Intelligence vs trainability

Intelligence is not the same thing as trainability. Trainability masquerades as intelligence, or is mistaken for intelligence. 

Both have their place.

"Getting good grades" is a sign of trainability.
Doing tricks to amaze or amuse the humans is trainability.

A minimal amount of intelligence is necessary to be trainable-- you can't train a sponge-- but people seem to be more impressed, in general, by trainability than by actual intelligence.

Those who submit to training are rewarded and praised. Those who outsmart the ones who want to train them are often not appreciated. Or even punished.

I'm usually much more impressed by intelligence than by trainability. Even though I'd appreciate it if I were able to train my cats a little more.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Large scale archation

I don't support archators. Not if those archators are a State, not if they are a political group that acts like a State, not if they are lone archators. All of those archators are bad guys. All of them.

It doesn't matter if those archators call themselves "Hamas", "Israel", or anything else.

If the archation harms the innocent-- on any "side"-- those who committed the acts of archation are the enemy of liberty and humanity (really, that's the same thing).

It doesn't change anything if the acts are in revenge for something someone else did in the past. No harm to the innocent. Period.

If a politician (or other archator) who is individually responsible for ongoing harm is taken out, that's great. That's always an ethical option. But harming people-- who were just going about their lives-- because of something politicians are doing? Unforgivable. Hold the politicians or the individual followers accountable, don't target anyone else.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Government no good for worst times

(FYI- This was blog post #7000, and September 3. 2023 also marked the 17th anniversary of this blog. 

Imagine that. 

My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 3, 2023)

When it’s important, when it's life and death, when it matters most— that’s precisely when you don’t need government involved. This is when you don’t need politicians and bureaucrats dictating a one-size-fits-all standard, backed with the threat of violence. This is when government power is most dangerous to society.

I'm not only talking about unusual or emergency situations. The same applies to ordinary everyday matters which are important for your health, safety, and general welfare.

Unfortunately, these are exactly the situations in which politicians and bureaucrats are most likely to demand you give them control. These are the times when it's easiest for them to convince gullible people to give them power and then go along with whatever they are told.

I believe the residents of Maui found this out the hard way. Will you learn from their tragic example without waiting to experience something similar for yourself?

Not only will the political parasites (who hope you think of them as leaders) take advantage of bad situations, they will magnify small problems and manufacture imaginary problems to this same end.

If you've been paying attention, especially for the past few years, you've probably noticed this happening

A few people are never inclined to obey authoritarians. They see political power realistically and don't fall for the cozy lies it tells.

Some people noticed the deceptive excuses the politicians and bureaucrats overused and abused to seize control, and they won't be fooled again.

Others clamor to bring back the feeling of Big Mommy Government making all the uncomfortable decisions for them; giving them the illusion they are being protected from every "owie" and unpleasant feeling. These people will sell you out in a heartbeat, right along with any liberty you have left. They are government's favorite people.

If you make your own decisions and things go badly, accept responsibility, learn, and move on. Try to do better the next time a crisis comes along.

If you blindly obey someone who imagines they have a political quality they call "authority" and things go wrong, remember to hold them fully accountable. And don't make the same mistake twice.

I saw someone say we are in the midst of the longest, saddest, most excruciating and unsatisfying "I told you so" in the history of the world. Let's make sure to at least learn something useful from it. Such as this: if it's important, it's too important for government to touch.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

Don't let politics make you evil

Politics makes people stupid. Stupid enough to support actual evil. Sometimes, stupid enough to commit evil. In such cases, politics not only makes people stupid, it makes people evil.

If you believe I'm exaggerating, take a minute to look around. Look at politicians and those who support them. Look at the rules and policies being imposed and enforced. Look at how politics is used as an excuse to target and harass people with different preferences-- including throwing them in prison when they are on the side with less power.

If you don't see politics causing stupidity leading to evil you're not looking close enough. 

It's not a matter of different opinions leading to different paths taken. You can take a different path without forcing others along your path at bayonet point.

That would be the "different opinion" path. What's happening in the world around us isn't that path-- it's the path of coercion. The path paved with politics, making followers stupid and causing them to support and commit evil in support of their team.

