Nowhere left to go?

I know of someone in this area who is in America for political asylum.

She is originally from Venezuela. She wasn't an activist; just a woman who got on the bad side of government when it nationalized her employer's business. She was told to say publicly that this was a good thing. She wouldn't. (Governments sure do love compelled speech!)

Soon after, while she was visiting a family member in America, her home was ransacked by government agents and friends warned her to not come back because she was in danger- so she didn't, and applied for asylum.

It's a shame that statists are pushing to make America more like Venezuela of today than America of 1776. If things don't turn around, there will be nowhere left for people like her to go. Or for people like us to go.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

You are the terrorist they want to find

Whenever anything is proposed to "fight terrorists", it's going to be used to hurt you. Anything, every time.

If you aren’t 100% enthusiastic about letting government track your every movement, spy on all your communication, control every dollar you spend, turn rights into privileges, etc., they consider YOU the terrorist. 

You are the target of these programs and this legislation or policy. If it happens to catch a real terrorist somewhere along the way, that's just the cherry on top that they'll point to when claiming success. And most of those terrorists are probably their guys in one way or another.

Government considers you the enemy, and it will show you by what it does if you're paying attention.

Imagine being gullible enough to believe government protects you and is essential for your well-being. Or to conflate government with society.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

We must fight politics like a disease

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for April 30, 2025)

In spite of our best efforts, bad things exist. Nature, as much as I love it, is trying to kill us. So are some people.

Entropy, disease, and politics surround us. The first two are simply the way the Universe is; the third is a bad choice. All three lead to death and destruction if left to run their course.

It takes millions of dedicated people to keep these destructive forces from doing all the damage they would otherwise do. Part of being human is doing what you can to reduce the impact of things which are bad for humans.

Things break down, There are more ways for something to go wrong than there are to keep going right. Paint weathers and houses need to be painted again. We have repairmen and maintenance workers fighting around-the-clock to stall entropy. It's one of the most useful things anyone can do.

Doctors, medical researchers, and those in sanitation also fight against disease and the effects of aging, which are types of entropy which involve our bodies. Without people dedicated to keeping us healthy, our lives would be shorter and sicker. You can't bathe once as a baby and expect this to last the rest of your life. You have to keep doing it. Health has to be maintained.

Not enough people are working to dismantle politics. Unfortunately, even most of those who know politics is a problem believe it's a problem which will be solved with more politics. When government is doing something wrong, they believe the answer is to switch out some politicians and bureaucrats and have them do something different. Usually the difference is still wrong, just in a slightly different way. This won't fix anything.

If my dishwasher stops working, I can't expect to repair it by pounding it with a hammer. It also won't fix the issue if I shove a USB drive in the water line. It's the wrong part for the job.

Politicians, government, and taxes are the wrong part for the job of keeping society functioning smoothly, too. Expecting anyone to fix things with politics is like treating the flu with rabies. Not only must they be shut down now, they must be shut down regularly. This destructive problem will keep cropping up in the minds of a certain type of person, to be spread like a cancer throughout the population. Bad things exist; we aren't obligated to sit and watch them destroy us.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Good for government; bad for you

If it’s good for government it’s probably bad for you.

Government supremacists want "a little bit" of inflation. No matter what they say and how they try to justify it or say it is "necessary", inflation is bad for you.

War seems to be good for The State- at least as long as they don't lose (or win) too hard. War isn't good for you. In the case of fighting off an invasion or tyranny, you're going to get hurt even if your side wins.

Terrorism is good for government. Look at what happened as a result of 9/11 if you don't believe me. Look at how hard government works to create terrorists around the world. Yes, it complains about terrorism, but its actions expose government's true ambitions in that regard. But terrorism isn't good for you!

Government thrives on surveillance. It's not to your benefit to be spied upon or tracked.

The Federal Reserve's counterfeiting scam is good for government. This same scam has resulted in your money losing nearly all its value since 1913 through inflation. It wasn't good for you or me.

Anti-gun rules are good for government. They give government more power and less accountability. Anti-gun rules are never good for you, even if you've been brainwashed to believe they might be.

Taxation is good for government. It gives them a little extra money, but it also gives them a way to control you. And it makes sure you aren't as financially independent as you would otherwise be.

Government "borders"- open or closed- are good for government. They increase government power. They are bad for you because, for one thing, they are a denial of your property rights. Especially when government imports people from other countries and forbids you from defending your life, liberty, or property from archators of any kind.

There are probably some exceptions, where something good for government is also good for you. I can't think of any at the moment. Perhaps more along the lines of the avoidance of something bad for government that is also bad for you. A mile-wide asteroid making a direct hit on Washington, DC would be bad for government, but the disastrous effects on you would mostly offset the good it would do. Maybe we shouldn't hope for that one too hard.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"Law" pollution illustrated

The big book is full of counterfeit “laws”; legislation,

The small one says, “Don’t violate anyone’s life, liberty, or property- and if you do, you owe restitution. Pay it.”

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Should I lie so people will feel better?

Of all the topics people have gotten mad at me over, the subject of cops is the only one people have actually cut me out of their lives over.

Perhaps I should take this as a sign I ought to pretend there are good cops. But that would be a lie. Why would I participate in a lie? Especially one as dangerous as that one?

It's painful for them to be exposed to the truth, but sometimes pain is the only way people will take notice. Don't you think family members were desperate to believe their loved ones in the SS, doing Hitler's work, were good guys? Of course!

Except they weren't good, even if they were nice 99.99% of the time. Nice isn't the same as good. 

Most rapists are probably nice to nearly everyone they encounter. Otherwise, they'd rarely survive long enough to violate their next victim.
Same with serial killers, who are often very nice and charming- until they aren't.
Cops are no different, unless they are worse.

