Property rights in their dog days
(My Clovis News Journal column for September 20, 2013)
The recent anti-property rights ordinance- disguised as a "pest control measure"- should hammer the point home that there is no such thing as "conservative" or "liberal" (many of those advocating for this ordinance call themselves "conservatives") - there are only those who hunger to control others and take their property, and those who have no such compulsion.
You might be shocked to learn I would oppose any "law" that forbade property owners from eliminating prairie dogs on their own land just as passionately as I oppose this ordinance which criminalizes prairie dogs on private property. "Private property"? I suppose we can dispense with that illusion now.
Either "law" is wrong in the same way. Either you are forced to allow animals on your property or forced to kill them if they set foot on it. By advocating one position, you automatically legitimize the other side's position. You can't have it both ways, and trying to do so just furthers the growth of socialism.
It also brings to attention another inconvenient fact: you can't legitimately criminalize indigenous nature- although it has been attempted since the first control freak gained the power to enforce his whims on others, especially in the past century under the guise of "fighting drug abuse". Wild animals are wild. They are not under the control of property owners. No one can tell them to not trespass, and since trespass is a human concept, it would be ridiculous to try. Leave it to government to impose ridiculousness by edict.
Since private property owners are being burdened with the responsibility for the wildlife on their property, lets take a look at "poaching laws". If you are responsible for the wildlife on your land, then that wildlife is yours to do with as you see fit. No need to ask permission from anyone, or to get any sort of "license" or permit. Once again, you can't have it both ways.
Recently, in Colorado, some petty tyrants were thrown out of office for just this kind of legislative abuse. Will you continue to throw your support behind those who would violate your rights, or will you hold them accountable?
In my fondest dreams I imagine that silly overreach of this sort will be "the straw that breaks the camel's back" and get people to see the game for what it is. In reality, I know most people who oppose this violation of property rights will continue to justify the exact same type of acts against other people's property, as long as the stated goal is one with which they agree.
Where will you stand?
.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
You've lost the luxury of time
If you were a Jew (or any other "undesirable") in late 1930s Germany, would you have had the luxury to take the time to decide on an individual basis whether each person wearing a Nazi uniform, or displaying the swastika was your enemy? Not all were. But, as I say, would you have had the luxury of time to not make that assumption?
Would you have had time to sit down and talk to each one, individually, to see if perhaps they were really on your side before judging them? Or, would the uniform have been a pretty clear sign where their loyalty lay? Would you have been right to use that in-your-face display as justification for slitting uniformed throats in a back alley?
The time is past where you and I have the luxury of waiting around to see where the loyalty of each person in a cop uniform may lie. They have already chosen sides by continuing to wear the badge.
Many of those in military uniform may feel trapped and be afraid to quit, due to threats of violence that are the only way the military can keep many of its slaves enslaved, but a cop can quit his job this minute just by walking away, like from any other job- so each and every day he is on the "job" is another declaration of where he stands. Each day he shows up for work he is spitting in your face and holding a gun to your kids' heads.
They are only human, so don't let them get in the way of living your life, but keep track of where they are and don't let them sneak up behind you- so that if/when it becomes necessary, you will know where the threat lies and will be able to take care of it in a proper manner.
.
Would you have had time to sit down and talk to each one, individually, to see if perhaps they were really on your side before judging them? Or, would the uniform have been a pretty clear sign where their loyalty lay? Would you have been right to use that in-your-face display as justification for slitting uniformed throats in a back alley?
The time is past where you and I have the luxury of waiting around to see where the loyalty of each person in a cop uniform may lie. They have already chosen sides by continuing to wear the badge.
Many of those in military uniform may feel trapped and be afraid to quit, due to threats of violence that are the only way the military can keep many of its slaves enslaved, but a cop can quit his job this minute just by walking away, like from any other job- so each and every day he is on the "job" is another declaration of where he stands. Each day he shows up for work he is spitting in your face and holding a gun to your kids' heads.
