I'm sure you've seen the old meme, "Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid".
Well, politics makes people stupid (and causes them to embrace evil), so it could be said, "Life is hard. It's harder if you're political."
Same true message. Regardless of who said the original quote.
Centralized power grids make everyone vulnerable. If everyone creates or captures their own energy, and I lose mine, my neighbor probably won't. If I have power and my neighbor doesn't, I'm available to help them out. When the whole region blacks out, you'd better have alternatives because no one near you who is dependent on the grid is going to be better off.
Centralized bureaucracies and governments become tyranny. Controlling life through force and ignorance. It's better if everyone can take care of their own stuff.
Centralized defense- police and military- become tools of the tyrants. They defend those who are the problem rather than "the public" they are supposedly responsible for defending. Everyone is better off if they take responsibility for their own defense, and then help others who are helpless or worthless when they can.
If there's only one food distributor, starvation is likely.
If there's only one "approved" source for anything, you're vulnerable to shortages or manipulation.
The more paths to get to where you need to go, the better off you'll be. The inclinations of those who believe in governing is to cut off all paths other than the one they control. Then, when you need it the most, they can cut that cord, too.
I did have a small tear and an area that was in the process of detaching (the scan looked to me like it was already detached). He fixed it with a laser in the office. That was more painful than it sounds, and today my eye still hurts- although I think it's mainly the muscles around my eye that are hurting now.
Blindness averted yet again. I have a follow-up appointment next month.
He indicated that my insurance will "cover" this, or at least approve it- although I probably won't really know for a while. I'm not sure what the difference is, or if he's just being hopeful on my behalf.
Yet, so many government supremacists love to position themselves as "tough on crime". It would be funny if it didn't have such disastrous consequences/
The way they get away with this deception and diversion is by misdefining crime as something government forbids, rather than as an act which violates someone's rights. It's dishonest, yet many people fall for it completely.
Owning a machine gun without government permission isn't a real crime. Enforcing a counterfeit "law" against the person who owns a machine gun without government permission is a crime. But it's a crime government loves to commit, with the approval of these lying "tough on crime" types.
You could find myriad examples. If there's not a specific, individual victim, it's not a crime. To treat it as though it is a crime is criminal. "Tough on crime" people need to suck on that for a while.
It shows that the Leftist "intellectuals" aren’t as smart as they believe they are.
They are, however, very confident in their superiority and very committed to remaining wrong. They can see so clearly where "conservatives" go astray, but are completely blind to their own cognitive errors and biases.
"Liberal" is on the side of liberty; it is generous and respects the rights of all. This is as far from modern Leftism as it is from modern "conservatism", both of which are entirely authoritarian. It's a shame that the Leftists have co-opted the word "liberal" and made it mean the opposite of what its root, historical meaning was.
It takes a view from a higher dimension to see it clearly.
But I don't fly it alongside other flags that negate its message.
Whenever I see a Gadsden flag flying beside Holy Pole Quilt or a disgusting Blue Line Mafia flag, I can't help but shake my head.
Or Holy Pole Quilt and a Christian flag together.
A few miles out of town, there's a house that flies Holy Pole Quilt, a Texas flag, and a "Confederate" flag. All together, every day. It's weird! That's like flying an Israeli flag and a Nazi or Palestinian flag together, or a Ukrainian flag with a Russian flag. Make up your mind what you're supporting here!
I guess the message a flag sends to the world gets lost on some people.
"Believe it or not there used to be a time when the government worked for the people, and helped the people with their needs and they ran programs to keep society functional."
I said, "I don't believe that fairy tale. That's what statists told their children, but it was never true."
What about you? Do you believe that? Am I wrong? Or, is it indeed a fairy tale told to gullible children to disarm their critical thinking and observational skills?
Update: Unfortunately the guy was serious. He is sure an ethical system of government is possible.
I was skeptical to begin with, because efficient government is the last thing I want- I want government crippled and abolished. Piece by piece or all at once. I'm not picky.
DOGE wanted to use a chainsaw instead of a scalpel to cut away waste and fraud- but it would take a woodchipper.
But, whatever the goal of DOGE, it failed.
It didn't stop waste and abuse- judges who depend on fraud and abuse saw to that.
It didn't save money- congressvermin who saw any potential "savings" as money to spend on their own pet projects saw to that.
Government isn't something that can be fixed. It is something that's going to have to be eliminated for human liberty to survive and thrive. No constitution can limit it. No election can save the population from it.
