When "polite" is too costly

If being polite means I have to pretend lies are true, I'm not willing to be polite.

All my life I noticed I was expected to go along with obvious lies. In the past few years it has only gotten worse. A lot worse. On so many topics and issues-- it's everywhere.

This is a difficult situation for me. I want to be polite. I don't want to upset people or hurt their feelings. But I'm not going to nod along as people celebrate lies.

In some cases, when I've spoken up in the past and I like the person promoting the lies, I keep my mouth shut. They know; there's no need to keep rehashing the topic. Until or unless someone demands I say their lie is true. I won't do that. If I get pushed enough, I will be rude about it.

Sometimes people don't realize they are promoting a lie.
Sometimes they are doing it for personal reasons- to support someone they care about or to keep a job.
Often they are promoting a lie because they have to if they want to stay loyal to a political side. That's despicable, but whatever.

If I discover I've been propping up or promoting a lie, I want to change what I'm saying. It's unthinkable to me that some people aren't like that. But I know they aren't.

I wouldn't stop saying things like "You'll be okay" when I don't think they will be okay, because I don't want to take away someone's hope. But even that prickles my conscience a little. I might just give them a hug or a pat on the back without saying anything concrete if I'm there in person.

The lies that I am expected to go along with, even though they are harmful, even to those they are purported to be helping? No. Not gonna go along. I may still try to find a polite way to be hard on the lie and easy on the believers. If I can't, then the chips will fall where they fall.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Various ways to support

Statism will have to move aside

There are two ways to look at the world, and both are true in their time and place:
You don’t know how good you’ve got it.
Or
You don’t realize how bad things have gotten.

This contrast came to mind this past week. Especially the second part. 

I didn’t realize how bad my eyesight was, even with glasses, until I had surgery to fix it. I thought I was seeing OK- at least out of the eye that was still working after the retina reattachment. 

Even when I got the left eye fixed, I wasn't really able to comprehend how much better I would be able to see after both eyes were working together again. And working correctly, basically for the first time in my life.

If I hadn't taken the risk and the expense to fix my eyes, there's no way I could know what I was missing.

If I refused to make the change, knowing that this would mean I would need reading glasses from now on, I would be missing out. Sure, it's a trade-off. It's worth it.

This made me think...

People in general don’t realize how enslaved they are until they experience, or can truly envision, living in liberty. They can’t comprehend how much better life could be. They use the first view as a crutch to avoid responsibility to make things better. They only see how things could be made worse by fiddling with them, but rarely understand how much better things could be. They let their fear rule them, and they want their fear to rule you, too.

I understand how good it could be. I know how good we have it now, but I know there's room for massive improvement, and I won't be satisfied not giving it a shot. I'm not willing to be mostly blind for the rest of my life because most people are too scared (or criminal) to accept liberty.

Is it a risk? Yep. I'm willing to take the chance. I wouldn't force it on anyone else, but they have no right to stop me by continuing to inflict their statist anti-system on me, either. To force statism on you and me! 

Unless they can find a way to coexist with liberty, they are going to lose their "system" of authoritarian oppression completely. For themselves as well as those of us who won't be enslaved.

We both know which path they are doomed to choose. I think most of them will be glad, eventually.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Freedom of speech non-negotiable

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 8, 2024)

Anyone who is on the side of censorship and punishing people for their speech is not on the right side.

It doesn't matter if they are a government, a corporation, or an individual. It doesn't matter if they are a crooked Brazilian judge, a US presidential candidate, or a probable android running a "book" of faces. Banning speech, especially for political reasons, is inexcusable.

Freedom of speech is non-negotiable, but this matters less when it's speech you like hearing and agree with. No one is looking to silence those voices. It matters most for things people, particularly powerful politicians, don't want you to say or write.

People who want to silence the opposition come up with nice-sounding lies. They'll label anything they don't like as "hate speech", and claim this isn't free speech. They are wrong. They'll claim they are protecting the public from harmful "misinformation". Yet, they'll say this while spreading their own self-serving harmful misinformation.

