Does it "work"?

I see people pointing out that if 100% of the population is "vaccinated" then of course 100% of the deaths will be among those who were "vaccinated". It's simple logic and couldn't be otherwise. No argument here.

However, they say this to explain reports that in some countries where somewhat less than 100% of the population is "vaccinated" (potentially every country on the planet, in other words) a significant percentage of those dying of the target disease were among those "vaccinated" against it. And this doesn't hold up the way they seem to believe.

There's a huge difference between 100% "vaccination" rate and any other rate.

If 90% of the population is "vaccinated" shouldn't it still be overwhelmingly the unvaccinated dying of the disease? Even if total numbers are way down. Even if the unvaccinated are a small percentage of the total population. Like hundreds to one-- or more. That should still be true even if 99% of the population is "vaccinated"... if the "vaccine" works. If that's not how it adds up, I don't think the "vaccine" can be said to work.

Something isn't adding up here. It might be my assumptions, my speculative numbers, or whatever on my end. But it might also be the official story.

Also, if a vaccine needs a booster every 10+ years, that's reasonable. If it needs a booster every day, it's NOT a vaccine. If it needs one every six months or so, that's a lot closer to "not a vaccine" than to a vaccine. You'd have to stretch your definition of "vaccine" beyond all reason in that case.

Things like these, that make me not trust the official narrative, just keep piling up. 

But, if you want one of the Covid "vaccines" I hope you get it, and I hope you feel better for having done so. I hope it keeps you healthy. Just don't demand government violence or corporate coercion be used against those who choose differently.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Today, for the first time, I was asked to wear a mask as I entered a store in New Mexico. He said, "You have to wear a mask", as he tried to hand me one. I said, "No thanks, I'll just leave", and I did, as he was apologizing, saying it's "store policy".

No, I don't think I will

Someone posted a video clip of a cop (I think it was in Australia) saying he agrees with those protesting the lockdowns, but he's just doing his job, and that policing is the only skill he has.

So I commented: "If your only 'skill' is being a hired gun for a tyrant, enforcing legislation or policy, you need to end your pathetic existence. You are taking up space from worthwhile lifeforms."

So, Twitler (his minions, I'm sure) suspended my account. 

I can get back on if I delete the tweet. Not going to happen, at least not today. If they don't like it, they can delete it, but I'm not going to do their dirty work for them. Because, like it or not, what I said is 100% true.

I've never been suspended or banned from any "social" media platform until this, and have always thought that if it happened, it would be time to stop using that platform.

Yes, I've gotten a lot of value in the last few years from Twutter, but not enough to beg to be in their good graces. I've had several people who I interact with a lot tell me they never see any of my tweets on their timeline anyway. So maybe I overestimated Twutter's value all along.

(Just for laughs, you should share this on Twutter!)

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Do those who seek power over others enjoy it?

Is the pandemic response a way to increase authoritarianism?

Yes.

Intentional or not, this has been the result.

No, there was no secret meeting where this plan was hashed out. Political government is authoritarian. Those involved don't have to discuss it anymore than fish have to discuss how gills work. It is just the nature of the thing. Leave them alone and they will become increasingly authoritarian over time. And if pathetic cowards actually encourage them to be more authoritarian, they'll go at it faster and harder. They like it and if no one stops them...

You want to know who gained power? Well, the New Mexico governor, for one. But she wasn't the only one-- almost everyone at every level of political government gained power from the Covid reaction. Do people like power? Are they happy to gain it and unhappy to lose it? Do you understand what motivates people?

What power did the New Mexico governor, as one example, gain? The power to control how and if business owners are "allowed" to run their business-- beyond the illegitimate controls they agreed to by getting a business "license". She also gained the power to make individuals wear face masks (through threats of state violence) and to get a "vaccine"... among other powers she didn't have before. Did this benefit her, personally? She must believe power benefits her. If not, why did she seek political office-- power over others-- in the first place?

People look really dumb when they argue against stuff like this just because they like government as a general principle (as long as it's doing what they want).

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Libertarianism works in real world

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 18, 2021)

When you take a libertarian and whittle away everything nonessential-- all the philosophy and politics-- what is left is the understanding that no one has the right to use violence against those who aren't harming someone else, and no one has the right to violate the property rights of others.

This simple idea is often phrased as "no one has the right to initiate force". Another name for the initiation of force is "aggression", so the definition of a libertarian is anyone who rejects aggression.

Even most children understand this concept. It's why they say "He started it!" rather than admitting they threw the first punch. Children instinctively know libertarianism is the right way to live among others, even though they often fail to follow it very well. Come to think of it, the same could be said for most adults.