I've never seen any individual made better by politics, but the examples of those made worse are endless.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Preps and falling down on the job

Prepping never takes a break, but sometimes I let things slide longer than I should. Firewood being this year's pressing issue.

No, I don't heat the house with wood, but I like to have a supply just in case. Winter can be unpredictable. Plus, the cats (and I) really enjoy a fire now and then.

I did sweep the chimney a few weeks ago so that part is ready.

Stocking up on firewood isn't as fun as keeping my ammunition stockpile up to date (which reminds me...), but it has a bigger chance of being essential to my immediate survival. 

Unfortunately, this isn't an area where you can just run into the woods and cut trees-- there are no woods, and nearly every tree in the region was intentionally planted by someone for some reason. If you see a grove of trees, there is either a house in the middle of them or there used to be. People would get twitchy about someone harvesting firewood from those trees, plus, they are invariably the species of tree I'm not willing to work too hard for.

I do often get scrap firewood that comes from people cutting down trees that are unwanted or dead. Usually dead. That's normally Siberian elm; historically the most often planted tree around here. I dislike Siberian elm. It stinks when it burns, is difficult to split, and has sharp spikes under the bark that rip my hands open when I handle it. But it's cheap and sometimes free. This year I didn't manage to get any yet. Mostly because I was holding out hope for something better.

There are people around who sell piñon firewood they import from the mountains. I have bought some in the past and I got some as a birthday gift once. It sure smells wonderful.

I still have a little firewood left over from last year, but I feel I let my preps slide more than I like, so finding or buying firewood in the next month or so will be a priority. More of a priority than replacing the ammo I shot up last weekend.

Do you ever discover you have let some aspect of your preps slide more than you realized? It's hard to keep up with everything, but that's exactly what is needed.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Plotting to Control is planning to fail

On a recent Scott Adams livestream he reacted to someone suggesting it would be smart to legalize drugs. In response, he gave the least credible justification for prohibition I've ever heard, but it's typical.

He immediately pivoted away from actually ending the stupid and evil War on Politically Incorrect Drugs to some system whereby government gives "free" regulated drugs to people. No one had suggested that.

As usual, he had changed the subject away from the actual argument to make a point he preferred to focus on. It's a typical government supremacist response to getting government out of any facet of life. Also known as a "straw man".

He said this version of "legalization" won't work because addicts always want "more". That's not even part of the conversation, nor should it be. It's only something that a person who still assumes government Control of the supply (and the addicts) would bring up.

Letting a government employee Control and ration something isn't the same as getting government out of the market for that thing. It's the opposite. You can't say "legalization" will fail by using the opposite as evidence unless you are being dishonest.

He said the rationed, free handout drugs which he pretended were part of the argument wouldn't be enough, so addicts would still go buy "illegal" drugs, too. Not if there's no such thing as "illegal" drugs, they won't. How hard is this to understand? That's what ending prohibition means!

He did this all under the pretense that he understands people, addicts in particular. It doesn't look as though he does. It just looks like he's grasping to justify government maintaining Control so that any solution is forbidden.

Would addicts die? Yes. They already do. Would more die than under the current system? I don't know and neither does anyone else. But, it's a fundamental human right to destroy yourself. It's tragic, and I would rather people didn't, but they will, and "laws" don't prevent it from happening. 

In fact, enforcing the prohibition "laws" destroys many lives that would have otherwise not been destroyed. Much of the harm from drug abuse and almost all of the harm from drug use comes not from the drugs but from the anti-drug rules and policies.

Regardless of anything else, responsibility doesn't go away just because you were on drugs. That's a completely separate issue, one that prohibition hasn't come close to solving.

You can't say liberty won't work by using examples where you keep someone in Control.  Liberty won't fail, but it isn't given a chance.

It's one of those things that makes me want to scream and give up on brainwashed people like this.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Education matters

Here's an education question for all my readers. 

First, a little context. I think one good quality I possess is the ability to adapt. When I think "there's got to be a better way" I don't mind changing things around to try to find that better way. I see it as a survival skill, and it has served me well many times.

Well, I'm shifting gears on how I'm educating my daughter and I'd love some input. I'm hoping for good, well-thought-out answers.