The excuse of "misinformation", coming from the largest gang of liars on the planet-- government-- fails the fact check. It's a lie even when the information really is wrong. Government doesn't care about misinformation, it cares about information that makes it harder to rule you.

Government has a hard time operating under the pressures placed on it by free speech. This is a good thing. Most governments can't withstand factual information about them and their activities being widely known. It's why they "classify" information to hide what they are doing from their superiors-- you and me. They make up rules which say it's legal, but it's still criminal behavior. If any government can't survive complete transparency, it should die.

The best cure for misinformation is true information. If someone is spreading misinformation and you silence or block their words, you've given them credibility-- especially if you're as untrustworthy as a government or a corporation known for carrying water for government. Lies must be countered with truth. It's the only way.

Invariably when someone is a free speech absolutist, someone else will claim they're in favor of schools providing pornography to children. If you believe this, and if this is where your mind goes automatically, you might be too politically brainwashed to think clearly. Which is where politics often leads.

The next time you see someone trying to silence opinions and information, ask yourself what they are trying to hide. Then stand with the free speech absolutists.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

This is why we are in danger

According to a dedicated anti-conservative account on X, it makes a person "far-right" to admit there was no insurrection on January 6 and that elections aren't credible (ever, not just that one).

No, it takes awareness, observation, knowing what words mean, and a lack of partisan brainwashing. 

I told him that every day I get called "far-right" by radical Leftists and a Leftist by the Far-Right. He demanded I present evidence.

I told him he is the evidence.

People like him are also proof that politics makes people stupid. Or, since "proof" is subjective, it is more evidence on the heap. A heap so high that to me it is convincing proof.

He believes his media sources, he trusts what cops say, he believes in democracy, he wants you to be governed, he doesn't listen to others, and he makes up reasons to not believe reality. He's common. He has more in common with the Republicans he hates than he does with me. He won't see it.

He doesn't realize he's hallucinating. He'd never admit it if he got an inkling. He's not alone. Certain things make me fearful for the short-term outlook of our species. Clutching onto political nonsense is one of those things. People like this are a danger to everyone when they get power, including the power of large numbers. They'll impose deadly democracy on us even if it kills them, just because they believe in it so hard.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Counting on the kindness of the Universe

Luck gets some people through when they ought to suffer for a lack of readiness. Not saying I want them to suffer, but it seems the laws of reality would not be so forgiving of me.

I've talked before about my friend who believes she's invincible because she "has medical training" (worked in the kitchen of a nursing home) and can defend herself from any threat with her keys.

Well, she also refuses to take a hurricane seriously... because...? Just because.

She was right in the path of Hurricane Milton. She's only lived in Florida for a few years, but she knows it all. There's no need to prepare for anything. "Nothing is going to happen". She got lucky, again. 

Is there anything other than her job, and advancing up the ladder, that would get her attention? I mean, sure, it's great to take your job seriously, but it's pointless if you don't survive because you close your eyes to danger.

I wish she would listen to me, but maybe she doesn't need to. Maybe she really will keep being lucky and will never need to be ready to face any threat. For her sake, I hope so. Because she's determined to not change.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Two eyes again!

I’m on my way home after my post-surgical follow-up. I have stereoscopic vision again, with depth perception and everything! I actually got chills just walking into a grocery store.

It’s been almost a year since my retina detached and set this all in motion. It happened on October 26. I have another checkup on the 18th. But the doctor expects no problems.

Thanks for the support.

The election will be a mess

If Trump "wins" the election I will be unhappy and I will assume there was some cheating.

If Harris "wins" the election I will be unhappy and I will know there was massive cheating on a scale to hand her the office.

If Oliver "wins" I would be somewhat relieved and I would know I had left my current reality and slipped into a better one, but one still dumb enough to allow rulers to govern others. There's room for improvement.

For me, there's no acceptable outcome from an election.

All elections are rigged because "None of the above; abolish the office" isn't the default on every ballot. 

I have no use for a president. I don't need to be governed and I don't need you to be governed to protect me, because I'm an adult, not a helpless child.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

What else would "opportunity economy" mean?