They are only human, so don't let them get in the way of living your life, but keep track of where they are and don't let them sneak up behind you- so that if/when it becomes necessary, you will know where the threat lies and will be able to take care of it in a proper manner.
.
Monday, October 21, 2013
Keeping information safe
What are the bits of knowledge that you feel should be kept safe, written on actual paper in your home, just in case Google or other search engines decide (or are ordered to) suppress them?
I mean stuff like the "formula" for gun powder:
I mean stuff like the "formula" for gun powder:
75% potassium nitrate (KNO3), 15% charcoal, 10% sulfur.
Are there any things of that nature that you have written down just in case?
.
Saturday, October 19, 2013
A "care", I do not give
I find myself caring less each and every day about what the bad guys who call themselves "government" are doing.
It's odd, in a way, because I still enjoy writing about their stupid and evil ways, but for my own personal life, I'm really not caring too much what their silly demands are.
I try to avoid them, and if I can't I just view them as I would any other thief, thug, or bully. A fact of life, but one that I don't have to like or cooperate with.
I still notice the parasites when I see them out preying on their supposed bosses, of course.
But, I find myself less inclined to even consider their wishes.
Just a couple of days ago I shook my head in disgust at one of the local cops as he sat by my house, lying in wait for travelers who make the mistake of driving near the school in the mornings. After I did so (I was crossing the street near him) I thought "he might have seen that", but then I realized I just didn't care.
And, I had glared at this same cop- only a week or so on the "job" [sic] in this town- after he almost pulled right out in front of me as he was leaving the "cop shop" a week or so earlier. He had a dazed "deer in the headlights" look as he sat there about half way in the road and I had to drive around his Mobile Oppression Unit.
But, as far as what "laws" the vermin choose to try to impose- or occasionally relinquish- I can scarcely muster a "meh".
Part of that may be due to reading Rose Wilder Lane's "The Discovery of Freedom". I really recommend the book- even if I do find it absurd that she starts out by speaking of how necessary government is, and then spends the rest of the book very effectively demolishing her own claim. And her descriptions of the "outlaw" heritage of humanity, doing what is right and necessary in spite of "laws" and Rulers, really speaks to me.
Part of it may be that life is more important than those who try to stand in its way. I have other things to worry about.
I'll keep exposing their failure, laughing at their absurdity, ignoring them when it pleases me, going along with their demands "just enough" when necessary, and defying them when I need to.
I think they are doomed. I really do.
.
It's odd, in a way, because I still enjoy writing about their stupid and evil ways, but for my own personal life, I'm really not caring too much what their silly demands are.
I try to avoid them, and if I can't I just view them as I would any other thief, thug, or bully. A fact of life, but one that I don't have to like or cooperate with.
I still notice the parasites when I see them out preying on their supposed bosses, of course.
But, I find myself less inclined to even consider their wishes.
Just a couple of days ago I shook my head in disgust at one of the local cops as he sat by my house, lying in wait for travelers who make the mistake of driving near the school in the mornings. After I did so (I was crossing the street near him) I thought "he might have seen that", but then I realized I just didn't care.
And, I had glared at this same cop- only a week or so on the "job" [sic] in this town- after he almost pulled right out in front of me as he was leaving the "cop shop" a week or so earlier. He had a dazed "deer in the headlights" look as he sat there about half way in the road and I had to drive around his Mobile Oppression Unit.
But, as far as what "laws" the vermin choose to try to impose- or occasionally relinquish- I can scarcely muster a "meh".
Part of that may be due to reading Rose Wilder Lane's "The Discovery of Freedom". I really recommend the book- even if I do find it absurd that she starts out by speaking of how necessary government is, and then spends the rest of the book very effectively demolishing her own claim. And her descriptions of the "outlaw" heritage of humanity, doing what is right and necessary in spite of "laws" and Rulers, really speaks to me.