What knowledge do you believe a young person should know when they leave high school and/or start living independently? What knowledge is essential in order to be prepared for life? Beyond the obvious.

I have my own thoughts on the matter, but I want to hear yours. I really want to hear yours, so don't hold back, even if you've never posted a comment before. Please, and thank you!

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

The Market

"The market" means voluntary trade without coercion. 

It is an example of spontaneous order through the action of independent individuals. An emergent property.

Government "laws" make a market impossible-- although you can still create a sort of quasi-market through the Black (or Gray) Market.

I don't usually say "free market" anymore because if it's not free, it's not the market.

.

How to fix* Congress

The best way to fix Congress is to disband it entirely and replace it with nothing-- which is the best way to fix all political institutions. I'm sure you have great ideas as to how this could be accomplished expeditiously.

However, if someone needs to be weaned off of being governed, I have a gentle suggestion as to how that could be done gradually. A simple two-step process. In fact, I would apply this to every political office in the world, but let's pretend I'm limiting this solution to Congress for the moment.

1- Don't hold elections anymore-- what you've got is what you've got. No cheating by holding a special election to elect young people before this takes effect, either.

2- Don't replace those who die off, get arrested, resign, or retire. Let attrition do its work.
Then each empty seat counts as an automatic "No" v*te on every bill that would increase or maintain government power, or a "Yea" on any bill that would disband, defund, or disempower any government agency or function (we can dream that those ever get proposed). 

That means, next time the budget comes up, every empty seat is counted as a v*te against approving the budget. Every empty seat counts as a v*te against every steaming lump of legislation that any legislator drops in front of Congress.

As soon as empty seats make up at least 50% of the seats, there would be no more point in even gathering the political criminals to go through the motions anymore. Then liberty could flourish.

Yes, shut it down.

    *Fix it like you'd fix a stray that you don't want breeding ever again.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Discrimination, because the "law" says it's OK

Back in June, I reported that my formerly favorite gun store didn't respect all rights equally. Well, the sickness has also spread to my formerly favorite gun range.

I spoke up at the gun store because I was alone. I held my tongue at the gun range Saturday because my son and his girlfriend had invited me to go shooting with them. But my son gave me a look that said he knew what I was thinking as soon as we pulled up to the office.

Of course, a gun range has an interest in saying "Don't come here to shoot if you are intoxicated". But why single out Cannabis? Probably because it's legal just over the state line. I see no signage mentioning any other medicine or intoxicant, any of which would be just as much of an issue-- some more so. That's why it doesn't strike me as a safety measure as much as discrimination.

You have every right to discriminate against anyone for any reason-- or no reason at all. But, if you discriminate against people for things they have no control over (their "race", for example) or for doing things they have a natural human right to do (ingest things, carry weapons, worship, etc.) then I'm going to think poorly of you. I may shun you.

I don't care that the gun store used the excuse "But marijuana is illegal" when I brought it up to them. Government illegitimately makes all sorts of things "illegal". Look at all the anti-weapon rules. That has no bearing on rights.

I respect those who respect rights without any "buts". I lose respect for those who don't respect or acknowledge rights they don't like. Even if the State gives them permission. That is an anti-liberty position.

The signs at the gun range and gun store look exactly like a "Whites Only" sign to me. It screams that the person displaying it is a bigot. Someone discriminating in the nastiest ways they can "legally" get away with. What else would they do if the "law" told them they could?

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

State ruling infringes on rights

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 27, 2023)

Any time a court sides with a government employee, giving government more power over your life, liberty dies a little. There isn't much liberty to spare; the last remnants are circling the drain, washed down with public apathy. Or approval.

Such is the case with the recent Supreme Court of New Mexico ruling allowing a police officer to question a vehicle passenger-- a suspected thief. You may approve of the officer's actions, but it isn't good for your future rights.

In cases like this, the details don't matter. The court standing against individual rights by twisting the Bill of Rights to suit government preferences is the important part.

There is no one I despise more than a thief. If I let my feelings overrule my brain, that would be the end of the discussion. But liberty is more important than anyone's feelings. You've got to stand up for liberty even when your feelings would rather not.

As H.L. Mencken pointed out, “The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”

This not only needs to be stopped, it needs to be reversed.