If Harris is serious about her plan to create an "opportunity economy", I'm on board. Not to v*te for her, obviously, but to not be quite so opposed to her. As soon as she actually implements it, anyway. Not a moment before.

It's up to her. She needs to get on it.

When will she be abolishing all taxes, business regulations, and licensing? Before the "election" would be the obvious time.

That's the way you'd promote an opportunity economy. The only way.
Anything else means she's lying.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

The last post-apocalypse firearm

I keep thinking about the question of "the last gun I'd ever give up" and I finally came to a decision. 

I would choose my flintlock pistol. 

It wouldn't be my first choice, but if things got bad enough that I could only keep one, it is the most sustainable long-term. If I were a nomad without a home base, I might choose differently.

Ammunition is the main reason for my choice.

Black powder can be made at home, so there's less risk from the supply chain or the murderous BATFE's rules. Of course, in such a situation, the murderous BATFE wouldn't exist, so their empty opinions could be ignored.
Powder manufacturing is also why I would choose a different gun if I were nomadic with no place to set up to make black powder.

Lead can be found as trash. I find lead wheel weights on the street all the time, although the zinc ones are becoming more common. You can get a bullet mold the size you need and use it practically forever. In a pinch, you could probably find a way to make do even without a bullet mold.

Patches for sealing the bullet in the barrel can be made from old shirts or handkerchiefs, or can be skipped altogether if you don't mind a loss in accuracy.

Flint or chert can be found just about anywhere, and would be easy to pick up and carry to use later. No, I don't have any locally, but I pick it up whenever I do find it in my travels.

The gun is also simple to disassemble and work on. I think I could keep it running to be passed on to the next generation. If all else failed, someone could probably turn it into a matchlock without too much trouble.

Yes, for defense I would rather have a revolver or a modern semi-auto with a magazine. But unless you can get brass and primers, those won't keep being useful under post-apocalyptic conditions. And, I doubt anyone has enough ammo.

Feel free to explain why I'm wrong and what you'd keep.

Also, until the apocalypse happens, if you want to sign up for the ammo subscription service, AmmoSquared, you can use my link https://ammo2.me/dullhawk and help us both. I've also added the link to the sidebar.
If you sign up from my link, using the "join today" button, once you've spent $20 we each get an additional $25 in our ammo accounts. I put in very little every month, but it's adding up. I hope you'll try it. We both win!

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Does she v*te?

Just consider the character and intelligence of those who live among us. It's not fine.

My insider in the local PlastiCrap World told me that a woman got angry last week after being told she couldn't try on underwear. How stupid does someone have to be to think that would be OK? But there's more.

Then she decided to get back at the store by emptying her bladder and colon in the dressing room.

Then, around the time her mess was being discovered, she got caught shoplifting. She was taken away by cops and banned from the store.

Some people would say people like her are why "we need" government. 

I say people like her are the ones who'll be v*ting and filling government "jobs". Maybe even running for office. People like her have political power over you.
People like her are why government is a bad idea and why it doesn't work.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Government efficiency crushes liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 1, 2024)

Government efficiency may sound like a worthy goal. To me, it sounds like the worst threat imaginable.

Historically, Germany's National Socialist government was efficient, as was Mussolini's fascist Italian government. Today, the Chinese communist government seems to be dangerously efficient. The US federal government, famous for its inefficiency, is still too efficient for comfort. Efficient government inevitably becomes too much government.

People who push for government efficiency often believe this would save tax dollars; efficiency is how they plan to keep tax money from being wasted as badly. Taxation is unethical and I would like to see it abolished in its entirety, but the last thing I want is to get all the government we are forced to pay for. I want some government inefficiency because that's the only place liberty can hide and survive.

An efficient government would use this efficiency to better spy on you and more tightly control everything you do. An efficient government would end up doing more to control you with the money available. An efficient government would find it easier to tax away every cent they claim you owe. It would continue to spend all it takes, and more. Politicians aren't going to steal less from you; they will keep taxing you but do more to you with this money.