I wish that weren't the case, but it's delusional to believe otherwise.
It’s why anarchists understand the arguments made by statists better than statists understand the arguments made by anarchists. Anarchists are more familiar with the arguments, pro and con, than the statists are.
One example: sometimes I sort of believe in the alien explanation for some UFOs. I can at least sympathize with the believers. But when I hear a nonbeliever shooting holes in the arguments in favor of "alien origin", it's clear they are familiar with and understand the arguments the believers make. They just don't buy them.
But I don't get the same sense from the believers when they try to address the arguments made by the nonbelievers. It often doesn't seem like they understand the nonbelievers' arguments very well, and certainly not as well as their arguments are understood by the other side. Often, it seems like they aren't even familiar with the arguments made by the nonbelievers.
And this is definitely what I see happening when statists- those who "believe in" governing others- try to address the arguments made by anarchists- those who don't believe in such behavior as an ethical thing. The statists don't even seem to know what they are talking about, but they certainly have a lot of confidence.
Be familiar with, and try to understand, the arguments made by those who disagree with you. Then you won't be relying on straw men or grasping at ad hominem attacks when you get frustrated by their stubbornness. You may not even get as frustrated.
-
Thank you for reading.
Show your support.
You don't need to wait to see what effect tariffs have. Imposing them is unethical because they are a tax, and taxation is theft.
You don't need to wait to see if the next anti-gun rule reduces murder or suicide, because disarming people is wrong.
You don't need to wait to see if banning food dyes- or mandating vaccinations- improves "public health", because such edicts remove personal options concerning personal health decisions. This indicates you are someone else's property- a slave. Slavery is unethical.
You don't need to wait to see how ending drug prohibition would turn out. No one has the right to control what someone else consumes; doing so anyway "for their own good" is wrong. As is criminalizing defending yourself and your property from those under the influence of drugs.
When doing something you have no right to do, the only reason to say you need to "wait to see how it turns out" is because you are addicted to controlling things that are not yours to control. You are rejecting ethics in favor of pragmatism.
Cop: "I'll need you to hand over your gun for both our safety."
Innocent person: "I'll need you to do the same, for both our safety, since cops are statistically much more likely to kill an innocent person than I am. We are both safest if we each keep our own weapon."
The cop then shoots and murders the innocent person for non-compliance, thus proving the victim's point. He's right, but dead.
Copsuckers: "He should have just obeyed! You have to obey, even if the officer is wrong! If the officer is wrong, stay alive and work it out in court later. He was just doing his job and the criminal made him fear for his safety!"
Liberty continues to die a little more each day.
The End.
It’s important enough to go through the pain of facing reality and rejecting things that stand in its way. Things such as your biases, government, laws, "authority", and even loyalty (when it’s misplaced).
Does liberty matter this much to you? It does to me, which is why I've questioned and examined each and every one of those items on that list at one time or another. I expect to keep questioning and examining these things- and more- in the coming years. Regardless of how things turn out.
Even if one ruler respects liberty, the system is designed to destroy it. Because the next ruler probably won't- few, if any, have ever understood or respected liberty. It's not in their interest to do so.
But, if one did- You might have liberty until the next ruler comes into power, and then you could lose it all. Then the next ruler after that might be better again. Or worse. It’s a terrible system.
If rulers were scared to violate liberty- and I mean scared to death to violate liberty in the smallest way- then, perhaps, tolerating rulers might not be the worst thing. But the system isn't designed to protect liberty, it is designed to protect those who violate it. Again, it's a bad system. One that's incompatible with human flourishing and liberty.
Those who support such a system don't understand or support liberty. That's why they tolerate government. They want everything to be subject to government permission. They can't even think outside that box.
If you tell them that you don't like something, they automatically think you are saying it should be illegal and people should be punished for doing it. Even if you clearly say that's not what you're saying, it's as if they can't see those words. They hallucinate that you are advocating that liberty be violated. They literally can't think outside the statist box. And these are the people who are empowered to v*te to violate your liberty.
It's fascinating to watch happen in real time. It's frustrating to try to communicate with such people. Because you can't. They are immune.
These are the type of people who put their support behind a broken system and demand everyone play along. Liberty doesn't register with them. They just want their anti-liberty side to "win" for now. They are willing to hurt themselves to further that goal.
"Paying taxes" isn't helping.
It can't be entirely avoided, so I don't blame the victims. I only blame those who are proud of being "taxpayers", and those who want others to also pay, or pay more.