Part of it may be that life is more important than those who try to stand in its way. I have other things to worry about.
I'll keep exposing their failure, laughing at their absurdity, ignoring them when it pleases me, going along with their demands "just enough" when necessary, and defying them when I need to.
I think they are doomed. I really do.
.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
SHTF advice from Dirttime
Dirttime has had some excellent SHTF-type posts recently- and I suspect they may have more coming. Check these out, and watch for more.
Has The SHTF? You Betcha!
Hidden Inflation plus Greed equals Screw you
Subsistence Survival Re: The Stealth Poacher.
Added: another good one! In a Grid Down World
And another: Bartering
.
Has The SHTF? You Betcha!
Hidden Inflation plus Greed equals Screw you
Subsistence Survival Re: The Stealth Poacher.
Added: another good one! In a Grid Down World
And another: Bartering
.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Excuses, excuses.
I'm angry at myself right now.
I have come to realize I am the King of Excuses.
Do I make excuses for things I don't really want to do, or do I make excuses to keep from doing things I want to do but I'm afraid of trying because I am scared to succeed or fail?
Either way it makes me mad.
.
I have come to realize I am the King of Excuses.
Do I make excuses for things I don't really want to do, or do I make excuses to keep from doing things I want to do but I'm afraid of trying because I am scared to succeed or fail?
Either way it makes me mad.
.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Rejecting people’s negative vortex
Rejecting people’s negative vortex
(My Clovis News Journal column for September 13, 2013)
Negativity is a real problem in a lot of people's lives. If it's a sunny day they'll complain about sunburn or drought. If it rains, that's no better because it ruins their plans.
But sometimes a person will be blamed for being negative when all they really did was reject someone else's negative outlook. Don't mistake a person's rejection of your doom and gloom for negativity on their part. They may be seeing a better way.
Libertarians face this phenomenon all the time.
Which is more negative: to wallow in imagined victimhood, or to tell people they have the power to run their own lives? The apparent answer, judging by the response you'll get for pointing out the obvious, might surprise you.
For pointing out the negativity of the culture of helplessness and victimhood, and offering an uplifting alternative; for reminding people they don't have to wait for "laws" to change, or for politicians to lead them, but can start being more free right now; for insisting that voluntary choice is better than coercion, libertarians are condemned for being too "negative".
It would be funny if it didn't expose such a serious problem.
Is it "negative" to point out that if you don't eat, you'll eventually starve to death? Not at all. It's reality, and accepting reality can save lives.
Too many people seem to have an emotional attachment to their perceived problems. They don't want a solution; they want sympathy, or company in their misery. Their problems are familiar and comfortable.
If it makes you feel better to wallow in hopelessness and despair, I won't try to stop you. If you want to continue chasing your tail in an endless cycle of doing the same thing and expecting a different result, who am I to try to convince you to do something more constructive, or to even sit down and relax? But I don't want to join you, either.
If you see the futility of propping up the status quo, and would prefer to try something that can actually make life better today and into tomorrow, take a chance and reject coercion, reject theft, and embrace voluntary association and self-responsibility.
On the other hand, if you do make a positive change and refuse to get sucked into other people's negative vortex, you'll be called "Utopian". The truth is somewhere between Utopia and Washington DC, but that isn't dramatic enough, I suppose.
.
(My Clovis News Journal column for September 13, 2013)
Negativity is a real problem in a lot of people's lives. If it's a sunny day they'll complain about sunburn or drought. If it rains, that's no better because it ruins their plans.
But sometimes a person will be blamed for being negative when all they really did was reject someone else's negative outlook. Don't mistake a person's rejection of your doom and gloom for negativity on their part. They may be seeing a better way.
Libertarians face this phenomenon all the time.
Which is more negative: to wallow in imagined victimhood, or to tell people they have the power to run their own lives? The apparent answer, judging by the response you'll get for pointing out the obvious, might surprise you.