Property rights violations are sometimes counted as aggression but are more commonly called theft (including fraud, taxation, and fines), trespassing, or vandalism. Either way, they are still wrong.

What's wrong with aggression?

Aggression is offensive force. You have the human right to use force-- violence-- as long as you use it in defense of yourself or someone else. Violence used in defense is not aggression. Every living thing on Earth has the natural right to violently defend itself. Legislation can't overrule this right, nor can it legitimately forbid or control the tools of defense, be they claws, horns, fangs, knives, or guns.

Most people have been fooled into accepting aggression and property violations when committed by those who claim it's their job. These are the people among us who live by "the political means" where one person wins at the expense of another, rather than by "the economic means" where everyone comes out ahead and feels they got the better end of every deal.

If you use force against someone for not wearing a seat belt or for offending you with their words, you have used aggression. You've done something no one has the right to do. I consider those who do this to be the bad guys, no matter what justifications they use.

Libertarianism works in the real world, every day, without being forced on anyone. The alternative only works when most people have been tricked into believing aggression and theft are the only way to get things done. For a growing number of people, the trick isn't working anymore.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Foot in mouth, without realizing it

Sometimes government-supremacists put their foot in their mouth; they make a point that works against them without realizing what they've done.

I saw someone point out-- with regard to mask/"vaccine" mandates-- that good ideas don't require force.

So a statist piped up that "The Republic is held together by force".

Yeah, that didn't quite make the point he believed it did. It seems to make a great argument against "The Republic"-- beyond all those I've heard in the past.

In the same way, I saw someone pointing out that there is no database for long-term vaccine problems, as justification for not letting the lack of such data for all the Covid "vaccines" keep you from getting the jab. But, that's not exactly what I took away from that. It got within spitting distance of turning me into a full-fledged anti-vaxxer. No, it didn't quite get me there, but a few more brilliant points like that, and it might happen.

It makes me wonder why government-supremacists are so clueless about what they are saying. So often, if they pondered the words they utter, they'd see that they've dismantled their own position.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Who woulda thought?

It's odd. People I never expected to hear saying smart things have been saying smart things. 

Some famous girl, Nicki Minaj (a rapper, I've heard) has been quoted as saying people should watch what substances they put into their bodies. She believes a friend of her cousin had a bad reaction to the "vaccine". Whether that really happened or not, she would still be 100% correct.

Then Sarah Silverman (I've seen her before but I can't remember where) says the US needs to break up because this "isn't working". Some of us have been pointing this out for years-- practically forever. Yes, it's long past time. The "Civil War" [sic] should have ended that way. "The Union" isn't. It has become a forced marriage between people with not enough in common. Breaking up would be the healthiest alternative. It's dumb to stay together just because you're scared that someone else might come along and force you into another coerced "marriage".

It just goes to show you never know who's going to say something smart (or who's going to say something stupid).

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

You can't fix what shouldn't exist

A while back I watched an informal interview with Elon Musk as he walked around Starbase, Texas. One thing he said really struck me.

He has said many times that the best part is no part, and the best process is no process. 

In this interview, he described wasting time trying to optimize and improve something that really just needs to be eliminated. The brilliant insight is to realize this fact and to stop trying to fix it. Just ditch it!

This not only applies to landing legs on Starship, but to police, elections, and the state.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

New Mexico mask mandate update #3

I've made some observations about New Mexico's newer mask mandates, and it's not going the way the governor wants. Not in this region, anyway.

Links to previous observations here and here.

Today my daughter wanted ("needed") to go to a hobby/craft store. I could either drive 90 miles one-way to visit one in a big city in Texas, or drive about 12 miles one-way to the local one in NM. I chose NM.

Again, there was a state-mandated sign on the door, but this time at least 50% of the customers were unmasked. I didn't try any other stores to see if the percentage held there, too. But, it appears as though compliance is actually fading with time. At least in this more Texas-like part of New Mexico.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

How can you tell that the suspect is either a cop, a politician, or a politically connected person?

Clovis police announced Aug. 31 they had identified the vehicle and the driver in the hit and run, but the police report on the incident has not been made public. (link)

That's how.

A ban on mask mandates is still a ban. Just like a ban on slavery is a ban. Neither would be necessary without government creating the conditions that allow both to become a problem.

Doctors vs. veterinarians

Yesterday I had a routine medical checkup. The doctor wasted the majority of his time in the room trying to talk me into the Covid "vaccine". 

Thinking back on this later I had a realization: Covid-- or at least the social turmoil surrounding it-- destroyed my trust in doctors. 

But at the same time, recent events bolstered my trust in veterinarians.

There is a huge difference in how the vet spoke to me and how the doctor did. 

