New prez won't change politics as usual

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 26, 2025)

Are you tired of overwrought political drama? Can we stop hyperventilating over the political hysteria of the past and get on with real life again? I hope so, but I've seen an awful lot of panic on social media over the past few days. Some people are coming unhinged and could become dangerous. If you think the world will end-- or has been saved-- because there's a different president, you put too much faith in politicians.

Now that there's a new (or perhaps "recycled" is a better word) president, how are you feeling? Optimistic? Doomed? Wondering "What's a president?"

I'm glad Biden is gone, but now the work to point out the bad things President Trump will do begins. Again.

The only promise Trump made that I cared about was his promise to free political prisoner Ross Ulbricht on "day one". He technically broke the promise but got around to it the second day. Better late than never. Politicians never care about their promises as much as we care about them being kept to the letter.

Whatever else Trump does, I'm grateful he followed through with this one.

As for the rest, I expect politics as usual when it comes to liberty. Politics is easy; liberty is hard for politicians. It goes against their instincts and makes the other government functionaries angry. They'll look for any excuse to avoid respecting liberty. It's why they prefer to use the watered-down word, "freedom".

Some of the things conservatives want from Trump would be a good change for liberty. Others are as disastrous as the things the Biden administration was doing, just in different directions. Authoritarianism of any flavor is always the wrong way to go.

Maybe I'm jaded. Maybe there will be a positive change. I would love to be pleasantly surprised. Whatever happens, we aren't out of the woods. As long as there's a political government designed to violate your liberty, as they all are, and politicians willing to be the ones committing the crime of governing others, there will be work to do.

Protecting liberty-- your freedom to do everything you have a right to do because it violates no one else-- is a never-ending task. It's one no politician is capable of doing. Or willing to do. Defending liberty is something only you and I can do. I intend to do my part; I'm counting on you to do yours.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate your support.

What is praiseworthy?

Your “race” is not something to be praised.
Your sex is not something to be praised.

These things are beyond your control, and none is better than any other. Praising (or rewarding) anyone for something like that is dumb.

Also, what you do with your genitalia is not something to be praised, as long as you aren't violating anyone else with what you do.

This brings up what is worthy of praise-- not violating the rights of others. When you don't stand in the way of their liberty. Regardless of the excuse you use, including if you use "race" or sex as your justification. This is usually better than "helping" them.

You can still speak out when you think (or know) they are doing something that will result in them hurting themselves. You can tell them, ridicule them, or beg them. Those things are within your rights, even if they don't like it. You simply have no right to initiate force to stop them. "Force" includes legislation; the threat to kill them with government.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Thank you to those who ignored the rules

Back when I first began carrying a gun, it wasn’t “legal”, but I had no clue that it wasn’t. I didn’t think to check or ask about that. My boss suggested I get a gun (if I didn’t have one) and start carrying at work. My co-workers all carried. Not one person even brought up government rules.

I’m glad for that.

If I had thought about “legality” I might have hesitated. I might have acted guilty.

As it was, I understood that “concealed” meant "don’t talk about it" as much as it meant don’t flash it to people. So I didn’t. It just became a part of getting dressed and starting my day.

Now the rules have changed, but the ethics of it haven’t. I’ll be forever grateful to the people who encouraged me to begin carrying but didn’t take political criminals’ opinions into account.

It’s how I always try to approach liberty. As I say, “Assume liberty”, don’t assume you’re government property.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Is there gold in them there vaults?

Is there gold in Fort Knox? If so, is it more than a plating of gold over tungsten bars?

My assumption, for decades, has been that either there's no gold there or any gold within is whatever amount it takes to fool anyone who walks through and looks.

I would have to take a random sample bar, test its weight to volume against real gold, cut it in half to see what's in the middle, and then do the same for other random bars before I would be convinced that there may be actual gold bars in Fort Knox.

Or maybe it holds gold-foil-wrapped chocolate bars.

I would probably never be fully convinced it holds as much gold as the feral government claims. I don't trust government, or anyone acting on behalf of government, to tell the truth. Why would I?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Choosing which flavor of tyranny to live under

I've lived in a variety of places- places with widely different cultures. (Mostly rural, but still different.) I was okay in all of them, even though I was more comfortable in some than in others.

Personally, speaking only for myself, I am more comfortable in a "conservative" territory than in a "liberal" place. 

