Show me yours...

I've seen pictures of Gadsden "Don't tread on me" tattoos, but that has got me wondering...

I'm just curious if anyone out there has a "Time's Up" flag tattoo, yet.  With or without the flag border.  Do you, or does anyone you know of?

If so, I would like to see a picture of it.  I'll keep it private if you'd prefer.

Someday, if I ever have the money to waste- and if I could overcome my aversion to needles- I might consider getting one.  Not sure where I'd place it, though.  Also not sure if I'd want the flat version above, or want a more dynamic "waving" flag design.  Or, if I'd only want the striking snake and "Time's Up" without the flag around it.

Probably it's nothing I'll ever have to worry about.

(Just a note:  This is my 2,700th blog post.  Here I thought I'd run out of anything to say in a week or so- and that was almost 7 years ago.)

.

Order without coercion is possible

Order without coercion is possible

(My Clovis News Journal column for May 3, 2013)

I have seen people say that there is no point in being libertarian because there will never be a libertarian society. Or because there will always be bad guys who will take advantage of others, or because someone will always be setting up some form of government.

That seems to be a very myopic view of the situation to me.

I'm not libertarian because of a belief that the future won't have problems.

I am libertarian because I know it is always wrong to initiate force- to throw the first punch. I am libertarian because I know it is wrong to steal. Calling theft something else doesn't make it right.

Perhaps there will never be a libertarian society. No one can really know that for sure. It would be a missed opportunity, but it changes nothing for me. It seems silly to refuse to do what's right because there will always be uncooperative troublemakers who will look for excuses to keep attacking and stealing.

Should you refuse to do anything good because it may never quite arrive where you want to end up? Maybe humans will never live on any other planets, but that doesn't make the study of science, which could be used for space travel and extraterrestrial colonies, pointless. Knowledge is power.

Living by libertarian principles gives an ethical foundation that serves you well here and now, making your life better today; not only in some hypothetical future society.

That there will always be bad guys is obvious. Why let them dictate your choices? Why give them power over your life?

True, some people are addicted to telling others what to do, or being told what to do. Those people will forever be trying to set up some sort of system to force everyone to join, "or else". Some people are simply in favor of being stolen from and being coerced to live by someone else's rules. So? Let them.

When you claim some job can't be done without government, remember that slavery was once considered necessary for farming cotton. You can have organization without coercion and theft. Your organization can be fluid, changing to fit the evolving needs of those who are a voluntary part of it at the moment. If you are afraid of allowing people to opt out, it shows you know how unpopular your scheme really is.

If you wait until there's a bandwagon to jump on you may jump too late. If you wait until everyone else is already doing it, does it really count in your favor?
.

Storm chasing: "Too dangerous"?

This past weekend's deaths of the storm chasing scientists in Oklahoma, and the injuries of the crew of a second car manned by Weather Channel storm chasers, has spawned some really stupid comments about how there needs to be "a conversation" about whether storm chasing is "too dangerous".

When people say there needs to be "a conversation", what they are really saying is that you and I should shut up and allow authorities to discuss and decide among themselves whether more liberty needs to be violated, by "law", for our own good.  Oh, you and I can chime in as long as we encourage those violations or are begging for someone to come save us.

The "consensus" will undoubtedly be that government-approved scientists and other authorized people will be "allowed" to continue storm chasing, but people like you and me must be discouraged from doing so- probably subject to some "fine" or other violations if we don't take the hint.

Storm chasing- even the most "irresponsible" kind- is an invaluable tool for learning more about storms and how other people (those who don't want to risk chasing the storms) can survive or avoid the storms.  The near-religious belief that only authorized scientists can make valuable discoveries and contributions seems to be widespread among believers in The State.  But it's wrong.

People know chasing tornadoes is dangerous.  That is why they do it.  They know, intellectually, that there is a risk of death (even if emotionally they feel invincible).  NASCAR is dangerous.  Over-eating is dangerous.  Driving is dangerous.  Thinking for yourself is dangerous.  Without danger, what is life?

I would bet that everyone does something that someone else, somewhere, would consider "too dangerous".

Don't force people to do things that they feel are "too dangerous", but don't prevent those to whom boredom is the biggest danger from doing what gives them enjoyment.  Especially when it can benefit the rest of us so much.