The vet gave me what she believed were the facts to the best of her knowledge, told me the options, and accepted my decision. I didn't feel judged.

The doctor told me anecdotes with giant obvious (to me) holes in them, tried to scare me, assumed I get medical advice from F***book, told me the experts say it's a good idea, and didn't want to take "no" for an answer. I felt I was being manipulated and judged when I didn't succumb.

One gave me respect and the other treated me like a stubborn, stupid child.

This is how it felt anyway. 

Was this the real situation, or just my perception? Is it just a difference in their personalities? Or, is it understandable that a doctor "cares" more because his patients are human so he's going to try harder to convince you of what he believes is the right course? Maybe. I know I have biases that will color everything.

I come away from the vet feeling good about the interaction, even if she says something I don't want to hear. I came away from the doctor appointment feeling terrible about life and about myself.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #8 (and something about puppies)

His good side, to save you the shock

Whiskers is home. He looks kind of bad-- mostly because they shaved that side of his face. I knew they'd probably need to do so.

But he's in good spirits and playful-- if a little clumsy. He seems very happy to be home with his humans. He hasn't ever (since I've known him) been able to see out of his right eye anyway, so not having it isn't going to be an issue.

They neutered him (I told them they could, if they thought it was advisable) at the same time they took out his eye, but I forgot to ask about the hernia, so they didn't fix that yet. That means there's still one more surgery in his future. Still, he's getting there!

Thank you for all your support as I try to do my best for this little guy!

  
  >> If you don't mind, share his GoFundMe.

All the parts of his story, here: Original, first update, second update, third update, fourth update, fifth update, sixth update, seventh update.

              PS: I've actually rescued more puppies over the years than kittens, even though I prefer cats. Shocking, I know! 

I once raised an entire litter of boxers after the mother died a couple of days after they were born. That was interesting. Those guys were fat, destructive, and numerous. OK, so there were only 5 of them, but it seemed like a lot more sometimes. But they were all healthy, so that was easy. I raised them until they were weaned and gave them back to the people their mom had belonged to. They kept one of the pups; the one they had named "Number Five".

I also once raised a puppy of indeterminate breed that was brought into the pet store I worked in. It was a newborn with a still wet umbilical cord that was already the size of a half-grown guinea pig. The person said they watched a dog cross their yard, squat and have a puppy, and keep going. So they picked it up and wanted to know how to raise it, but then decided it was easier to leave it with the pushover at the pet store. That one became a big dog with a HUGE appetite-- I found a home for him after he was weaned (too long after, I think), but they said he ran away the very next day and they never saw him again. I regret that mistake. 

Anyway, just in case you thought I only rescue kittens...

A police officer is someone who commits the unethical act of legislation enforcement, just like a rapist is someone who commits the unethical act of rape. Opposing those who commit unethical acts isn't being collectivist and is in no way similar to racism.

What it is vs. what people believe it is

Exhibit A

Whether or not what social media corporations are doing these days to those they disagree with counts in your book as "censorship", most of those affected negatively by it feel that it is. And they are reacting to what they feel-- as humans usually do.

Whether or not you believe social media corporations and other corporations are "private companies" or "private property", a growing number of people no longer see them that way. And people are reacting to what they see, not how others define things.

So, whether people are right or wrong, they are going to go with the assumption that they are right. They will act on this assumption. Even if you believe they are wrong, and even if you are 100% correct, you'd better get ready anyway. Your definitions (or mine) aren't going to persuade them out of what they see and feel.

Interesting times.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #7

Whiskers went to the vet this afternoon. As expected, the eye has to go. He is going in first thing tomorrow to have the offending eye removed. 

My daughter is kind of upset about this, but understands it's what he needs. I'm kind of the same way.

I'll post another update sometime after the surgery.

   >> If you don't mind, share his GoFundMe.

All the parts of his story, here: Original, first update, second update, third update, fourth update, fifth update, sixth update.

I'm not afraid of the current political/economic/social situation, but I definitely feel a looming sense of unease.

Ending the "worker shortage"

Do you want to solve the "worker shortage" problem? Then stop making it unnecessarily difficult to work for you.

No, I'm not saying you shouldn't expect people to do the work you hired them to do, I'm saying you shouldn't try to control them beyond what is necessary to do the work.

That means no sexual molestation/urine fetish called "drug testing". If someone is at work and you think they seem impaired or unable to do the job-- for whatever reason-- fire them. You have the right to do that, but to demand a sample of their fluids to see what they might have done when they weren't working for you is an indication that you don't respect their boundaries. You're a terrible boss.