This doesn't mean I don't get angry at the stupid anti-liberty nonsense that is imposed in "conservative" places-- I do, and I speak out-- but those things don't generally affect me on a personal level. It's still enemy territory, but it's slightly more tolerable for me.

I don't use Cannabis, I'm not gay. I'm not an immigrant. Legislation that violates the rights of those affected is abhorrent to me, but it doesn't really impact my day-to-day life. I'm lucky in that way.

Oh, and I'm not looking for an abortion, either.

The one thing that makes the biggest difference in my own life is that my natural human right to own and to carry a weapon not be violated. Of course, it is violated everywhere to some extent, but not as badly here, now, as in other places I've lived at other times.

I loved Colorado, but I'm glad I no longer live there. The local sheriff was a flaming turd, but I never had a run-in with him. The bigger issue is that their current anti-gun rules are simply too oppressive. Even guns I bought when I lived there would probably be illegal to buy now. The place where I lived was pretty good about ignoring Denver's bad rules when I lived there, but from what I've heard, even they have drifted far left since. I don't think I could live there anymore, and I'd even be hesitant to visit now (even if I avoid the authoritarian slime pit of Denver). 

Pennsylvanians seemed to love guns, but they also were eager to lick jackboots and prove they were worthy to own them. And the local sheriff once threatened me with arrest if he ever caught me carrying a gun outside my door. Which was illegal for him to do, but I guess he was accustomed to getting away with it.

So I feel more free, and safer in exercising the rights I normally exercise, here than in other places I've lived. Especially now.

I realize that this is only my experience. Others who have different priorities would choose differently. That's okay. As people who value liberty in a world that hates and fears it, we have to figure out what works for us. At least, for now. I look forward to the day when we don't have to choose which flavor of tyranny we can tolerate.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Don't statists get tired of their cult's failures?

Statists suffer one disappointment after another, and yet they never seem to learn.

Wednesday, after access to my X account was restored ($%@#!!) I watched as statists drooled over the news that the Epstein List would be released.

My thought was that if it did happen, nothing of any consequence would be released. Can't endanger the politically powerful! Plus, anything important would have been erased by now.

Thursday, I watched statists be disappointed that the list wasn't actually released; with great fanfare, they were given a substitute that didn't have any new information. Many of them acted surprised at this development. A few pretended this was what they were waiting for, but they were widely ridiculed for this delusion.

But it's always the same. Statists get their hopes up because they believe professional liars, they have the rug pulled out from under them, then they believe the next set of lies.

It keeps them v*ting. 

This seems like it would be exhausting and difficult to keep believing after all this time.

But, maybe I've been wrong all along and in the time between writing this post and you reading it, the REAL list has been released, without redaction, and all the names are known. I'm not holding my breath, nor does it really matter. Archators are archators, and the flavor of their particular archation isn't terribly important to the calculations.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"Expanding" rights?

Rights can't be expanded. There is no such thing as "expanding rights".

It's an odd idea I hear from both "sides"; from those who hate natural human rights and want more violations to occur, and from those calling for rights violations to be curtailed and rights to be respected. Both say "... rights are being expanded" but this is complete nonsense.

Rights are rights. They can neither be added to or taken away. They can either be respected or violated.

If the feral government is, for example, forced to stop violating the right to own and to carry weapons, or to scale back the violations, "gun rights" are not being expanded; they are being violated a little less in some specific way. Nothing new is being created.

It's the same for any other right.

If a new "law" says your neighbor has the right to fight back and kill you if you try to kill him in his home, his property rights have not been expanded. It was always within his rights, whether government recognized it or not. 

If a new "law" says you have the right to kill someone because he got within 12" of your property line, your property rights haven't been expanded. A counterfeit rule has been invented that gives you "legal" protection for doing something you had no right to do.

Even if you wear a badge, and instead of stepping "too close" to your property, government said he was ingesting "illegal" substances or owned a weapon they claimed he wasn't allowed to own and sent you to rob and kidnap him.

Rights don't change with the times or the circumstances-- or with who we're referring to. They can't be expanded or abolished. Rights are immutable. Only the beliefs about them change, and those beliefs are often wrong.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Government not here to help anyone

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 19, 2025)

After watching the devastation of Hurricane Helene and now the Los Angeles wildfires, do you understand yet that government isn't there to help you? Do you understand it can't help, and generally makes things worse?

It doesn't take a disaster. Government won't save you from poverty, from health problems, from crime, or from competing governments. It isn't designed to help you; it is designed to hold, and increase, power. You are its annoying pet, or livestock to be sheared or butchered.