.

Sneak on over...

He hungers for a "4 digit pageview day".  Just for fun, let's give him one.

.

"Nope, we can't sell you that..."

I don't get the whole logic of "laws" forbidding selling alcohol to obviously drunk people, or prohibiting the sale of Oxycontin to addicts.

Before long I expect to see similar "laws" forbidding grocery stores from selling food to fat people, or prohibiting restaurants from serving "obviously obese" customers.

Because, really, what's the difference?

In each case it's obvious that the customer has had (someone else's definition of) "too much" of what he is seeking to buy more of.  It's also obvious that it's no one else's business- until a credible threat is made of causing imminent harm.  And "might hurt someone" is never good enough an excuse for me.

.

Bad jobs

I think most people don't want to admit that there are some jobs that are legal that are just bad and should never be done.

They can call freelance aggressive thugs and thieves bad people, as well as people who do the illegal jobs that are honest- like those who deal in politically incorrect drugs or trade in sexual favors- but they pussyfoot around the fact that every TSA employee is a rapist, every cop is a thief and bully, and every politician is a mobster.  And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

When those jobs are illustrated to the general public, especially if children might see, the core nature of the job isn't shown.  These bad guys are shown to be helpful and necessary.

Just watch some kids' cartoon where one of those jobs is shown and you'll never see any resemblance to reality beyond the ridiculously superficial.  And all the main parts of the job will be ignored and never shown at all.

Of course, they can sometimes show politicians and lobbyists as bad guys, but only if they work for "the other side" - the politically incorrect "minority" (which may actually be in the majority) side.

Makes me wanna produce TV shows.

.

The worst politician quote ever

Someone recently reminded me again of the worst thing I think I have ever heard a puppetician utter.  And he said it in public and no one shot him for advocating slavery!:

"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

That's like claiming that life is all about the willingness to rot in your grave forever.  It shows that this turd doesn't have the first clue what "freedom" is (and I'll bet liberty is really scary to him).  It shows he sees it only according to what he can do to you.

Of course, he would consider himself and his hired goons to be "lawful authority", which they most definitely are not.  

Yeah, it sounds like something that psychopath Mikey Poopie Bloomers would say, but it was actually a previous NY thug who said it.

.

Accommodating the Damaged Ones

Cops are such crybabies.

I am now expected to structure my life around the demands of these most broken, twisted, violent, and terrified individuals.  When society is fashioned for the convenience of the police, you have a police state- even before the brutality reaches a crescendo.

I have to remember they can do anything to me their paranoid little minds justify in the name of "officer safety".

I am expected to comply with their prying demands to know who I am, where I am going, and what my business is once I get there.

I am expected to switch lanes if I see one robbing a traveler on the side of the road, so as not to "endanger" the life of the distracted thief.

I am told to not carry a gun- or if I do, to drop it at the first fearful whimper of a LEO- because I "might want to kill the cop".  And why wouldn't I, under these conditions?

I am tired of being told I have to accommodate these broken, perverted individuals, and then fawn over their "service" and "sacrifice" to "society".

Screw that.

.

Peace

I find myself more at peace recently- with regards to non-libertarians.  Maybe I have more pressing things on my mind.  Or maybe I have matured a little.  Or maybe it is a temporary thing and will soon pass.

That doesn't mean I don't speak up, it just means I'm not going to get too worked up by those who continue to reject liberty in favor of slavery- unless they come to me.  They are wrong, obviously, but my telling them so probably won't make them accept it.  Sometimes when I start to respond to someone, on someone else's blog, or on a news story somewhere else, I take a moment and decide it's not worth it.

Of course, this only applies to "other" places, statist places- not "my own territory" (such as this blog), or friendly spaces around the internet.  And, if you come to me defending statism and other forms of slavery, I'll probably not spare my keyboard.

.

Self-reliance not such a bad idea

Self-reliance not such a bad idea

(My Clovis News Journal column for April 26, 2013)

Throughout most of American history, interference in an individual's life by government employees, even under the worst administrations, was rare. Government and its regulations were practically invisible, like a ghost, and most people never noticed government because its laws didn't affect their lives or normal behavior in ordinary circumstances. The regulations that did exist were generally consistent with Natural Law; "don't steal", "don't attack the innocent", and "don't trespass". The rest of the rules, like "give the taxman his cut", were easily complied with (or ignored).

