"Tough on crime" criminals

You can’t be "tough on crime" and also pro-government (pro-police, pro-military, etc.) because government is the biggest criminal the world has ever seen.

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.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Liberty: Mortal enemy of government

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for April 2, 2025)

It isn't "political" to keep government-- its employees, agencies, and rules-- out of our lives. Politics imposes those things on others. Liberty isn't political, but violating liberty is.

If you want to be governed, I'll respect your right to act like you have no rights. If you want someone else to be governed, you're on the side of slavery and tyranny. You're doing something no one has a right to do, which is a better definition of crime than "breaking laws".

"Consent of the governed" is a lie. You can consent for government to violate your rights; you can't consent for others to have their rights violated.

If you look at the news on any typical day, how much of it concerns government violating some segment of the population? I'd guess at least eighty percent. Only a natural disaster or major accident can change the focus for a while. Yet, most people consider this normal and look askance at those trying to keep their life, liberty, or property out of the hands of political criminals. This is upside down.

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of political criminals and against the Constitution's Second Amendment in yet another gun case. The Bill of Rights doesn't list what you are allowed to do; it lists some of the things placed out of reach of any legislation or politician's opinions. Any interpretation which gets this wrong is illegitimate, no matter where it comes from.

Owning and carrying weapons isn't political-- trying to allow government to illegally put limits and conditions on a natural human right is entirely political. When the Supreme Court rules in defense of government power and against the people and their right to not be burdened with government, it is wrong. Every time.

All government is against you and your rights; it is never on your side. Especially if being on your side would take away some illegitimate power government currently enjoys. It doesn't matter which party is in power or what encouraging words the politicians whisper in your ear. Government is your enemy because government fears your liberty and always seeks to place limits on it.

Liberty has only one limit. Liberty is the right to do everything that doesn't violate any other person's life, liberty, or property-- their equal and identical rights. This leaves no room for government interpretation or exception. Liberty and government are mortal enemies. If you value liberty, government considers you its enemy.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Leftist "intellectuals"

It’s interesting that Leftist “intellectuals” notice that reality has a “liberal bias” but imagine that Leftism is in any way “liberal”. 

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.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

People and their flags

People seem to love flags. I have a fondness for a certain one, myself.

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.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Children's fairy tales

Someone posted this- and with the way the world is, I'm not sure if they were being serious or sarcastic:

"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.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

DOGE failed

DOGE promised... and failed to deliver.

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.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Not again!

Wednesday, my optometrist gave me the news that I may have to another eye surgery. This doesn't make me happy at all, especially since I can see so well now. That wasn't how I wanted the check-up to go.

He discovered a place in my right eye that may indicate my retina in that eye is now trying to detach. It isn't yet, and he can't see any tears or holes, but something doesn't look right. It's obvious in the scan. He says it may be nothing, but it wasn't there the last time he saw me and he thinks it needs to be looked at by a specialist. He says, "It may be a wild goose chase, but..."

So, next Wednesday I go to the retina specialist again. This is the guy who doesn't take my insurance, so we'll see how that goes, or if he'll even agree to see me.

I actually have one medical bill that is only 3 payments from being paid off, so it makes sense that I'll accrue some more before that happens.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

No excuse for Tesla vehicle vandalism

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for March 26, 2025)

To intentionally damage or destroy someone's personal property is wrong. To vandalize it because you don't like the company that makes the item is both wrong and stupid. There's no excuse; it makes you the bad guy.

If you mess with someone's personal property, I have no sympathy when the consequences come home to roost. Even if you believe those consequences are out of proportion. Respect for private property is non-negotiable. Thieves and vandals of personal property get no support from me.

If you'd destroy or scratch Tesla vehicles because your media programming and other bad people online told you to hate Elon Musk, why aren't you doing the same to Ford vehicles? I can only assume it's because you never learned about Henry Ford and his expressed opinions.

In the past, no one was falsely associated with German National Socialists by dishonest media sources simply because they waved awkwardly at a crowd. You can find pictures and videos of anyone jabbing an arm into the air, then interpret this according to your biases. Henry Ford actually supported, and influenced, their ideas. Your favorite national media figures won't tell you this because it wouldn't manipulate you into committing crimes.

Destroying Ford vehicles because Henry Ford was a bad individual would be stupid; just as stupid as destroying Teslas. Someone doing something bad in the past is no excuse for others to do bad things now. Including the attacks on Tesla vehicles and their owners. Don't touch people's cars and trucks.

It has become clear to neutral parties that the political Left is what they accuse the political Right of being. It was a lie and projection on their part all along.

If you don't like what a company, or the owner of a company, is doing, must you sit quietly and take it? No!

