Schools, penalty clauses, and radical libertarianism

Schools, penalty clauses, and radical libertarianism

Albuquerque Public Schools is considering suing the state because not enough stolen loot is being directed toward them. What a mature response.

So what if the state constritution requires a "sufficient" public education system. Schooling or "education" is not a legitimate area for The State, any State, to be involved in. Separate school and state. Education is much too important to leave to government!

*

Please spread around the following Bill of Rights Penalty Clause:

“Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.”

www.bigheadpress.com/lneilsmith/?p=501

*

I think that's all for Examiner. I got my blurb for L. Neil put in, and suggested that readers check out this blog for new stuff. I may change my mind, but I may not.

Support for military is NOT "libertarian"

The assertion that support (or at least acceptance) of the US military as something "we think the government should do- keep us secure" is a "libertarian" position keeps cropping up.

No, it is not a libertarian position, it is an authoritarian inconsistency when found in a libertarian and needs to be exposed as such. It makes as much sense as a koala trying to live on the sea floor.

Even the most weak-kneed variety of libertarianism is centered around the idea of "minimum government- maximum liberty". How can you claim "minimum government" while supporting the biggest government program there is? The one used as justification for every violation of libertarian principles imaginable.

If you include the (I think) necessary aspect of a libertarian living by the ZAP, then supporting the military becomes even more absurd. The US military has made it standard practice to be aggressive; attacking, invading, and occupying the homes of people who did nothing to deserve it. If it was "defensive" in nature, then ONLY government facilities would be targeted. And even one instance of "collateral damage" is a violation of the ZAP and makes one the attacker rather than the defender.

The US military- the army, the navy, the air force, the marines, the national guard, and even the coast guard- are a greater threat to YOUR liberty than all the foreign military forces and terrorists of the world combined.

They are already the occupying force surrounding you. They are already being funded with money stolen from you. They have already claimed large tracts of land all around you for their exclusive use. They have already gained acceptance from a large percentage of your friends and neighbors. They are already under the command of people who would gladly sacrifice your life and property to protect their own interests and have no ethical qualms about ... well, anything that normal people would know is evil.

If, in spite of all this, you still want to worship and fawn over the US military, that is your choice. But stop lying and claiming it is anything other than a statist position.

*

Donate?

Gold Rush - gold cap

For those of you who have one of those magic mirrors called a "television", which is attached by dish or cable to the channelsphere, you might check out Discovery Channel's "Gold Rush: Alaska".

And, if you are paying attention while watching it, you might notice that the best-looking star of the show wears a cap with a familiar symbol.

The cap was made by someone else, with my permission. I was a bit uncomfortable with it since it included the phrase "Strike Back 2010" and was advocating voting as a way to increase liberty, but as I have said before, as long as you are moving with me in the general direction of "more liberty", we can work out the details of where you want to get off the train later.

This brings up another subject. Another business has gotten my permission to make more flags (and other products) with the Time's Up flag design. I will let you know when these items are available.

Examiner- Adios, amoebas

Maybe it's just the flu talking, but I think I have posted my last Examiner column. They found a way to cut pay again, and, although it might not have made much real difference, I'm just tired of them. Of course, this means I am gonna be hurting even worse, financially.

*

Donate?

Laws don't put end to problems

Laws don't put end to problems

It seems a certain violent Arizona resident named Jared would have done well to have read my column last week. The message that right and wrong are universal rather than subjective is something he apparently needed. Of course, if he is crazy, as seems likely, he may not have understood. And if he is simply willing to commit evil acts without regard to right or wrong, then nothing could have changed his course short of effective self defense measures.

It is not right to kill a person who is not attacking you or others, or making a credible threat to do so. Even in the case of killing in self defense, you must not harm any innocent person. As a libertarian, I understand that "collateral damage" is never acceptable. Never. It changes self defense into an act of aggression.

I cringe when tragedies like this multiple murder happen, and not always for the right reason. There isn't even time to consider the innocent lives destroyed before the usual spokespeople start pointing fingers at their standard boogeymen to any news media that will listen. Guns; free speech; dissent: all the things that are necessary for liberty are blamed. As has been said by one of Obama's henchmen "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste..." In this case the crisis is even being used to deepen the chasm between the illusory concepts of "The Right" and "The Left". There is no "Right" or "Left"; there is only respect for liberty for all, or support of tyranny for at least some- liberty or authoritarianism- and this transcends the false political spectrum that we are told exists.

I just get the feeling that the anti-liberty crowd has a hard time not smiling when a tragedy of this sort happens. They get to start crying "There oughta be a law!"; no matter that murder and assault are already illegal, and really can't be made "more illegal". No problem has ever been solved with a "law".