Governments have no rights. Government employees have no rights beyond those every individual has. What they have, illegitimately, is power over you.

Any time there's a question of whether government power trumps your rights, the court's responsibility is to side with your rights. When they side with government power they have failed in their duty.

It's a clear conflict of interest to allow a branch of government to decide how much power government is allowed to have. The Bill of Rights was supposed to prevent this, but it doesn't work when the courts side with their government coworkers; interpreting the Constitution in whichever way helps their side most. This violates the spirit of the document. It's a good idea to remember that rights don't come from documents, but from your very existence as a human being. Nothing more is needed.

The state's employees can never be permitted to start-- or continue-- believing they have the right to rule over you. It's simply not their place to do so. Their only legitimate job is to protect your rights. This ruling does the opposite.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

My personal evolution

When I was a kid I was only interested in freedom (maybe along with some feelings of "safety"). As I grew I began to grudgingly accept some responsibility too.

When I became aware of the world outside my personal sphere, it didn't bother me that government existed. It seemed natural-- no one else seemed to think it was anything grotesque. Mainly because I gave it no thought at all.

During some of my pre-teen years, my dad was a lobbyist who would go to the Texas capitol as part of his job. He took me with him to learn about government. I spent time wandering the building and grounds (yes, on my own) and sitting in a little snack shop in the building. I met politicians, sat in their chairs, shook their hands, and had my picture taken with them. (Someday I ought to look for those pictures-- I have them around here somewhere.) One of those politicians later went to prison for some corruption thing.

Anyway...

I grew up mostly "conservative" (like my parents) but with a few non-standard views. I was always an environmentalist and started out believing government should (and could) "protect the environment". The inconvenient reality that most "environmental protection" had the opposite effect didn't go unnoticed, however. The cracks were showing.

For years I believed government should prohibit drugs and punish drug abusers. The more I learned from history, the shakier that position became. Everything like that I actually gave any thought to disproved the necessity of government. The cracks were growing.

Even as a young adult, I thought that maybe government had a point; that guns were just too dangerous and were more bad than good. Then, learning history and getting deeper into the claims and counterclaims destroyed that delusion for good. The cracks and splits started making chunks fall off.

Even as late as around 20 years ago (and still slightly when this blog began), I thought the US Constitution was great and that the main trouble with the US FedGov was that it ignored the Constitution too much. As I discovered the nature of rights I began to realize that the Constitution enshrined the violation of rights in favor of government power. Personally, I was done with it at that point.

I still like to use constitutional arguments against people who claim to love the Constitution while ignoring the parts they don't like (or hallucinating parts they want to be there, like "immigration" stuff). It's kind of funny. And I'll use it to demonstrate just how criminal the US FedGov has become-- it's even criminal by its own measure since it won't live within the limits laid out for it at its founding.

As part of this personal evolution, I stopped focusing on freedom and switched to liberty; freedom tempered with responsibility. I stopped accepting excuses for why "we" have to have political government. The whole thing shattered into tiny bits.

The main point is, that the older I get, the more anarchist I become. I don't buy any of the arguments in favor of governing others anymore. Even though, because of my history, I understand where those arguments come from. 

If others are determined to cling to government, that's their business as long as they don't try to impose it on me. There's the rub-- the reason for any conflict. It's not on my shoulders. I'm fine with responsibility, but I won't take responsibility for the ethical failings of others. And supporting political government imposing itself on others is a major ethical failing-- none is bigger.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

A good start

Senator Dianne Feinstein is finally dead.

I'm told I shouldn't be relieved over an evil person's death.
Well, I can't be sad about it.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Choose violence with discretion

Violence.

It's popular to say you're against it.

I take the opposite side. I am enthusiastically pro-violence when that violence is defensive. This stand got me perma-banned on TwiXXer. I wasn't wrong.

I'm against offensive violence; the initiation of violence (aggression).

Violence is just the use of physical force. Boxing is violent, but as it is mutually consensual I'm not going to stop anyone from pursuing that sport (as much as I personally dislike it). Much of the play I engaged in as a kid was violent. Sometimes I got hurt. But as long as no one was initiating force no one was in the wrong. Sometimes kids need to roughhouse. They "crave violence" and that can be channeled in healthy directions.