Call them out for doing wrong-- I do. You have the right to boycott based on your feelings. Or, be creative and organize a "buycott" to support a company or industry you appreciate; speak out in support of people and ideas you agree with. But keep your hands to yourself and off of people and their property. No matter how angry your programming has made you.

Once you start harming people and private property you've lost. You've admitted your side are the criminals. You have no more credibility and good people aren't going to waste time listening to you anymore. You're done.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Who understands what?

In my experience, nonbelievers understand the arguments made by believers better than believers understand those made by nonbelievers.

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.

"See how it turns out"

You don’t need to wait to see how something turns out to know whether doing it is ethical or wrong.

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

A One-Act Tragedy

A cop initiates an encounter with an armed individual who wasn't violating or threatening to violate anyone.

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Liberty matters

Liberty is important. It's critical. It's essential. It's non-negotiable.

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

A "jobs program" for losers

Legislation- "the law"- is welfare (a "jobs program") for losers who have no actual skills other than being a bully. 

It provides them with the opportunity to wear a badge and bully people in exchange for a paycheck funded by theft. They are using their victims' own stolen money against them. And they are allowed to murder anyone who resists their bullying.

Good people don't do this, nor do they excuse it.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

The system is anti-liberty

Your liberty depends too much on the whims of the current rulers. 

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Principles more important than politics

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for March 19, 2025)

If you put your faith in any politician, sooner or later, you will be betrayed. Whether you admit you've been betrayed depends on how fervent your faith in this politician is.

The same goes for loyalty to a political party.

I remember the political party my parents belonged to when I first became aware of such things. I also remember when they changed parties because the party they had always belonged to had turned into something they could no longer support. They stuck to their principles. I've noticed most people change to follow the party rather than let it go when this happens.

Then there are those of us who don't belong to any political party because none are principled enough for us. Or they have the wrong principles entirely.

It's more important to stand for good principles than to be loyal to a party or to have faith in a politician.

I value the principle of liberty over all else. I am able to agree with any politician or party when they support, respect, and defend liberty and to oppose them in the same breath when they violate liberty. It's up to them to stay with me; not up to me to follow them when they charge down the wrong path.

It's important to be able to define your principles and to be able to explain and defend your definitions to others, since people will define things differently. Politicians and political parties blow with the wind; principles don't change-- you either stick to them or abandon them.

Politicians lack principles. They promise things (both good and bad) and then break those promises. They'll blame their opponents while appointing people-- people who have no intention of carrying out those promises-- to the positions responsible for keeping the promises. It seems many people are surprised when this happens, as it inevitably will. Or they'll be fooled into not seeing what's happening right in front of their eyes just so they can keep the faith.

If you aren't anchored in principles, you'll be easier to fool. You'll accept pragmatic compromises, even though any evil can be justified with pragmatism. Those who want you to compromise will get angry at you. They'll call you names and threaten you. Let them. As long as your principles are rooted in ethics and worthwhile morals, you are the one who is right. The flaw is with them.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

It's a net negative

Taxes paid are not added to society.
That money is taken from society and given to society’s primary enemy. Taxes fund government.

"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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

They "can typing"

Lately, my online experience has reminded me of the old cartoon posted above.

It goes like this:

• I'll make a statement.
• Some statist will disagree and demand I explain myself.
• I do.
• The statist doesn't like what I say and starts insulting me in other ways. Usually by calling me a "liberal" or "MAGA", depending on his filter on life. 
• I'll be accused of avoiding the question or changing the subject.
  
• The other statists pile on.

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

4-19

Today is Patriots' Day. Not to be confused with Blowback Day on September 11.

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

I had almost forgotten

Several years ago, I noticed a guy down the street had some wild onions growing in his yard. To him, it was "just a weed". 

I asked if I could dig up a few to transplant to my yard. I like having edible wild plants growing around the house. He was agreeable to it.

That first year, they barely survived a month before withering in the heat. 

The second year, I saw no sign of them. The neighbor sold that plot of property, and the new owners landscaped it into a lawn, so there were no more wild onions there for another try.

Every year, I'd look where I had planted them, but they never made an appearance.

Until this Spring.

Now I have two small but healthy-looking clumps growing right where I'd planted them years ago. I'm going to encourage them and hope they spread a little.

Liberty works the same way.

You can plant it in someone you encounter, but there's no guarantee it will thrive. It may even appear to have died. In any case, you may not see any sign of it for several years. Don't give up hope. When you least expect it, it may sprout. And spread anew.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

A casualty of the battle of the cults

Wow, I pissed off the MAGA cult this time! Not due to anything I actually wrote, but by a caption on an AI-generated picture. The caption on the picture that illustrates this post.

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.

-
Thank you for reading.

Show your support.