For pointing out the negativity of the culture of helplessness and victimhood, and offering an uplifting alternative; for reminding people they don't have to wait for "laws" to change, or for politicians to lead them, but can start being more free right now; for insisting that voluntary choice is better than coercion, libertarians are condemned for being too "negative".
It would be funny if it didn't expose such a serious problem.
Is it "negative" to point out that if you don't eat, you'll eventually starve to death? Not at all. It's reality, and accepting reality can save lives.
Too many people seem to have an emotional attachment to their perceived problems. They don't want a solution; they want sympathy, or company in their misery. Their problems are familiar and comfortable.
If it makes you feel better to wallow in hopelessness and despair, I won't try to stop you. If you want to continue chasing your tail in an endless cycle of doing the same thing and expecting a different result, who am I to try to convince you to do something more constructive, or to even sit down and relax? But I don't want to join you, either.
If you see the futility of propping up the status quo, and would prefer to try something that can actually make life better today and into tomorrow, take a chance and reject coercion, reject theft, and embrace voluntary association and self-responsibility.
On the other hand, if you do make a positive change and refuse to get sucked into other people's negative vortex, you'll be called "Utopian". The truth is somewhere between Utopia and Washington DC, but that isn't dramatic enough, I suppose.
.
"The Discovery of Freedom"
I've been reading Rose Wilder Lane's "The Discovery of Freedom" and made a discovery of my own.
The entire book can be distilled down to one Malcolm Reynolds quote: "That's what governments are for- get in a man's way".
You're welcome.
.
The entire book can be distilled down to one Malcolm Reynolds quote: "That's what governments are for- get in a man's way".
You're welcome.
.
Monday, October 14, 2013
Libertarian badassery
I believe it's already "badass" to be libertarian, but others may not quite see it that way. So what would libertarian badassery look like?
First, there would be adherence to the Zero Aggression Principle- that part is non-negotiable- but beyond that would be a determination to not stand for any violations of non-aggression in your presence. An effective knight in shining armor for anyone around who is being violated by an aggressor or thief.
Next would be a determination to not violate property rights of others in any way. The ZAP is essential, but not sufficient.
However, both the above should always be tempered with the wisdom to know that while you don't have a right to initiate force nor to trespass, you must do what you think you need to do in the present situation and accept the consequences that come when you step beyond your bounds. This means that if you see a kid about to be hit by a falling tree on someone else's property, you go ahead and boldly trespass and grab the kid and then accept the consequences of your actions, whatever they may be. Let others second-guess and criticize.
There would also be the confidence to do what you know you have a right to do regardless of any "laws" to the contrary, but combined with the wisdom to pick your battles. Don't martyr yourself unnecessarily or in a wasteful manner. If you get caught up in the State's "system" due to doing right and good things they forbid- or failing to do stupid and wrong things they mandate- have a decision already made concerning how you will respond to that possibility. Submit or fight as you see fit, not as others would tell you to do. Either strategy can be the right course, and whichever you choose will be criticized by those not in your shoes.
Then, and I hate to say it, would be the incorporation of an inner strength to not preach at statists. A quiet confidence that "thugs will be thugs", and yapping about it to them isn't likely to change their nature.
Yeah, that's not me, either.
.
First, there would be adherence to the Zero Aggression Principle- that part is non-negotiable- but beyond that would be a determination to not stand for any violations of non-aggression in your presence. An effective knight in shining armor for anyone around who is being violated by an aggressor or thief.
Next would be a determination to not violate property rights of others in any way. The ZAP is essential, but not sufficient.
However, both the above should always be tempered with the wisdom to know that while you don't have a right to initiate force nor to trespass, you must do what you think you need to do in the present situation and accept the consequences that come when you step beyond your bounds. This means that if you see a kid about to be hit by a falling tree on someone else's property, you go ahead and boldly trespass and grab the kid and then accept the consequences of your actions, whatever they may be. Let others second-guess and criticize.