Along the same lines: Don't demand they get vaccinated against a new cold virus. Send them home or fire them if they get sick. Firing them would demonstrate to everyone what a jerk you are, but you have that right.

If the person doesn't clean themselves and is making people sick by how they look or smell, that affects job performance.  If they are rude to others and drive away business or make their cow-orkers miserable, that matters. If they are so incompetent that they endanger life and limb-- even if they aren't on drugs-- that person needs to go away. Some things matter, but a lot of what makes it hard to find good employees doesn't.

It's the same as the old silliness of (mainly) the past of not hiring a person based on the color they dyed their hair, the length of their hair, their visible tattoos, or anything else that's irrelevant to the job. If you want to have trouble finding good employees, then continue down that path. But, if not, the solution is in your hands.

The last "normal job" I held was burdened by bad management. They treated employees badly and took advantage of them, and fired hard workers for silly reasons, and then moaned that everyone in the area was too lazy to work. (Even though they had hired and rehired everyone around, even after firing them or driving them away-- the available jobs were as limited as the available bodies to fill those jobs.) When I pointed out that the evidence didn't support their claim, that there was an obvious problem they weren't acknowledging, they shut up about it. I'm sure their opinion didn't change, though.

This doesn't mean everyone is suited to hire. If the person preaches "seize the means of production", giving them the job is not a smart hiring decision. Such a philosophy is relevant-- it's a warning sign. I would say there are other signs that warn that the person will likely be more trouble than they could possibly be worth-- there are warning signs all over the place, such as social media bios. Believing in "microaggressions" and other w0ke nonsense being a big one. You are free to take the chance, though.

The deal-breaker for me, as a potential employee, is selling out your employees to government, on any basis. Yes, I know, government bribes you to do so, and threatens to punish you if the bribes don't work. Still, you really don't have the right to do that, "private business" or not.

The "worker shortage" could be ended overnight, but you'd have to be courageous enough to do the right thing. Fewer and fewer are that brave anymore.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Kitten update #6

Trying to get acquainted with The Chinch

Whiskers is doing good... except for that right eye. 

A week and a half ago it looked like it was going to heal up just fine, then it suddenly got worse again. Possibly even worse than it had been since that first couple of weeks. Yes, I'm discouraged.

Last Monday he went to the vet because of his eye, and because he'd had some blood in his stool over the weekend. She was a little surprised that his eye had gotten so bad again, and said (again) that it may have to be removed. I had been so happy when it seemed like that was to be avoided.

A dose of wormer seems to have cleared up the bloody stool problem.

Tomorrow he goes back to the vet to see what they say now. I'm hoping it's not too bad, but I don't want him suffering from that bad eye longer than necessary. If it needs to come out, it needs to come out.

Thanks for putting up with these kitten updates. He's important to me.

>> If you don't mind, share his GFM.

All the parts of his story, here: Original, first update, second update, third update, fourth update, fifth update.

Government not a moral guide

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 11, 2021)

As rational thinkers since at least the time of François-Marie Arouet, better known as Voltaire, have pointed out, it's dangerous to be right when those with power are wrong. This is because it's always dangerous to disagree with anyone who suffers from the delusion that they have the right-- or some imaginary political authority-- to force you to act as they believe you must. Especially when they reserve the power to punish those who disagree.

Just look what happened to the organizers, members, and supporters of The White Rose resistance group in Nazi Germany. They acted with no guarantee their sacrifice would make a difference. Some of them died gruesome deaths at the hands of government employees, while others were cruelly imprisoned. The only "wrong" they committed was being right and exposing the wrongness of the National Socialist government. They were heroes who deserve to be remembered.

We are quickly sliding into an era in American history where you may face similar choices; where this awareness influences your every decision. Will you choose to disagree with those who have the power to hurt you for thinking for yourself, or will you cave in and go along?

Whether government is issuing mask mandates and vaccine passports, criminalizing certain guns or gun parts, or even looking for excuses to regulate a plant the public has already told them to leave alone, government is consistently on the wrong side of a great many issues.

Those who are right on any of these topics are walking on dangerous ground.

Of course, disagreeing with government doesn't automatically make you right, either. Government does generally frown upon most of us committing murder, after all. Murder is only ignored when looking the other way promotes government power, such as when government employees, acting in support of government power, kill someone who hasn't bought into the lie enthusiastically enough.

This is why the only measure that matters is whether an act violates the life, liberty, or property of another, not whether or not something is legal. The problem is, there can be legitimate disagreement on whether an act violates anyone. You make your choice and accept the consequences.

If you get your moral or ethical guidance from government, you're not a good person. If you mistake politicians for role models you're headed for disaster. If you comply or turn a blind eye to government wrongs, you are part of the problem.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com