Taxes aren't inflicted to fund government. The Federal Reserve can dream up all the funny money government wants. Taxes, including inflation, are imposed to make sure you don't have money available for what you want and need. Taxes are designed to change your behavior and to keep you from being self-sufficient. This way you might come crawling to government, begging for its help. Help you'd be less likely to need if you were able to keep and use your own money.

When government does provide a service, it's a dim shadow of what you would choose for yourself if you had the money.

Just like the wealthy homeowners in California who hired private firefighters to save their homes once they realized the government-provided service wasn't enough. Or those who rigged up their own fire suppression systems instead of relying on government.

There are still people in western North Carolina living in tents, in winter conditions, who thought government was there to help.  Not only is government not helping, but it's blocking those, like the Amish, who want to help. It considers its own rules more important than the lives of the victims. It has even informed its victims that their property tax bills will not be adjusted to reflect their new circumstances.

If you don't yet understand how evil government is, are you waiting until it affects you, personally? Even worse, you may decide "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" and become part of the problem by entering government. As well-intentioned as you may be, you can't change the mafia from the inside. Chances are, good people who accept a government job will change more than they change government. If you've paid any attention, you've seen this happen time after time.

A smarter approach is to do what you ought to be doing in spite of government. Find workarounds to help those government is ignoring or mistreating. Be the help government can't be.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate your support.

Never trust government

If you don't trust government's actions, even if it seems like you should "in just this one case", you will be proved right eventually.

Distrust of government never fails to be the best choice.

Isn't it odd how it always works out that way?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Doing the right thing isn't pain-free

I'm seeing an increasing number of posts from people who have lost government "jobs"; "jobs" they seem to believe they are entitled to. Their posts also seem to indicate that they believe I'll be upset over their plight". They believe I'll take their side.

What do they say about people being unable to "read the room"?

I want ALL federal employees to be unemployed-- unless they can find a helpful, productive job in the market rather than a harmful, destructive "job" like the one they've previously held. If they are (or were) a federal employee, I'm going to assume they don't have any useful skills-- it's up to them to prove me wrong. I hope they are able to add to society once they are freed from living off politics. That would benefit us all!

Then, I want all state and local government employees to find themselves in the same situation.

I don't care if it's DOGE or someone else eliminating those "jobs". Just delete them and find more to delete. Keep it going. Bring the chainsaw!

Yes, this will cause problems for the economy. I don't care. I never asked for those "jobs" to be created and filled. Just the opposite. Tolerating government "jobs" was inevitably going to cause problems (beyond those useless and damaging "jobs" being performed) eventually. We might as well deal with it now instead of five years from now.

Doing the right thing is not always pain-free. If you haven't figured this out, you haven't done the right thing enough times yet.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

A righteous trade-off

I would be willing to give up everything government can "give" me in order to free myself (and others) from the theft of liberty and property that government subjects me to.

How about you?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Don't be boring

Supporting liberty is never boring.

Supporting the political Left or Right gets boring. At least, they bore me. I get tired of listening to those people. There are no surprises-- they are always going to fawn over political "authority". And it's always going to be the authoritarian who they believe is on "their side".

However, supporters of liberty can surprise you. Sometimes they'll see an angle you were missing. It may convince you or it may not, but it will nearly always make you think.

So if you enjoy thinking and being challenged you belong on the side of liberty. It's just more interesting here.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

What are you allowed to think?

We-- probably all of us-- are being trained in how to speak; what words to use so as to not offend the perpetually offended. It's not helpful.

I posted the above comment in reply to Elon Musk saying the Cybertruck is "Apocalypse-Level safe".

My reply was a joke- one I think Musk would have agreed with and appreciated if he had ever seen it (as far as I know he's never seen one of my posts, which seems normal).

That reply got me locked out of X for 7 days. Immediately, as soon as I hit "post". I had even censored myself by replacing the "o"s with zeros to avoid this very problem.
I noticed that when they sent me a copy of the offending tweet it looks like they put "o"s back in.

Now I'm angry that I censored myself at all. Ever.

As Orwell pointed out, you can control what people are able to think by controlling the language. Modern institutions and individuals are becoming so weak and pathetic they "need" to be protected from words that might make people think. Because you know it's not really government/corporations doing this without being pressured by weaklings to do it. You see it everywhere. It's automatic.