There would also be the confidence to do what you know you have a right to do regardless of any "laws" to the contrary, but combined with the wisdom to pick your battles. Don't martyr yourself unnecessarily or in a wasteful manner. If you get caught up in the State's "system" due to doing right and good things they forbid- or failing to do stupid and wrong things they mandate- have a decision already made concerning how you will respond to that possibility. Submit or fight as you see fit, not as others would tell you to do. Either strategy can be the right course, and whichever you choose will be criticized by those not in your shoes.
Then, and I hate to say it, would be the incorporation of an inner strength to not preach at statists. A quiet confidence that "thugs will be thugs", and yapping about it to them isn't likely to change their nature.
Yeah, that's not me, either.
.
Sunday, October 13, 2013
If not "Stand your ground"- what?
The opposite of stand your ground? Crawl away like a bitty little bug.
That's what your enemies- the anti-liberty, anti-LIFE bigots want you to do. And if you die... well, too bad. At least you didn't use a gun.
.
That's what your enemies- the anti-liberty, anti-LIFE bigots want you to do. And if you die... well, too bad. At least you didn't use a gun.
.
Saturday, October 12, 2013
Parental failing
I have spoken about my youngest daughter's unfortunate desire to attend the government school across the street. Well, those chickens are coming home to roost.
I fought, was outnumbered, and defeated.
She went to kindergarten last year, even though she was technically too young to start. Her mom (and all my relatives) encouraged her to go, and her mom actually sort of pushed her into going last year. "Here, take my child!" She loved kindergarten, so she expected our daughter to have the exact same experience.
She did well, but because of her age, and the fact that the teacher said she thought my daughter would benefit emotionally and socially from repeating kindergarten (and because her mom thought it sounded like a wonderful idea), she is back in kindergarten again this year.
My daughter liked her teacher enough that she wanted to be in her class again this year. I don't have anything in particular against her teacher, although it does bother me that in this government school it is official policy to show the kids religious programming and have them pray for absent classmates. Yes, that bothers me.
But this isn't about that.
Before my daughter started kindergarten she was rapidly learning to read and write. She would try to write words and ask me how to spell things all the time. She liked to try to read and would participate in bedtime story reading with me. She was to the point where she could actually read (nearly) entire kids' books to me.
But, no more.
Since she started school, her desire to learn has taken a nose-dive.
Now she never tries to write anything. She never reads except by accident.
And yet, her mom and my government school-worshiping family members don't notice this change- probably because I am the one around her the most. And it bothers me. I feel like I am failing her- but I know this is a fight I will not win. Because, even though my daughter often says she'd rather not go to school anymore (admittedly, mostly when it's time to go to bed or wake up), the resolve of the other "people of influence" is only stronger.
I see school doing the same damage to her that I see in so many others, and that I don't even know how I avoided. School was a living nightmare for me, and I still hate it with a red-hot passion- I wish I had never been forced to attend, since I learned nothing positive from "class" after I learned to read, but only by skipping class and reading in the library.
.
I fought, was outnumbered, and defeated.
She went to kindergarten last year, even though she was technically too young to start. Her mom (and all my relatives) encouraged her to go, and her mom actually sort of pushed her into going last year. "Here, take my child!" She loved kindergarten, so she expected our daughter to have the exact same experience.
She did well, but because of her age, and the fact that the teacher said she thought my daughter would benefit emotionally and socially from repeating kindergarten (and because her mom thought it sounded like a wonderful idea), she is back in kindergarten again this year.
My daughter liked her teacher enough that she wanted to be in her class again this year. I don't have anything in particular against her teacher, although it does bother me that in this government school it is official policy to show the kids religious programming and have them pray for absent classmates. Yes, that bothers me.
But this isn't about that.
Before my daughter started kindergarten she was rapidly learning to read and write. She would try to write words and ask me how to spell things all the time. She liked to try to read and would participate in bedtime story reading with me. She was to the point where she could actually read (nearly) entire kids' books to me.
