori Bush, some politician from somewhere, over her support for defunding police while hiring her own private security. (Here's a link, but of course, it's from one of those fake news organizations, so take it all with a grain of salt: link)

If that were the whole story she'd have it exactly right. Shocking, I know!

Of course, being a politician, any money she spends on anything-- food, transportation, clothing, housing, or security-- is stolen money. If it weren't for institutional theft ("taxation") she wouldn't have the money to spend.

But, if she were not a politician she'd be doing it right.

Yes, the police must be defunded, dismantled, and disavowed. Then the "taxes" which would go to funding that gang need to be abolished, too. That money could then be used for whatever each individual wants, including security of some sort if that's what someone wants to spend it on. People could hire private security or buy a gun. They could even pool their resources-- through mutual consent with others who also want the "service" and are willing to chip in to pay for it-- to hire something superficially police-like (but without "qualified immunity" and such). I wouldn't chip in, but that's just me.

You can't legitimately justify legislation enforcers by pointing to a problem they perpetuate-- crime-- through their enforcement of disarmament legislation. Well, you can try, but you look like an idiot doing so,

I know... copsuckers gotta copsuck. They hallucinate that cops are the good guys and are different than their freelance competition. Of course, police now out-steal freelance burglars (ignoring other types of freelance thieves) even before you count the "tax" money they receive, so the claim they are the good guys is completely delusional. 

Abolish the police, then accept the responsibility for your own security-- it has always been your responsibility whether you wanted to face that or not.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Don't tolerate vandals, vandalism

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 7, 2021)

The article in last week's paper about the problem of restroom vandalism in Clovis city parks struck a chord with me. I've seen the results myself.

I realize the people who vandalize park restrooms aren't the kind of people who read newspapers. Nor much of anything else for that matter. I'm going to express my contempt for those reprehensible creatures anyway.

The most useless thing in the world is a park without restroom facilities. If you're going to have a park, you need the facilities. It doesn't matter if you're the parent of a small child who waits until the last minute to tell you they "need to go... NOW", or an adult who has to interrupt a family visit to the park in a desperate attempt to find a nearby fast food restaurant with a public restroom-- which was even harder to find in the era of "take out only" under Covid-19 hysteria.

If I sound like I speak from experience, it's because I do.

I never excuse taxation and don't want it used to fund anything, even things I like, including parks or their restrooms. But what kind of a dimwit vandalizes restrooms? I'd guess they are the kind of people who will relieve themselves on a picnic table or on someone's lawn, just because they are too self-centered to care about others.

Vandalism and litter are two things I can't think of any excuse for doing. If you ask me, both are as irresponsible as cluttering the world with legislation.

Vandalizing tax-funded property can only have one of two results-- either those damaged properties get repaired, costing even more stolen money (you might call it "public funds"), or they get taken away so that no one will have them. Don't count on getting a tax rebate due to fewer available facilities, though. It's not going to happen.

How can this problem be solved? My suggestion would be to let local businesses and individuals build, own, and maintain park restrooms. Let them protect their facilities however they see fit. I would hope security cameras inside the restrooms are off the table, but there have to be other clever solutions.

What can you do? Don't tolerate vandals. Anyone who vandalizes anything is your enemy. They are violating you and me. Don't vandalize anything in my presence and expect me to laugh about it or ignore it. I won't. It's completely unacceptable.

(The week after this was published, vandals struck the city aquatic center. And a week or so later, vandals broke the glass in both outer doors of a Family Dollar near my house.)

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #2

Yesterday we went to the Big City to celebrate my son's birthday with him. The rescue kitten went with us because I hated to leave him alone all day. It was a good decision.

I've been giving him antibiotics in his food since Friday. He can taste it and can be stubborn about it, but has finally accepted it. He's still snotty and his eyes are still gooey, though. I do think he's improving some. He has gained a lot of weight in the past week. He no longer feels bony; I can pet him without his spine and ribs feeling so obvious. He is very playful. 

He has also been taking up most of my free time, but that's OK. 

The road trip was probably the kitten's best day ever. He had a great time with my daughter on the 180-mile round trip. He played, ate, and slept in the back seat. Usually in my daughter's lap. He got to play and explore my son's apartment, too. I think he's already spoiled.

The kitten also got a name: Whiskers.

My daughter is wanting to buy him a lot of things. I really need to find him a home once he is healthy, but that's not going to go over well with her. I guess we'll see what happens.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Enemies out of thin air

Do you have actual enemies? Yes, whether you know it or not. But do you hallucinate more enemies than you really have?

People who wouldn't otherwise have "enough" enemies-- or who want to pretend their real enemies aren't enemies-- often hallucinate enemies. Then by treating those chosen people as enemies, they make them into real enemies.

These days, "The Unvaxxed" and "The Maskless" are popular targets to make into enemies, as are gun owners.

Yes, there are people out there doing wrong. You have real enemies; people seeking to violate you (and others). Most use legislation, others are more freelance about it. No need to hallucinate more of them, just because you don't take the real ones seriously.

-

Now would be a good time to help support KentForLiberty.com