I know there are those who insist on simply calling aggression "violence" and say if it's defensive it's not violence. 

In that case, as long as they oppose "violence" under their definition, I'm on the same side-- we simply disagree over definitions and that's fine with me. I know how they define it (and they can know how I define it) and there shouldn't be any real conflict.

Sometimes, like it or not, it takes a violent response to stop a bad guy or to save people from a thug. It's not a choice I want to make, but if a bad guy chooses that path, I'll play.

Pacifists don't like that and would rather die and see other innocents die than use violence in defense. That's their choice, and while I think it can be pathetic to live that way, as long as they don't try to stop me (and how would they, considering their belief?) they can be pacifistic to the end.

But not me.

Violence is not unethical. By itself, it is neither good nor bad. It is ethically neutral. It's like a rock sitting in a creek. It is a tool with the potential to be used for good or bad.

Aggression is unethical. It is the act of using that rock to crack someone's head so you can steal their food. Even if you don't use the rock yourself, but hire crooks and thugs (government) to crack the heads and steal food on your behalf.

Shooting the aggressor who is making a credible threat to hit you with the rock so he can further violate your life, liberty, or property is completely ethical. It is good. Even though his worthless relatives will inevitably say what a "good boy" he was before you shot him "for no reason".

If you choose aggression, I hope someone will use violence and stop you. I just hope it doesn't have to be me, but that's not up to me, is it?

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Shut it down

It’s extreme to allow government to involve itself in every aspect of our lives, not to shut down such government.

Shut it down for real. Totally. Forever.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

The NRA-- the anti-gun bigots' boogieman

You may have noticed (or not) that I tag most posts about guns with "NRA".

I don't do that because I think the NRA understands guns, rights, or liberty, but to poke fun at them for being such failures, for so many decades, where actual rights are concerned. 

Yes, they still have their uses. They are good for making anti-gun bigots have a choking fit. Anti-gun bigots are quick to attack "The NRA" when gun owner rights get some respect, even though the NRA rarely has anything to do with it.

The NRA is weak on rights and liberty-- preferring to fawn over cops and the military and Republicans. Eww. I don't know if they are still good at training/safety-- their political stupidity made me write them off years ago. 

I'm a (disgruntled) Life Member who joined back in the (governor) Bill Clinton years! But after several form letter responses over the years-- "responses" that had nothing to do with the concerns I was voicing to them-- I gave up. They are going to politick and keep licking those boots for a pat on the head and a seat at the kids' table rather than take a principled stand on the absolute HUMAN right to own and to carry weapons without ever asking Master's permission. They kinda make me sick.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

How do you see the world?

Whatever framework you get stuck in your head will control how you interpret everything going on around you. 

People who get government stuck in their heads are statists. The idea of government colors everything they experience. To them, it looks like the answer to every problem.

I don't have government stuck in my head.

I have liberty stuck in my head. I think every real problem can be addressed by respecting liberty more completely, not by violating it. 

If liberty is wrong I’m going to be wrong about everything. 

If government is wrong, statists will be wrong about everything. 

I think 5000+ years of human history clearly demonstrates which of us is on shaky ground. But I'm biased.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Biden's new Ministry of Gun Lies

National Embarrassment Biden has established a Ministry of Gun Lies, to be run by Spare National Embarrassment (SNE) Harris.

Really it's just more of the same. Lies, bigotry, and slavery-- things government does "better" (or at least more of) than any other criminal gang.

You are their enemy, and they don't want you armed. They'll do whatever they can to make it happen; to disarm you. To enslave you like people in most other "civilized" [sic] countries are enslaved-- so deeply that they will fight you for suggesting they are enslaved. They don't want Master called on the carpet.

"Gun violence" is a lie. It always has been, and everyone who uses the phrase unironically without realizing it's a lie is stupid. They've been zombified by politics. Politics makes people stupid.

There is archation and there is everything else. If archation occurs, the tool is utterly irrelevant. It's stupid to focus on the tool when the problem is the people committing archation. 

But if they want to focus on the tools... government is a tool which kills many times more innocent people than guns. Government aggression (initiated violence) is a much bigger threat than guns could ever be. If something needs to be controlled to keep everyone safe, it's not guns. 