Instead all the proposed "solutions" will only make events like this inevitable. Stifle free speech, "heated rhetoric", and you have closed a vital pressure-release valve. Add more illegal gun control "laws" and bad guys who have no ethical problem with violating the Zero Aggression Principle and the laws against murder will still find ways to be armed and hurt the innocent, while some good people will be stopped from being able to effectively defend themselves. Ignore the fact that this shooter was an apparent fan of collectivism, and blame individualism, and you'll marginalize the only people who can truly be counted on to do the right thing.

Nothing will ever stop truly evil people from harming others, but really respecting liberty and the basic rights we all possess will prevent more tragedies than any other tactic. It's time to stop letting the few bad guys out there dictate what the rest of us must put up with. It's time to stop surrendering liberty to the twisted misfits.

(Once again, this is as I wrote it, not as it was published.)

Flu-cation

I have had the flu and have been out of circulation for a few days. It's almost been a vacation. The flu is better than the insanity of the gun-banners and other liberty-phobes, which I see hasn't calmed down any in my absence. I think I'll go back to bed.

Frustration!

You just can't discuss a subject rationally with people who get their world view from their interpretation of the opinions of imaginary beings and think the written records of the opinions of reality-ignorant, brutal, slave-owning, genocidal, female-subjugating tribes are "The Law". Especially when they cherry pick those writings so carefully (and apparently without any realization they are doing so. And yes, I am cherry-picking as well, but one turd in the pie ruins the whole pie and should not be ignored).

This has come to a head due to my CNJ columns. This is a very statist and superstitious region, and the commenters demonstrate that in spades. Every topic gets hijacked into a "Well, God says..." sort of thing. If I wanted to write about religion, I would write about religion. (I guess I sort of do anyway since so many worship The State against all reason, and they don't like me showing that god as an imaginary, yet destructive, delusion.)

Want to end a conversation with me? Just start basing all your "arguments" on religious notions rather than universal principles.

Looking down the barrel...

I am worn out from all this nonsense over the Giffords shooting.

I really do try to care about it but the victim disarmament crowd- the Mass Murderer Fan Club- makes it very hard for me to care that politicians were shot. I am very upset at the death of the 9 year-old girl, though.

But, truly, the balderdash from the hoplophobes makes me much more concerned about protecting my own life and family. It is hard to be really concerned with the tragedy that has befallen others when you see that the real bad guys have you in their sights and are drooling over the chance to "take you out" next. That is what is happening here. Those who want to take your guns are willing for you to die to further their agenda. And they are happy to have their tools kill you.

More corrupt 'law enforcement officers'?

More corrupt 'law enforcement officers'?

Three Bernalillo County (Albuquerque area) deputies who work on the despicably authoritarian "DWI unit" are suspected of falsifying timesheets.

All I can say is that if they really have been doing what they are suspected of doing, at least they were "only" stealing money (stealing extra money, on top of the theft that normally funds their paychecks) instead of adding other rights violations to their offending behavior. We are all better off if they don't show up for "work".

And these are the guys allowed to enforce the "laws" on the rest of us? This is not the result of "a few bad apples"; it is absolutely inherent in The State and its version of "law enforcement". You can't fix something that is wrong from its very foundation.
*
Donate?

Quick, Close the safety valve!

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable." - John F. Kennedy

The authoritarians and statists who are wringing their hands over "heated rhetoric" don't realize they are trying to close the best pressure-release valve that exists.

Add to that the fact that they are also dancing in the blood of the dead and injured while they gleefully dust off their carefully-prepared new violations of the Second Amendment and basic human rights, and you have a perfect recipe for "interesting times".

Maybe, in spite of their pious assurances to the contrary, this is exactly what they want. Judging by their actions and their heated rhetoric, it sure seems that way.

*

Donate?

Another "Manchurian Shooter"

I think the shooter in Arizona is being exposed, more and more as information becomes available, as another "Manchurian shooter"- prepped and drugged and unleashed at a time when the BATFE is under scrutiny for recent, additional, illegal activities and more people are becoming aware of the actions of The State and how those actions violate their liberty.

Even if this is not the case, idiots in government need to learn that their actions and their rhetoric have consequences and can cause tightly-wound individuals to snap. Keep seeking to violate liberty and this will keep happening, no matter what "laws" are passed (and, in fact, directly because of those "laws"). Of course, this is exactly what The State wants.

Not one more inch!

*

Donate?

Thugs steal, destroy, house

Thugs steal, destroy, house

Once again "code enforcement" and complicit neighbors skip vapidly hand-in-hand toward the collectivist police state.

An elderly Albuquerque man's property rights have been violated in the worst way by the thugs of the city. Known as a "hoarder" and said by neighbors to sometimes be "aggressive", his home has been stolen and destroyed by the city.