An efficient government could track you all the time, and get the information instantaneously, to use the data against you. Didn't let your tires quite stop spinning at the stop sign, or going slightly faster than the arbitrary speed government edicts allow? Guaranteed extortion-- called a "ticket" by the armed extortionists.

It might end up with your food purchases being watched to see if you are costing nationalized healthcare more with your unhealthy eating habits. Would you be allowed to purchase that milkshake if the Surgeon General thinks it's bad for you, and if his bureaucracy can cancel the transaction in real time?

You may not believe it could ever go so far. You might be right, but I'm not willing to let you bet my life, liberty, or property on it.

If you don't realize how this efficient government could turn into a nightmare, you don't know history or human nature.

As long as I'm forced to tolerate governments crippling society, I want them as inefficient as possible. Even if this means it's painful. If it's painful, maybe fewer people will be willing to continue tolerating it. This might be our only hope.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Armed enemies preventing assistance

Government agencies-- FEMA and the FAA for a couple of timely examples-- are the enemy. Some of them are armed enemies. You don't hate them enough.

They and their employees-- those not ignoring the orders of their employer-- need to be treated as such. At least by those they are victimizing.

If a government employee is threatening violence to stop you from delivering or receiving emergency help, they are worse than Al Qaida, ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Antifa, or the Chinese Communist Party. Combined. Yes, really.

Why are Americans so weak and useless that they allow these enemies to tell them what to do? To prevent them from helping? Oh, right-- because the enemy is armed and has a huge gang providing backup.

No government employee should be allowed to be armed while on the "job". None of them. If that means they can't do their "job", then that's a good thing. Let the people handle it. We can. Better, without violating anyone. Without pretending we have the authority to claim a monopoly of "assistance".

You probably still don't hate government nearly enough.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

I'll take second helpings of Liberty

The way most people want liberty is that they like to chew it up and taste it, but then they spit it out. They don’t really want it. 

They like the idea of it but are scared of experiencing it in reality. "Terrified" might be more accurate.

They make bizarre excuses so they can keep advocating for political government. For Rulers and other political criminals. For slavery, theft, superstition, and the ruination of society.

They focus on "corruption" and deny that government is working exactly as it has been designed to work. They live in a state of denial and a state of enslavement; dual "citizenship" for the statist.

They carefully avoid anything which would give them a hunger for real liberty. That would upend their world.

So, "just a smidge" is all they want to taste. It's a sad way to exist, but it's their choice. It's not their choice to impose their cowardice on me. 

Me? I want a heaping helping of liberty, and I'm going to eat and digest it all. It's good for the health and good for the soul. Quite unlike the poisonous dish of statism.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

A foul authoritarian

Who else sees Burgermeister Meisterburger whenever Tim Walz is on your screen? It's like one of those "separated at birth?" things from a few years back. Or the current "I'm going to tell my kids this was...".

I saw it the very first time I saw him, and I still see it. I can't unsee it.

If only real-life political criminals like Walz were as harmless and humorous as fictional authoritarian monsters. We can still laugh at the similarities.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Help in various ways?

Status report

The good news is that my eye surgery got moved up by a week. Next Wednesday, the 9th, is when I'm now scheduled to have it. I'm so ready! But also nervous.

October is also turning out to be a rather busy month with tangled schedules, which is a bit of an issue, but it will work out.

I'll try to not miss any posts, but we'll see how it goes.

More good news is that my bank account is in the black-- I have $3. If you're someone who hasn't donated in a while, or ever before, and you'd like to help me get a little cushion, you can help in various ways. If not, that's fine, too. It's neither your responsibility nor your concern.

I have a lot to do, and some stuff to get, to be ready for the surgery and the month of limited activity afterward. But I have practice, now.

My computer is still dead in the water, but I'm adapting. I really wish I could access my files and pictures, though.

And that's the situation as of now.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Self-sabotage

Anytime you see the acronym DEI, replace it in your mind with the word “sabotage”. Do the same with the individual parts of DEI; “diversity”, “equity”, and “inclusion”. Those are all sabotage. They will lead to a predictable result.

If you try to implement this policy on your own organization, you are sabotaging yourself. 