But, no more.
Since she started school, her desire to learn has taken a nose-dive.
Now she never tries to write anything. She never reads except by accident.
And yet, her mom and my government school-worshiping family members don't notice this change- probably because I am the one around her the most. And it bothers me. I feel like I am failing her- but I know this is a fight I will not win. Because, even though my daughter often says she'd rather not go to school anymore (admittedly, mostly when it's time to go to bed or wake up), the resolve of the other "people of influence" is only stronger.
I see school doing the same damage to her that I see in so many others, and that I don't even know how I avoided. School was a living nightmare for me, and I still hate it with a red-hot passion- I wish I had never been forced to attend, since I learned nothing positive from "class" after I learned to read, but only by skipping class and reading in the library.
.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Wednesday, October 09, 2013
"Time's Up" flag Wikipedia page
OK, so there is no such thing. But I think there should be. The design has gotten enough attention beyond what I do to promote it that I think it deserves a page. (Of course I would think that, right?)
However, I don't feel like making one. I'm still bitterly disappointed that Wikipedia deleted the page about me (which I had nothing to do with and simply discovered by accident one day- and it already had a "take down notice" attached).
Well, maybe "bitterly disappointed" is going overboard. I was shocked anyone thought I needed a page- and apparently Wikipedia agreed with me.
"Time's Up" is a different story.
Anyway, if anyone feels like making a Wikipedia page on the "Time's Up" flag and/or design, I'll link to it on the blog.
.
However, I don't feel like making one. I'm still bitterly disappointed that Wikipedia deleted the page about me (which I had nothing to do with and simply discovered by accident one day- and it already had a "take down notice" attached).
Well, maybe "bitterly disappointed" is going overboard. I was shocked anyone thought I needed a page- and apparently Wikipedia agreed with me.
"Time's Up" is a different story.
Anyway, if anyone feels like making a Wikipedia page on the "Time's Up" flag and/or design, I'll link to it on the blog.
.
Tuesday, October 08, 2013
War by any name is still as painful
War by any name is still as painful
(My Clovis News Journal column for September 6, 2013.)
Let's imagine a world where you are the ruler of a town. All the people in your town are encouraged to get all their news and information from people connected to you. There are plenty of other sources of information, but the people have been convinced the news they get from "official sources" is more reliable, even when it should be obvious that's not always the case.
You also have the help of highly visible people who comment on the information you release, to the exclusion of everything else, to make it seem as if yours is the only perspective out there. Anything else would be "aiding the enemy" or a "fringe opinion".
Far away from your town is a small, insignificant village run by another guy very much like you. "Sir Ya", has done some nasty things to the people in his town; it seems to go with the job. But, since you have decided you need to go to war with this particular thug right now, he is the thug of the moment to anyone who will listen. Everyone listens.
You eagerly, and with grave expression, report on, and the commentators pass along, any and all evil acts this other guy is suspected of committing.
Of course, the information you release is slanted against Sir Ya and is carefully calculated to make you look better than you are.
The other guy has used "chemical weapons" on the people of his town, so you propose to go to war and kill many of the survivors- using chemicals like gun powder- to "save" them. The irony will be completely lost on the people of your town, and on the popular commentators you depend upon to spread your narrative.
People don't remember the rumored, and ultimately imaginary, "weapons of mass destruction" or baby-eating from every past lead-up to war, and this makes your scheme easier to pull off. You will succeed in getting your war, one way or another.
Sure it's crazy, but the people in your town won't see it because of how you have slanted the information they are exposed to. The same old story could be told of every time you and your predecessors decided to sacrifice the children of your townspeople for some political capital and to ensure a "legacy".
You'll call your war something like "humanitarian aid" or "rescuing his people". It makes the coming death and destruction more popular with the townsfolk. It makes the returning broken bodies and minds of the town's kids something to revere and honor rather than regret.