An anonymous neighbor claims "we weren't against him personally". Really? There is nothing more personal than stealing a man's home.

And the claims of "aggression" seem suspicious to me as well. Who wouldn't be "aggressive" when having his property rights violated over and over again? This wasn't the first time "authorities" had entered his property without his permission, in other words, trespassed, and stolen things from him that they decided he didn't need. It isn't "aggression" to defend your property rights against those who seek to violate them.

I am also very ashamed of the "work crew" that did the actual destruction. People who do the dirty work of The State are as guilty as those who make the evil decisions. I know times are tough and money is hard to come by, but taking blood money is not the solution. Doing so makes you the bad guy, no matter what you may want to think of yourself.

Refresher on right and wrong

Refresher on right and wrong

Before an event like the one which happened in Arizona comes to Albuquerque (or other parts of New Mexico), I think it is time for a refresher course on right and wrong.

I know this is not necessary for libertarians and anarchists, but I do this in order to show the statists which side we are on.

First off, please watch the Zero Aggression Principle video, then read this article about right and wrong, then another about the need to do what is right, and finally this most recent one about right and wrong being universal with the ironically-written headline.

Then, if you still don't understand, repeat as necessary.
*
Donate?

Lawsuit at the ABQ corral

Lawsuit at the ABQ corral

The police union is suing the Albuquerque mayor over the issue of "take-home cars" that the LEOs had grown to feel entitled to. The union mouthpiece claims the new policy endangers "officer safety" and "public safety" [sic].

If the cops are scared when driving their own cars, I question their grasp of reality and wonder why cop cars are so much safer than yours or mine. If they feel endangered by this policy, they can always go out and get an actual dangerous job, rather than their cushy tax-suckling gig. The only time "public safety" [sic] is at risk is when those police cars are being used by police.

It's too bad that when government appendages sue one another it is our money that is wasted, because I sure do enjoy seeing the bad guys fight among themselves. It's like seeing two firing squads facing each others' ranks and just enjoying the show; while knowing that I had to buy both side's guns and ammo, uniforms and briefcases, and that I will be billed for the clean-up and the medical care of the survivors.

There is a glimmer of hope: The union says it will drop the lawsuit if the city council comes up with a "better alternative". Well, city council, here it is: fire all the cops and let people take responsibility for their own safety once more, without the "legal" hindrance of The State's anti-self defense "laws" getting in the way. It's the only thing that really works, after all.

*
Donate?

Only you can judge what is right

Only you can judge what is right

(Is it just me, or does the headline which was written for this column seem to say the polar opposite of my main point? I was trying to say that right and wrong are universal regardless of your opinions.)

Last week's column emphasized the need for each of us to do the right thing in order to improve society. Most commenters seemed to agree, but were not necessarily sure what "the right thing" is. Fair enough.

Real right and wrong are pretty easy to grasp as long as you aren't looking for excuses or shortcuts to get around them. They are not dependant upon opinions or the prevailing culture; these substitutes will lead you astray. Circumstances, "laws", or personal beliefs don't change wrong into right. Nor does "majority make right" in the case of believing it is OK for fifty percent, plus one, to be able to dictate, by "law", what others will be prohibited from doing. Most things are not up for a vote.

Avoiding doing the wrong thing is probably even more important than doing the right thing. It is never the right thing to cause harm- economic or physical damage- to someone who is not harming you. Put another way, it is never the right thing to attack someone; it is never the right thing to steal; it is never the right thing to deceive someone who is not harming or threatening you.

Beyond the actual wrongs, there will always be petty disagreements about this or that. If you don't like it, don't participate. If a friend insists on doing something you can't tolerate, and won't change to suit you, find a different friend. Don't cross the line by forcing the friend to do as you wish.

So, what is the right thing? It is the right thing to take responsibility for your actions and deal with the consequences that result. This does mean looking out for your own interests, but not at the expense of doing the wrong thing to others. After all, if you don't look out for yourself and your family, who will? The responsibility can fall on no one else. Your interests do not conflict with the genuine interests of others. It is right to protect your interests from all those who seek to violate them through aggression, theft, and fraud.

In many cases "doing the right thing" means you must learn to mind your own business and deal with being offended by the consensual behavior of those around you. It doesn't mean you have to like it or refrain from expressing your opinion, it just means you have no right to meddle or support "laws" that meddle in the lives of others. It means that you need to recognize that not everyone subscribes to the same beliefs that motivate you, and as long as they are not attacking, stealing, or defrauding anyone you need to leave them alone. After all, even YOU do things that offend someone.

(As submitted, not as published.)

*

And, if you can, Donate?