The only right, ethical level of taxation is zero. If you can't fund the projects you want under that condition, then your projects are harmful to society and to the individuals who comprise it.
It goes like this:
No reasons. No counter-arguments. No good points I missed. Just knee-jerk typing. Often, however they respond completely misses, misinterprets, or ignores what I said. It's chess with a pigeon, without the amusement of watching a pigeon strutting around on a chessboard. Instead, it's a statist strutting around on a keyboard. It's a spectacle of its own sort.
Today should be a reminder of why government is your enemy. The Ancestral Enemy. Why routing one government to install another government is a foolish waste of lives and will not turn out well.
Use the occasion to give government all the respect it deserves.
It's so much easier to react than to think. Or read.
Friends and relatives jumped on me over this, and yet it was obvious not one of them had bothered to read the post. They might have still gotten angry- cultlike behavior leads to anger- but they could have at least addressed the actual post rather than simply reacting to the caption.
I was called "stupid" and "immature" and told "it wasn't Trump who said that" (duh- I know!)
MAGA is just as much a cult as TDS. Both seem incapable of thinking or reading anything beyond the surface. I've realized this for as long as MAGA has existed, but it's like they really want to show me.
Politics makes people stupid. Politics is a battle of the cults. It makes the followers behave badly, and it fosters ignorance.
Stupid enough to wear a shirt honoring murderer Luigi Mangioni, like one of my daughter's work friends was doing the other day. The shirt tells me she's a Left-statist, has poor character, and isn't too bright. Just like those attacking me over a caption are telling me similarly embarrassing things about themselves.
I don't think anyone has been more balanced than I have been. I clearly say when Trump does something right; I clearly criticize him when he does something wrong. I'm accustomed to this triggering the cultists on both sides. If I don't get called a Leftist and MAGA in the same day it's a strange day, indeed. Something about this post really got noticed by the MAGA cult this time.
So what did I do, after replying that they really need to read the post that the picture goes along with, and it being obvious from subsequent comments that no one did? I posted another link to the blog post, along with the illustration. Along with a short paragraph chastizing those who comment without reading. As if that will change cult behavior whatsoever.
Yet, some people disagree with me that politics makes people stupid, and often evil, too.
The evidence is clear. There's no question, and never has been. Ignore reality if it makes you feel better, but reality doesn't care about feelings.
Me neither.
But to statists, who are emotionally attached to a failed system, it is.
Government, mainly through the govshool version of history, has told them that without government, there will be nothing but chaos and death. So it must be true. Right? Government wouldn't lie to them to protect its own power, would it?
Pointing out that this doesn't have to be the case is "too negative". Showing people that they don't have to be slaves is "too negative". Telling people they have a choice and can choose liberty is "too negative". Trying to break through their Stockholm Syndrome is "too negative". They love Big Brother.
Lying to someone to protect their feelings, especially if they are in danger, isn't being nice. It seems a bit predatory.
Statists seem to think that if you say the government way of doing something is unethical, you're against any other way of doing that thing. No, I'm in favor of looking for a way to do everything that should be done without violating the life, liberty, or property of others. If an ethical solution makes everyone happy (other than archators), then that's what I want. Even if I'm not personally interested in participating.
It doesn't seem like it would be hard to understand that- unless someone has a vested interest in not understanding. Such as the vested interest someone who has their lips superglued to Trump's hiney (or any other politician's body part) might have.
The next-best situation, if government is allowed to exist at all, is only one government "employee", even if it's a lone dictator.
What can a dictator do if he has no underlings- government employees- to impose his will on the people? You can't have a police state without police, nor can you have a military state without a military.
Would the lonely dictator be killed, or would he be ignored because he would be irrelevant?
His Supreme Potentate, General Dick Tater, would be utterly powerless. If he did start to find a way to impose his will on others, he'd either end up with more people helping him for favors, money, or power (more government employees, which is always bad), or he'd be eliminated the minute he became a threat.
One way leads back to where we keep ending up; the other to a potential for liberty
That shows it is unambiguously part of a theft ring, targeting people who are simply trying to travel around doing their daily business. A pirate, but not the cool kind. Just the trashy kind.
About half of the local cop cars (and sheriff vehicles) are of this type. They aren't the good guys. Neither are those who support them and excuse their crimes.
I pointed out that this isn't true.