I rarely cuss-- I've told those around me that if I start cussing, they'd better start running the other direction. I do say things others find offensive. Pretty often. More offensive than mere cussing, apparently.

And when I say those things, it's often because I think they need to be said. Truth hurts. Censoring truth hurts worse.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Amazing modern life

We're having a bit of a cold snap. Yet I'm warm inside a house. I have a fire in the fireplace, but it isn't necessary because I have natural gas (and electricity). I even lit the fire with a butane lighter this time!
I can get clean water just by turning a handle,
I can get light and help with doing other things by flipping switches.

It really is amazing if you think about it. Or it ought to be.

I will never stop being grateful and appreciating the modern conveniences. Mainly because I've spent significant time without those things. I don't need them, but they make things easier and more comfortable.

If, every time you want light or heat, you must first make a fire-- especially if you don't have modern fire-starting equipment (including ferro rods)-- you appreciate those things more.

If thirst means you must find water and either filter and sterilize it, or hope it's "clean enough" and take your chances, you'll be grateful for tap water. A lot of cooking also requires added water. Even sanitation is made easier by having water available by turning a handle.

Electricity is amazing. It makes so many things easier or possible. I hear people even have electric snow shovels and box cutters!

There are other conveniences I could mention. Some I use, others I don't. I'm glad they are there for those who need them.

In the same vein, I've been told I should accept government because without it, civilization wouldn't have been able to come up with these things. That's bunk, of course. The market provides; government prevents innovation and places obstacles. Even if that weren't the case, I'm not thankful for the existence of a criminal gang, no matter what may come of it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Deniers of liberty on wrong side

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 12, 2025)

No one wants to be on the wrong side with the bad guys. At least, that's what people claim. Many of them don't seem to understand which side is wrong. As strange as it seems, it must be explained to them.

People who are in favor of slavery of any variety are always on the wrong side. Even if it's the "slavery-lite" imposed on everyone in America by Abraham Lincoln's war; subjugating us to an overbearing federal government which goes directly against the principles upon which America was founded. Unless it was all, from the beginning, a hoax to gain power and Lincoln was just the one who was able to finally put all the pieces in place.

People who are in favor of stealing are on the wrong side. It doesn't matter if the theft is called a tax, extortion, armed robbery, a fine, or shoplifting. It doesn't matter if the thief uses a gun or legislation. Theft is never ethical and those who are okay with it, under any circumstances, are on the wrong side.

Anyone who tries to deny others the liberty to defend their life, liberty, or property from all violators is on the wrong side. They often use the justification "I don't condone violence". If you don't condone violence in defense, you want everyone to submit to the bad guys. This helps no one but the bad guys. They appreciate this support.

The wrong side supports censorship, war, kidnapping, vandalism, trespassing, and governing others.

Those on the wrong side will try to argue that something which is wrong in every other situation isn't wrong if the person doing it has imaginary political authority or a government job. This is a feat of mental gymnastics I won't participate in. A government position can't turn wrong into right.

Anyone who is okay with violating any rights, of anyone, is on the wrong side.

Sometimes this is called being "on the wrong side of history". Unfortunately, when the wrong side wins the battle and gets to write the history, it gets to say which side was, in its opinion, right. At least for a while. This is how a protest gets labeled an insurrection. This is how self-defense gets treated as murder. This is how refusing to submit to an armed kidnapping gets called "resisting arrest".

Before you attack those with a different view, make sure you aren't the one on the wrong side.

-

Thank you for reading.
I appreciate your support.

Statists clinging to their anchor

Statists will perform seemingly impossible mental gymnastics to justify government.

They'll abandon their morals while pretending they aren't doing so. They'll change their opinions as soon as "their side" is doing something they've always said was wrong when "the other side" did it.

They'll put aside their (other) religious beliefs to keep faithful to The State when the two clash.

They'll redefine (or misdefine) words. Or they'll deny words mean anything at all.

They'll support destructive legislation, sometimes even if it hurts them, because they fear liberty and don't trust anyone. Everything not forbidden must be mandatory!

They'll advocate anything they think will help "their side" of the statist monster gain power over "the other side" of the same monster.

They'll hate when the right thing is done, or love when the wrong thing is done, based upon who's doing the doing, rather than what they are doing. It's about the teams, not the actions.

They'll see different political sides where it's not political. They believe "everything is political" only because they make everything political.