Let's imagine a world where you are the ruler of a town. All the people in your town are encouraged to get all their news and information from people connected to you. There are plenty of other sources of information, but the people have been convinced the news they get from "official sources" is more reliable, even when it should be obvious that's not always the case.
You also have the help of highly visible people who comment on the information you release, to the exclusion of everything else, to make it seem as if yours is the only perspective out there. Anything else would be "aiding the enemy" or a "fringe opinion".
Far away from your town is a small, insignificant village run by another guy very much like you. "Sir Ya", has done some nasty things to the people in his town; it seems to go with the job. But, since you have decided you need to go to war with this particular thug right now, he is the thug of the moment to anyone who will listen. Everyone listens.
You eagerly, and with grave expression, report on, and the commentators pass along, any and all evil acts this other guy is suspected of committing.
Of course, the information you release is slanted against Sir Ya and is carefully calculated to make you look better than you are.
The other guy has used "chemical weapons" on the people of his town, so you propose to go to war and kill many of the survivors- using chemicals like gun powder- to "save" them. The irony will be completely lost on the people of your town, and on the popular commentators you depend upon to spread your narrative.
People don't remember the rumored, and ultimately imaginary, "weapons of mass destruction" or baby-eating from every past lead-up to war, and this makes your scheme easier to pull off. You will succeed in getting your war, one way or another.
Sure it's crazy, but the people in your town won't see it because of how you have slanted the information they are exposed to. The same old story could be told of every time you and your predecessors decided to sacrifice the children of your townspeople for some political capital and to ensure a "legacy".
You'll call your war something like "humanitarian aid" or "rescuing his people". It makes the coming death and destruction more popular with the townsfolk. It makes the returning broken bodies and minds of the town's kids something to revere and honor rather than regret.
.
Breaking what they've got - Demanding more
If you learn nothing else from the phony-baloney "government shut-down" melodrama, learn this:
If the current amounts of control over the country wielded by these insane bureaucrats has inconvenienced you (it hasn't touched me), or worse, shouldn't you see that giving them even more control over your life (ObamaCare, "gun control", etc.) is the most stupid thing you could possibly do? This just proves they can NOT be trusted with even the smallest control over anything of importance. And they keep demanding more? Ha!
Take your life back.
If the current amounts of control over the country wielded by these insane bureaucrats has inconvenienced you (it hasn't touched me), or worse, shouldn't you see that giving them even more control over your life (ObamaCare, "gun control", etc.) is the most stupid thing you could possibly do? This just proves they can NOT be trusted with even the smallest control over anything of importance. And they keep demanding more? Ha!
Take your life back.
Live life in spite of bad guys
Attacks on your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and property are coming- just as they always have. Make no mistake about that.
On one hand it is silly to waste too much time worrying about what this or that puppetician is doing, or what "laws" may surround you. They are all attacks aimed at you- be warned and be ready.
On the other hand, it is good to know from which direction you are likely to be attacked next. Sticking your head in the sand doesn't really help you much.
Just don't get so wrapped up in worrying about the professional thugs that you miss out on life. That would hand the bad guys a victory you can't afford.
.
On one hand it is silly to waste too much time worrying about what this or that puppetician is doing, or what "laws" may surround you. They are all attacks aimed at you- be warned and be ready.
On the other hand, it is good to know from which direction you are likely to be attacked next. Sticking your head in the sand doesn't really help you much.
Just don't get so wrapped up in worrying about the professional thugs that you miss out on life. That would hand the bad guys a victory you can't afford.
.
Monday, October 07, 2013
Sour grapes?
People have suggested that my opposition to aggression and theft, particularly when committed by people calling themselves "government" or "The State", is just a case of "sour grapes"; that if I had chosen a different career path- one that resulted in me having a "government job" of some sort- I wouldn't be libertarian. Because of the trajectory of my life I would refuse to see "taxation" as theft and "laws" as either unnecessary or counterfeit.