I told him that if a foreign product goes up in price, it will give the American product room to raise its price as well. If the foreign product goes up by 25%, why wouldn't the American product's price go up by 20% - or by whatever amount keeps it just slightly below the competitor's price? Who wouldn't raise their prices if the competition has to? Tariffs are anticompetition.
He admitted that this may be true, but you can still avoid the higher prices by not buying anything. He said there wasn't anything he needed to buy that much, and he could do without it.
I said, in other words, "You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy"- MAGA edition.
When I quoted Communist Klaus as my only reply, he had no response at all. He was speechless and changed the subject.
This isn't hard to understand, and if you're not brainwashed by Keynesian fake economics you will be able to understand. Otherwise, you probably won't understand.
Appendix:
I openly disagree with Right-statists in this way all the time, because they are all around me, and they can take it. Occasionally, they even admit I'm right.
On the other hand, I don't usually say anything to the Left-statists around me when they are wrong, because they can't handle it. They are too fragile and lose their minds (and shut me out) when challenged on anything. There's no debate.
This is just my experience, based on a small sample size in the few geographical regions where I've lived. Maybe it means something; maybe it doesn't.
Maybe not if it's an extinct species of louse or flea, but if it's cool and impressive, yes, please! If it's potentially dangerous, that's even better.
I'm more than skeptical of the "de-extincted Dire Wolves". As far as I know, no one knows what Dire Wolves actually looked like, and they weren't closely related to Gray Wolves (and not even technically wolves), so I'm not seeing how they can figure that Gray Wolves are the closest living species to use in the gene manipulation. I think that's just the species they had handy, so they went with it.
I want to be wrong about this (I sure say that a lot!).
Whatever they are, the new wolves are still cool and interesting.
I'm still waiting for the Woolly mammoth to be brought back. That's first in a long list of things I'd like to see roaming the earth again. And, yeah, that list includes some non-avian dinosaurs.
It's wishful thinking and probably a lot of projection.
The anti-Trumpers are trying hard to push the narrative that there's regret over v*ting for Trump, but I haven't seen it. I suspect all those who they find to express regret are fake. Well, I'm sure there are a few out there, but I think they are rare and are the dumbest of the dumb.
Even the one in my family who lost her nice cushy govjob hasn't turned. This is what they v*ted for, and they knew there would be some pain. Plus, they knew Harris was a disaster, and they knew what Trump was like. They'd seen both in action for years- there were no mysteries either way.
Those looking for regretful Trump v*ters are the same people who watched Biden rotting in real time for well over four years and said he was fine; "sharp as a tack". Very few are willing even now to admit they were wrong or lying.
I don't support politicians, but I'm not shocked by what is happening. And, if I had supported the things Trump had said he would do (or try to do), I wouldn't be angry with him now. It seems odd to believe (or hope) otherwise.
Politicians always believe the answer is More Government- and that's literally never the solution to anything. Not when that government is "Right", "Left", or any other flavor. But if More Government is what they want, as long as it leans somewhat in their general direction, the supporters aren't going to regret v*ting for it. They'll always say the other outcome would have been worse.
Any real solution requires government to back off; to give up power and control. To be less meddlesome and intrusive. This goes against every instinct statists have. It kills them to even contemplate such horrors.
They believe everything can be solved with extra coercion, theft, authoritarianism, mass murder, and other things government is particularly good at doing. Just listen to them for a couple of minutes and you'll know it's true!
Leaving things alone goes against everything they believe and everything they want. No matter what they say to try to get you on their team.
So they advocate for "taxes", "tariffs", war, "law and order", legislation, borders, policies, interference, rules, rules, and more rules. Along with these barbarities, Left-statists also call for human trafficking, domestic terrorism, vandalism, and murder because they are trying hard to be worse than the rest (and right now, they may be succeeding).
People who understand and value liberty are caught in the middle. The statists can't be bothered to leave us alone.
Of course, there's some overlap, some exceptions, and some interpretation involved, I'm just saying it looks that way in general. To me.
Often, the Left's self-destructiveness harms others (how could it not?), and often, the Right's penchant for destroying others ricochets and hurts them (again, what would anyone expect?).
Politics makes people stupid, and usually at least a little bit evil, too.
It's an act of defiance to not play along- if you have the personality to give you that option.
If you have, or can develop, that personality it's an act of self-preservation, too.
If they won't listen to you and start destroying each other, your primary responsibility is to make sure you come through it. The world will need you and people like you when the smoke clears.