Now it seems almost unnatural to go about your day without being confronted with some sort of State interference.

Now how often do you find your course of action impeded by a law, fee, permit, license, tax, etc? How many times every week are you forced to interact with a government employee to satisfy some bureaucratic edict? Even once per week would have been too often to a person just a generation or two ago.

Yet, it only gets worse as government gets in our faces more every day.

We are watched by cameras so that any infraction can be fined. We are tracked in our cars and on our cell phones and computers. We must go through a gauntlet of groping hands, or worse, to get from Point A to Point B in many cases. We are told to pay for the privilege of exercising our fundamental rights. In short, we are ordered to submit to treatment worse than that which spawned a revolution. We are fast approaching the condition where everything not forbidden is mandatory. And we are always deceived and told it is for our own good or for "security".

Benjamin Franklin knew the score: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." He understood that tyrants claim you must give up essential liberty for the illusion of security- for that is all security ever is when you allow liberty to be diminished even the smallest amount: an illusion.

So, does all this government intrusion make your life better? Are you better off when you are not permitted to make vital decisions for yourself? Do you need a Big Brother watching your every move so that you don't hurt yourself or others? Or so Big Brother can make sure you don't defy his commands?

I can handle my own life, and I know you can too. Neither of us needs to be treated like a stupid or naughty child. Big Brother can go jump off a cliff.

.

Slavery is wrong, whatever you call it

Yesterday, on my "Death-by-Government Day" post, blogger "Bonnie Gadsden" asked a very pertinent question:

"Kent, what do you think about draft dodgers?"

I responded:

"You might as well ask what I think about the slaves who escaped their captivity up until the 1860s- or those in Africa who escaped being captured and enslaved in the first place. Because conscription IS slavery.
 It isn't cowardice to keep your freedom, especially when you know the price will be high, it is bravery."

Do we revile those three women in Cleveland who recently escaped after a decade of captivity as sex slaves?  What about those who foil a kidnapping attempt?

Runaway slaves, those who hid to avoid being enslaved, and those who escape or avoid a kidnapping.  I'd say "draft dodgers" are in honorable company.  They are the ones who actually sacrificed for freedom.

.

Happy Death-by-Government Day

Or, should it be called "Dead Government-paid Murderer Day"?

I know that many people who were in the employ of the US government truly believed they were doing the right thing.  I know that a lot of people actually fall for the "they fought for our freedom" propaganda, and have a powerful desire to honor the dead for that reason.  I know I come off as a heartless monster for seeing it differently.

But, if you are in the military you are only fighting for one "cause": the power (and wealth) of those who run the mafia called the US government.  You are their pawn; their tool.  That you get angry at that revelation is proof of how effectively you have been brainwashed.

Your scars, your death, and your murders don't protect one single act of liberty.  No one is free to write even one anti-State phrase on the "government's invention" because of your sacrifice.  No one is able to carry a fully functional M16 onto a flight from Texas to DC because of your "service".  No one is allowed to drive across the country without having to possess a plastic national ID card because of those you killed.  No one is allowed to buy morphine for their cancer-stricken grandmother, over-the-counter in Walmart, because you were blown to bits in Iraq.  Your lost leg, shattered and bleeding in the hot sun beside some nameless dirt road in Afghanistan, doesn't buy the liberty to do one single thing.  Your dead "brothers" didn't accomplish anything that was worth losing their life for The State.

I realize it is hard to accept this when you have been told the lie all your life, and when you want so badly for all those who have died in the past to have not died in vain (or worse, in service of evil).

I'm sorry.

(Also, check this out.)

Kokesh released- now what?

Now that Adam Kokesh has been released, and the most serious(ly fraudulent) charges against him have been dropped, there are a few thoughts I have.

First off, I would be careful around him.  Maybe he is a great guy who would NEVER snitch, but I don't know what they might have done to him or threatened him with while he was held prisoner.  I hate to admit I would think this way, but it's something to keep in mind.  It has happened before with other activists- maybe Adam is a better, stronger person than the others, but how do you know?