Maybe you're doing it because you think it's a good look. It's not. 

Maybe you think it is necessary in order to help some people. It's not. You're hurting them.

If you want to sabotage something useless and harmful, like government, then by all means impose DEI-- sabotage-- on it. 

But if you like something, keep sabotage far away from it. Hire the best people available, without regard to irrelevant surface characteristics and without worrying about checking certain boxes. Don't self-sabotage so you'll look good to those who want to destroy you.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Kill it with fire!

What do you consider THE killshot for the notion of political government? 

The one thing that, once heard, either cures the hearer of their belief in statism, or forces them to purge the killshot from their mind as though they’d never heard it so they can keep believing in government.

I know there are many, but there's got to be one that's far more powerful than the others and fits every situation. I'd like to find it. And use it.

What is your best suggestion?

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

The real danger of "climate change"

I will agree with the climate alarmists on one point: AGCC is an existential threat. Just not in the way they claim.

Not due to climate or weather problems, but because of the things government will do, and has done, using it as justification.

So many crises are of this same type. Crime, Covid, the economy, war, "immigration"... the list goes on forever. The "problem" may or may not be real, but the threat government poses, using these "problems" as its excuse for committing evil could lead to our enslavement or extinction.

This is why government is the root problem. It's why government is and always has been The Ancestral Enemy.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?

Both candidates tick communist boxes

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 25, 2024)

Is Kamala Harris a communist?

That would depend on what "communist" means. Defenders of communism get very slippery when you try to pin them down on the definition. Their usual tactic is to demand to know how you define communism rather than to define it themselves-- probably because they can't define it without looking like monsters for defending it.

Whatever you say in response, they'll claim it isn't "real communism" like they are advocating.

The dictionary says communism is a system based on "the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state". That's the nice version. The political version is a "social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party". (The definition of socialism rearranges the same words.) This sounds like "The Uniparty" to me.

Since I'm not a mind reader, I can't tell you what people who advocate communism are thinking or what they want.

A more useful approach is to describe what communists tend to do when they get power.

Communists tend to close the borders. They empower legislation enforcers. They work to erase property rights. They use legislation to control businesses and they impose price controls. They use taxation to finance the state, punish achievers, and buy support from those they give handouts to. They push "equity"; equality of outcomes, not equality of rights. They put government interests and power above the interests and legitimate power of the individual. They pretend to be doing it for those who have been left behind by success and prosperity-- they call it "fairness".

They try to censor those who point out what they are doing. Rather than outright government censorship, they may send their legions of flying monkeys-- corporations and activists-- to silence their opposition.

Once they get enough power they inevitably come after the smart people who don't follow the communists' agenda.

One final thing communists reliably do when they gain power: they eventually murder vast numbers of people in their own country-- after they disarm them in the name of "public safety", of course.

Political communism always results in too much government and too much government always starts sharing many characteristics with communism. Is Kamala Harris a communist? She certainly ticks more boxes than Donald Trump, but is it enough to single her out?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"Forever" governance

I guess they're at it again. Well, they never stopped.

The tyrannical taterheads of government believe themselves-- and their "job"-- so important that even if the world is destroyed someone needs to be governing what's left. 

Now, they are focusing more on what happens if they are all dead, too, in some sort of merciful precision strike. They want to make sure someone who thinks like them takes their place.

This is arrogant beyond belief. Like "forever" stamps.

You and I are on our own. We always were. We could all be dead, but as long as government continues these authoritarian monsters see it as a success.

Don't be fooled. "They" are unnecessary and harmful. Any plan to keep them ruling you after a "mass casualty event" is a plan for martial law and tyranny to be imposed, to protect their power over you. Forever.

I'm curious if they are worried that an obviously rigged or fraudulent election (aren't they all?) will trigger some widespread "unrest" that is more useful than sauntering through some "taxpayer"-owned buildings. I doubt enough Americans have the courage to be that useful.

Just remember that this kind of response is not even necessary. The simple fact is, if no one obeys, no one rules. Do not comply.

-

Thank you for reading.  

Show your support?