The future is a toss-up

Will the future be bright or will it be bleak?

Will scientific advances give us incredibly long, healthy, and prosperous lives?

Or will The State reward its elites with those advances while making the lives of the rest of us dreary, hopeless nightmares with the jackboot stomping the human face forever, while our private lives - along with our property and self determination- are a thing of the past. Make no mistake- this nightmare future is the future The State's architects (from the "left" and the "right") dream of subjecting us to, and they will unless stopped.

Right now it's a toss-up as to whether the forces of good or the forces of evil- those who seek to control the private, voluntary and non-aggressive behavior of others- will win.

At least in the short-term. In the long term, history shows that control freaks die violent deaths, in mass events, eventually.

War on America reaps more victims

War on America reaps more victims

Two young men have fallen victim to the thugs in blue. They were stopped and arrested on New Year's Eve for doing something about as "wrong" as walking across a room.

Their "crime"? Smoking marijuana and selling some to someone else. So now they face made-up charges including "conspiracy". Yeah, there's a conspiracy all right, but it is The State who is guilty in this one.

The only thing these young men did wrong was admitting anything to the LEO. Never speak to cops. Never.

If this gets to trial, which I hope it does since no one should ever plead "guilty", this is a good opportunity for a fully-informed jury to nullify the "law" in defense of justice.

The illusion of government efficacy

The State can give the illusion of working to those saddled with the misguided need to look and see someone "in control" and running things, even if that control is not real or is harmful.

For the rest of us, those who look at whether things are really working, we see that when left alone, people self-organize very efficiently. We see government as causing chaos. We see that society works best when meddled with least- and never from a "top-down" direction or through a coercive monopoly. Of course, the phrase "top-down" implies that Rulers are "above" us, which isn't even partially true.

The most pathetic drunk in the gutter is a better person than the most benevolent Ruler. At least the drunk is not telling you how to run your own life, and threatening to kill you if you defy him. Well, unless he is also a politician or a cop, that is.

LEO kills pedestrian

LEO kills pedestrian

The new year begins with death-by-cop in Albuquerque. And, of course, the knee-jerk response by The State is to check the dead man's system for intoxicants rather than checking the cop who was driving. The double standard is once again at work. Just imagine if you or I had run over a cop who was on foot on the street. Would the first reaction have been to check the cop's blood for alcohol, or would the driver have been the automatic suspect? We both know the answer to that.

The cop had spent the night involved in a "DWI checkpoint" and had just left the scene of that offense when he hit the pedestrian. This doesn't mean the cop was "clean", and only a blindly religious devotee of the US police state would make that assumption.

Now, perhaps the pedestrian really was at fault. It's likely that he at least shared responsibility for the accident. However, for the LEOs to get special treatment when an accident occurs only deepens the chasm between the agents of The State and the regular productive people of America.

This should also demonstrate that checkpoints don't make anyone safer, and in this case they tangentially killed someone. That cop had no legitimate excuse to be on the streets at that time, and probably would not have been had he not been leaving the scene of his violations of the rights to travel free from molestation and to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. Tyranny kills.

*

Donate?

Rationality- not terribly popular these days

I just really don't know how to respond to people anymore when their only justification for thinking a certain course of action is right or wrong is based upon superstition and imaginary beings who they believe are watching them.

I stopped even looking at the comments on one of my Clovis News Journal columns when the commentary devolved into "this is wrong- and must be kept illegal- because God says it is wrong".

I'm sorry, but if you get your notions of right and wrong from a supposedly immortal, omnipotent, and omniscient supreme being who is fine and dandy with, and completely supportive of, slavery, genocide, and other things that are harmful to innocent people (and, yes, I am fully qualified to judge that most victims of these horrors do not deserve them), then you have no principles and no moral compass. You will fall for anything as long as some authority you respect tells you it's OK.

I know who deserves to be defended against. I know who should be left alone. I know who is harming others if I see it happening. I know what actions are causing actual harm and which ones are just offensive to someone. If I can know this, shouldn't your supreme being be able to know this too?

Or, is he (or the narrative of him) trapped by the words and attitudes that were written down by barbarous tribesmen thousands of years ago? Unable to escape a primitive and brutal culture that laid out the rules of the game and claimed that this being was forever completely unchanging, since he was already perfection personified. Good thing for him that his fan club is so good at cherry-picking. Still, craziness is craziness, no matter how popular it remains, and it should not be coddled and encouraged.

Factual or fictional; rational or completely insane. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe. It is not within my rights to order you otherwise even if it were possible. But... you have no right to base "laws" upon your silliness. If you try to do so, and you harm other people in the process- people who were simply trying to live their own lives- you are worse than those you seek to stop from doing ... whatever. You are actively committing acts of evil.