Second, I see a lot of claims about how it has been revealed that he been working for Barry The Enemy all along.  Supposedly, The Enemy needs an "Incident" in order to declare martial law across the country, and Adam's armed march on DC is just that incident.  Well, I hate to say this, but Bring It On.   If The Enemy wants to get the preliminaries out of the way, I suppose now is as good a time as any.  Then we will know "It's Time".

Third, if this is going to be the standard way from now on to treat every activist who sticks his or her neck out, then why would anyone go to the trouble anymore?  Whether you agree with their methods or not, not everyone who does something you don't agree with is working with The Enemies.  They may simply be wrong.  Or YOU may be wrong.  (Hey, it's a possibility.)

As always, think for Yourself.  Don't follow anyone unquestioningly.  If your conscience or your rationality say "stop!", listen to them!!  You have a brain for a reason.  Even if something is a great idea, it may not be right for you.  We each have our path to liberty.  Don't initiate force; don't steal/defraud/damage property- but other than that find what works for you.  No person is infallible or great enough to blindly follow.

And, don't let this Kokesh issue distract you from continuing to live in liberty as you seek even more.

.

Don't look! You might see something unpleasant!

Statists seem to have infinite capacity for denial. Just watch what they write.

"I don't break any laws!"

"It's wrong because it's illegal."

"Just one more law will fix it." 

"Just elect the right people..."

"The Constitution was fine, it just needed us to keep the government in compliance."

It's almost cute the way they twist and turn trying to keep believing.  It's like kids trying to convince you that their imaginary friend is "really real".  The thing is, kids grow out of that (usually), while statists just get more adamant and angry when you point out how their imaginary friend keeps failing to deliver.

.

Reward the bully- punish his victim

I recently saw a quote* that was intended to show the absurdity of supporting gun owners' rights.  As you'll see, it utterly failed:

"When one child hits another with a rock, the answer isn't to give every child a rock."

And, if that were the whole story, it might be true.  But it isn't.

The truth of the matter is, that when you know there's a bully out there who intends to hit an innocent kid with a rock (or his fist, or a hammer, or a "law"), and you frisk the intended victim to make sure he has no rocks in his pocket, and then you threaten him with severe punishment if he dares to try to defend himself- well, then you are the bully's accomplice.  You are a friend to the villain and an enemy to all that is good.

The answer may not be to "give" every child a rock (they can find them on their own just fine- just like the bully did and will continue to do), but that would still be a better answer than the anti-liberty bigot tactic of trying to disarm all the decent folk.  The worst possible thing you can do is to try to take away the rocks the good kids have.  Or punish those who fight back.  When you do, you are only rewarding the bad guys and making it easier (and safer) to be a bad guy.

Anti-liberty bigots expose the festering evil in their hearts everytime they think they have come up with a clever new slogan.

I'll give my daughter some rocks, and expect her to abide by the ZAP.  Count on it.


(*I apologize that I forgot where I saw this quote.  I copied it, but neglected to copy the source.)

The Red Pill: "Down With Power"

I just recently finished reading L. Neil Smith's "Down With Power".  Excellent book!

Maybe not quite as excellent as "Lever Action", but I'm probably prejudiced since the latter book was the one that finally showed me where I fit in the scheme of the world.  And pretty much made me who I am today.  Whether you consider that a good thing or not being a separate issue altogether.

OK... maybe it is just as good.  The only reason I might choose "Lever Action" is purely emotional.

I recommend you get yourself a copy of "Down With Power", read it, and then loan it to people who need to read it.  If your "conservative" or "liberal" friends and family keep subjecting your to their vacuous statist opinions, invite them to get "the other side".  I'll bet the conversations will get more interesting.

They won't realize you have handed them "The Red Pill" until it is (hopefully) too late.

.

Do what's right, not what's legal

Do what's right, not what's legal

(My Clovis News Journal column for April 19 [4-19!], 2013.)

When a law is silly, good people may break it; when a law is wrong, good people have to.

I wouldn't tell you what to do, beyond telling you that you probably already know the right thing to do. I will tell you that if I see you breaking silly laws without hurting anyone or their property, I will respect you. But if I see you breaking, or even openly defying, bad laws, I will consider you a true hero.