But, mostly, they'll do whatever it takes to avoid admitting they are doing any of those things. Because, deep down, they believe the state is legitimate; they imagine that governing others is a legitimate human endeavor. They'll do anything to be able to keep believing this. It looks to me as though it scares them to let go of this anchor.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

?

As a mental exercise, start with the assumption that everything is untrue or wrong, then move things into the "true" (or "provisionally true") category as you test them.

See where things lead.

Is anything true, or is it all "mental constructs"? Does "mental construct" automatically mean it's wrong? Can you consider anything without it being at least partially a "mental construct"?

If there are things which are true, does it matter? Does it only matter if the answer hurts you (or others) immediately?

Is it more important to understand what isn't true than what is; to recognize "negative truths"-- which aren't exactly the same as lies? (Think "negative rights".)

Are some people qualified to run the lives of others? What about people they don't know personally? Who is, and under what conditions?

Is taking what others own something other than theft under certain circumstances? Is theft justifiable? When, and under what conditions?

If you hadn't been trained from an early age to see government as inevitable and necessary, and you were unfamiliar with the concept, could you be convinced to accept it now?

Is your life worth living, and is unnecessary death to be avoided?

Is liberty better than slavery? For whom and under what conditions? What does "better" mean? Is the answer the same for everyone?

Can someone who prefers slavery tolerate seeing others choose liberty?

Is it OK to take advantage of others as long as it benefits you in some way? Is your answer the same if the roles are reversed?

Is asking questions of yourself in this way even helpful? How?

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Government is dangerous

One of the greatest dangers facing you and me is government. Not a specific government, but the very notion of government.

Either government alone, or-- possibly the greatest danger-- government vs. government with us caught in between.

Government causes situations that endanger us. 

It meddles in other regions, creating enemies. Many of these enemies are (just like many Americans) unable or unwilling to distinguish between the government hurting them and the people in other countries who disavow what the government that rules them is doing. It isn't necessary to be my enemy just because you hate the US government. I hate it, too!

Government offers handouts, making people dependent and likely to get violent if the handouts stop. It makes people incompetent by design.

Government imports people from other countries. People who hate Americans. How does this make sense, unless it is to create trouble that you need to be resued from?

It makes it a crime for you and me to defend ourselves from freelance bad guys or from the bad guys operating on behalf of government.

Government makes up arbitrary rules that prevent you from "legally" doing things humans have always done-- things you still have the right to do-- to provide for your home.

Without government there wouldn't be excuses like "global climate change" being used against you. There wouldn't be tariffs, or egg shortages, or inflation.

Government also provokes other governments. Without government there wouldn't be missiles aimed at where you live. There wouldn't be nuclear weapons. 

Government is a net negative. I understand how so many have been brainwashed to feel (not think) it is necessary. It's still a net negative.

Government doesn't create society and give us prosperity and safety. If we have those things it's because we create them ourselves in spite of everything government is doing.

The warlords used as justification by fans of government are the very government they defend.

The more who realize this, the better off we all will be.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

DOGEd suddenly

DOGE may actually be doing what it promised.

It has hit home: a relative's federal government-financed "job" (in govschooling) has been DOGEd.

I would have more sympathy if I hadn't spent a lifetime being scolded for not finding a "good" government "job". Not by this individual, but by others who held this person up as an example I should aspire to.

I mean, I do have some sympathy. But I know this person is a Trump supporter, so I'm not sure how she feels about this. If she's consistent and principled, she'll accept this as necessary. The TDS-sufferers in the family will have a different take on events.

I've warned family members about accepting government "jobs"- but most of them either work in govschool or are retired from govschool. It was pointless and counterproductive to keep hammering the point, but if asked, I didn't hide my opinion. I'm not going to say "I told you so", or really make any comment at all. This is a time to hold my tongue and observe.

UPDATE: DOGE failed.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

One person's "creepy" is another's "possibly wholesome"

Someone posted this picture and commented "Creepy".

I don't find it creepy at all. I find it helpful and compassionate. An example of someone being part of the solution rather than contributing to the problem.

Plus, judging by the patch, she may be a Browncoat.

One of those big, influential Republican "libertarian" accounts said this is "a drug dealer who will touch you". Others said it's probably a guy (and that this proves ill-intent), who needs shampoo, is a pedo, and will rape you.

On the whole, most people were aligned against this person. I think, without knowing more, making the assumptions they made about this person is just sad.

It shows me what others think of me any time I reach out to help a stranger. The assumptions they will make about my motivations and character. If I cared more about what people think, it might make me change my behavior.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.