Possibly.
My opinion doesn't alter reality, though.
I would hope I am not so shallow that I would let that stop me from seeing reality. And, there are several things I was once in favor of that I rejected due to thinking the matter through rather than sticking with what I liked.
It's not as if lots of other people who have (or once had) "tax addict jobs" don't see what's really going on- it just makes acting on that knowledge more painful. Yet many do it anyway. Perhaps they are better than I am.
As it stands, I don't consider getting a government job, even though it could be justified on the basis of being a mole or a monkeywrencher. And, I really would prefer if everyone who works for any "government" anywhere would quit and find an honest job.
If that is "sour grapes", so be it.
.
Possibly.
My opinion doesn't alter reality, though.
I would hope I am not so shallow that I would let that stop me from seeing reality. And, there are several things I was once in favor of that I rejected due to thinking the matter through rather than sticking with what I liked.
It's not as if lots of other people who have (or once had) "tax addict jobs" don't see what's really going on- it just makes acting on that knowledge more painful. Yet many do it anyway. Perhaps they are better than I am.
As it stands, I don't consider getting a government job, even though it could be justified on the basis of being a mole or a monkeywrencher. And, I really would prefer if everyone who works for any "government" anywhere would quit and find an honest job.
If that is "sour grapes", so be it.
.
Sunday, October 06, 2013
"Time's Up" - new version
I re-worked my "famous" Time's Up design just a bit- more detail, larger design, more anatomically correct snake (the old snake always reminded me more of a boa), larger words.
What do you think?
What do you think?
Saturday, October 05, 2013
"I'm packing my bags and leaving you to starve without me!"
Let's pretend I am an abusive spouse and parent. I steal other family members' stuff and break their things and make huge messes. And I insist that they would die on their own without me.
Sure, I sometimes settle squabbles between family members, but I always do so to my benefit- my interests come first.
And, I do some chores around the house- but I make a big fuss about it when I do. "Look how essential I am!" I crow. "Only I can do this the right way!"
But, I keep making a mess of the family budget, driving everyone deeper and deeper in debt, and I throw a hissy fit when I don't get all the money I want. So one day I declare I am going to leave the family.
But instead of leaving, by any rational definition, all I do is lock a few rooms in the house and say no one can enter until I get my way, and I stop doing anything helpful- except the things that would actually get me kicked to the curb by a family who realizes how utterly useless I really am.
But I don't stop being abusive, nor do I stop stealing, breaking stuff, or making big messes. I even still insist on settling family squabbles so I can continue to guide things to my favor.
Welcome to the "government shutdown".
.
Sure, I sometimes settle squabbles between family members, but I always do so to my benefit- my interests come first.
And, I do some chores around the house- but I make a big fuss about it when I do. "Look how essential I am!" I crow. "Only I can do this the right way!"
But, I keep making a mess of the family budget, driving everyone deeper and deeper in debt, and I throw a hissy fit when I don't get all the money I want. So one day I declare I am going to leave the family.
But instead of leaving, by any rational definition, all I do is lock a few rooms in the house and say no one can enter until I get my way, and I stop doing anything helpful- except the things that would actually get me kicked to the curb by a family who realizes how utterly useless I really am.
But I don't stop being abusive, nor do I stop stealing, breaking stuff, or making big messes. I even still insist on settling family squabbles so I can continue to guide things to my favor.
Welcome to the "government shutdown".
.
Thursday, October 03, 2013
"Exchange"
I keep seeing comments about the "health care exchanges" (I know that's not the "real" name) that I suppose ObamaCare imposed.
To "exchange" means to trade, so I suppose a "health care exchange" is where you trade away your health care for... what? For the opposite of health care?
.
To "exchange" means to trade, so I suppose a "health care exchange" is where you trade away your health care for... what? For the opposite of health care?
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)