Look at how many heroes from the past are heroes because they broke and defied bad laws. Rosa Parks and Henry David Thoreau come to mind. How many heroes from the past do we look up to strictly because they obeyed laws? I can't think of any right now.

The law only deserves respect as long as it is respectable. "Laws" which attempt to control or regulate things other than theft, aggression, or damaging or trespassing on privately owned property do not deserve respect. In fact, they deserve contempt.

This also means that anyone I see enforcing silly laws is someone I have no respect for, and anyone I see enforcing bad laws I see as the enemy of everything America was supposed to be, and an enemy of liberty and decency.

No excuses involving "the will of the majority" or "just doing my job" hold any water. And any claims of "upholding my oath" are worse than pointless when your interpretation of your oath requires you to do wrong.

This doesn't mean it's always nice to break all silly "laws". Some behaviors are just not polite, regardless of the law. It isn't always smart to do everything you have a right to do. You need to look at unintended consequences that can result. Of course, this applies to proposing and enforcing "laws" too.

This profusion of "laws" has caused a condition I call "law pollution". It has been estimated by attorney Harvey A. Silverglate, a civil liberties advocate who has researched the issue, that each and every one of us commits at least three felonies every day; usually without knowing it or having any ill-intent. That's hilarious.

When everyone is some sort of a criminal it means the laws are wrong; not that everyone is bad.

If I were inclined to give you advice I would say "do what's right, and don't worry about what's legal". Come to think of it, that's the same advice a retired deputy sheriff once gave me.

.

The "only purpose" for cars...

The next time some foamy-mouthed anti-liberty bigot makes the standard claim that guns should be banned because "they only have one purpose: to KILL people!" I think I'll claim that cars only have one purpose: getting food at the drive-through.

That is just as "true" as the other claim.

I have used guns a fair amount, and I have never killed anyone.  Never even tried.  Yet, I don't have any trouble finding a "purpose" for my guns.

Or I could say a car's only purpose is to be a get-away vehicle after a hold-up.  Or as a teenager's motel room substitute.  Or as something to watch bikini-clad cheerleaders wash.

Of course, the argument that the "only purpose" for guns is to kill people is only believed by stupid people anyway, so the humor of claiming an "only purpose" for cars- whatever it might be- would go right over their heads.  It'll be fun to see the "mental" gymnastics performed by the anti-liberty bigot in response, though.

.

Lessons from Kokesh's kidnapping

If you can be kidnapped ("arrested") for- and charged with- "assaulting an officer" or for "resisting arrest" when you have clearly done neither, why not fight the cops like your very life depends on it?

Because it does, you know.

.

Adam Kokesh's arrest

I am not an advocate of using institutionalized kidnapping- euphemistically called "arrest" when committed by people who work for "government"- to remove "undesirables" from society.  But when that kidnapping is used against a person who wasn't doing anything wrong it is even more disgusting.

It doesn't matter if the kidnap victim was Adam Kokesh or that genocidal monster, Abraham Lincoln- if the victim isn't initiating force, stealing/defrauding, or trespassing on PRIVATELY owned property, the "arrest" is wrong.  If you won't speak out against the unjust kidnapping of your worst enemy, then you need to reexamine your commitment to liberty.

I have been frankly horrified at the things I have seen written relating to his "arrest" at the Smokedown Prohibition V event.  Gun owners, especially those who were not in favor of his planned armed march on DC, have been acting like statists.

The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs and The War Against Gun Owners are not separate issues.  They are both aspects of liberty, which can not be cherry picked to make you feel better.  You don't have to smoke Cannabis or own guns to support the absolute human right of everyone to do either or both.  Among other things.  But if you claim to love (and understand) liberty, you don't look convincing when you seem willing to throw someone else to the wolves.

Maybe Kokesh was seeking to be arrested.  Maybe he wasn't.  Maybe the feds wanted to get him out of the way so they wouldn't have to face the armed march in July.  Maybe it isn't smart to put yourself in a position to invite being kidnapped when you are planning something "bigger" for the near future.  Maybe, maybe, maybe...

You can always second-guess anyone's actions.  You can even disagree with what they are doing.  But if a person is not doing anything wrong, then you shouldn't ever support their abuse at the hands of government employees.  I can't support the abuse of anyone by government employees at any time, but that's just me.

Free Adam!

.