So when SNE Harris says we have a right to live "free from violence", we should interpret that as her resignation. Government is initiated violence-- every time, in every way. We do have the right to live free of it. So when will they put their money where their mouth is and disband the whole nasty monstrosity? Don't hold your breath; they are liars.

Is there a "right to be safe"? Well, no. Of course not. Safety is an illusion. 

Violating others because you feel unsafe is evil. Harris is openly promoting evil. Again.

You have the right to defend yourself from anyone initiating violence, and this has the potential to make you safer, but safety itself isn't a right. Not "civil", not "human". Not when you choose to violate others to achieve (the illusion of) safety. I don't think violating others to feel safer makes you any safer. Bullies increase their own risk by being bullies, even if they don't know it. Anti-gun bigots are promoters of initiated violence and they are bullies. They believe they'll always get away with it.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.

Only you can provide your own safety

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 20, 2023)

If you depend on government-- or anyone else-- to save you from danger, you're risking your life unnecessarily.

The tragic wildfires on the Hawaiian island of Maui are awful beyond words. I hate when horrible things happen to people who are just going about their lives.

Unfortunately, the fires were probably far more deadly than they would have otherwise been because too many people have been conditioned to be dependent on someone else to tell them when they are in danger and what to do about it.

When dependency overrides your self-preservation instinct it's not helpful.

I never want to see people encouraged to become dependent on someone else. "Let the professionals handle it" is a good way to create a helpless population. It may be good for government, but it isn't good for the community.

It's so easy to be seduced into letting someone else take responsibility for your safety. Especially since taking responsibility for yourself can attract unwanted attention and ridicule. Or even get you into legal trouble. The fear of being laughed at for evacuating or taking other defensive actions before others see any danger looming is enough to make many people wait too long to escape.

You have the senses of sight, smell, and hearing to help warn you of danger. Other people can also help you become aware of a threat they saw coming but you didn't notice yet. Use every advantage you can get.

But warning systems can fail. Other people can be wrong or have other priorities. You must stay aware for your own sake. Part of awareness is realizing no one else is as responsible for your safety as you are.

This applies whether the danger is crime, natural disasters, disease, or tyrannical government. Don't wait until everyone else recognizes the danger, or until someone "official" tells you it's time to act.

I want to help keep others safe when possible. If I see someone in danger I'll step in if I can. The problem is, I can't be everywhere. You are the only person who's always there when danger threatens you. No matter how pure someone else's intentions might be, they are not suited for the job of protecting you. It is up to you, and always has been.

Watch out for yourself, take action when you need to, and do your best to help others along the way.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

The spider web

Government has a benefit, at least if you are a government supremacist. One policy will create multiple problems that statists can use to justify more government and more policies which create more problems leading to more policies etc. ad infinitum, making an eternal positive feedback loop.

Because it's a web of connections, every part links to multiple other parts.

Just to give you an idea of how this works—  

Prohibition creates crime and huge profits for cartels, which empowers (and employs) legislation enforcers, and creates incentives to get drugs to customers living under prohibition which lets government supremacists claim justification for more "border" control in the name of fighting crime which is created by prohibition. Who benefits from prohibition? Not you or me.

Need more?

Handouts create dependency which creates a bigger demand for handouts. Handouts create incentives for people from other lands to want to come here, which makes people want unconstitutional "secure borders" to prevent people from coming here, which is exactly what "coyotes" need for their business model, and since prohibition has artificially inflated the price of drugs, they do a little lucrative drug smuggling too.

Still not convinced?

Anti-gun rules cause crime which causes dishonest or stupid people to scream for more anti-gun rules, which will cause more crime, etc. We already know the solution to crime: defense of life, liberty, and property. Government doesn't want crime solved because this wouldn't benefit them.

And even all those "different" topics are connected in various ways. More and more examples could be shown, all leading to the same place.

Government causes problems that government supremacists insist can only be solved by more government, which will only create more problems, and the cycle spins out of control with society and liberty sacrificed on the altar to The State.

Don't be part of the problem; be part of the real solution.

-

This blog is my job. You get to decide if I get paid. 

Please consider it.

PayPal -- Venmo -- GiveSendGo

Thank you.