Even if you have a cop who has never once helped enforce a counterfeit "law"- an illegitimate rule which violates life, liberty, or property- this cop has allowed others (who are in the same gang) to do so with his/her knowledge. This cop has not stood up and stopped other cops from committing these violations, even though they are equally armed and could have done something. This cop is not good.

Support for cops is a line in the sand. I'm not going to throw rocks at you- or cut you out of my life- if you're standing on the other side of the line, but I'm also not going to play along. If this makes people walk away from me, so be it. I'm not going to lie so they'll feel better.

There is no such thing as a good cop.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Doing more of the wrong thing

If you’re pursuing a path to stop something bad from happening, but the bad thing keeps increasing, what kind of person insists on doing more of the same? People who are hypnotized by politics, that's who.

Anti-gun rules inevitably result in more deaths, injuries, and destruction. But this failure is used as an excuse for more anti-gun rules. So, from the perspective of the anti-gun bigots, is this a failure or a success?

Letting others govern you is supposed to keep you safe and prosperous, and make it so you don't have to worry about how to keep things running. But it always results in less liberty and self-determination. And when things inevitably get worse, this is taken as a sign that the people aren’t yet governed hard enough.

People are scared of crime, so they support police. Cops, being criminals, get away with too much because they can’t be held accountable. So those who want them to be held accountable are said to be the problem. And cop behavior gets worse, and they still aren’t held accountable. Then dumb people say more cops are needed, and we need to respect them so they can do their "job".

Or, you can see through all these statist lies and pursue liberty.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

The filter selects for rule breakers

Of all the statist arguments that I can kind of understand while disagreeing completely with them, the "borders" thing may be the biggest.

I've even seen a lot of otherwise "libertarian" folk get confused about this one. Even those I admire.

I get it. "More criminals" is a bad thing. 

But, statists can't see how their "border rules" select for people who are willing to break counterfeit "laws", and are then more likely to break real Laws because they don't understand the difference.
Just like prohibition selects for violent criminals to enter the freelance drug market. 

Both "border controls" and prohibition are filters; selecting for rule breakers who don't understand the difference between rules that are valid ("don't violate life, liberty, or property") and rules that are illegitimate ("government says don't do this thing you have a natural human right to do").

It can't be otherwise.

If the State would stop violating your right to defend life, liberty, and property from ALL violators, the issue would go away. Maybe this is why they don't stop. They are using migrants, your fear, and your reasonable and rightful response to being violated as excuses to crack down harder on liberty. Liberty is what government hates and fears the most.

It's been going on for a long time. This isn't a Trump thing, although Trump has used it to his advantage and to get support from borderists.
Back in 2010, I was forwarded an email along those same lines. An email that missed the point. It began like this:

BUTTE, MONTANA

Shotgun preteen vs. Home Invaders : Illegal alien Butte,
Montana, November 5 , 2009

Two illegal aliens, Ralphel Resindez, 23, and Enrico Garza, 26,
probably believed they would easily overpower home-alone 11 year old
Patricia Harrington after her father had left their two-story home... read the rest of the story, along with my commentary.

I have no idea if the story is true. Or if it happened when it supposedly happened, where it supposedly happened, to whom it supposedly happened. It doesn't really matter.

I'm always glad when archators are permanently"taken out". I don't care who the archators were, where they were born, why they decided to do what they did, or how they might have been mistreated by someone else in the past. I don't care who took them out or how it was done. I also don't care that they didn't ask a criminal gang for permission to be somewhere.
I care only that they decided to violate life, liberty, or privately-owned property (the only kind). That's what a criminal is.

So, when archators get nabbed by archators, or even "deported", it's "Not my circus; not my monkeys". I have a hard time getting too worked up over it.
On the other hand, I don't believe the liars in government when they tell me anyone is guilty of anything. They tell the story they believe will move you in the direction they wish you to be moved. And it's always in the direction of giving government more power over something or someone.

I am also aware that when the government archators get away with doing things like this, it emboldens them to do more of it. And when a large percentage of the population is asking them to do it, even though it's wrong, they'll do more of it with enthusiasm.

The ethically correct position is "property lines, not government borders". But it's a hard sell to people who have been trained to be unable to think about things clearly; without assuming government has "rights" or "authority".

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Supporting politicians a waste of time

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for April 23, 2025)

I want you to be free to do everything you have a right to do. That's what liberty is. Even if you'd do something I wouldn't do and don't like.

If I won’t respect your liberty, how can I demand you respect mine?

If you have the right to do it, this means it doesn't violate anyone else in any way. It may offend someone, but that's their problem, not yours. There is no such thing as a "right to not be offended".

However, if someone would be violated by what you want to do, you don't have the right to do it. Not even if the majority sides with you.

You have the right to tell others why you believe their opinions are wrong. You have the right to ridicule bad opinions. Freedom of speech is non-negotiable.

You don’t have the right to threaten anyone, to censor them, to physically attack them, or to damage their property simply because you dislike their opinions.

You have the right to defend yourself from those forcefully imposing bad opinions which become "law". If it isn't dangerous to violate the rights of others, there's no pressure not to do so.

This puts me at odds with those who believe in government and its rules. No government has ever been limited to doing only what its employees have a right to do, or had its rules restricted to those which don't violate anyone. Even the old, mostly ignored US Constitution didn't do this, although it may have gotten closer than most ways to establish a nation-state have managed. Government and legislation are violations of fundamental human rights, even if you agree with what they do.

Supporting liberty seems to be getting more dangerous. People don't like having their opinions challenged. They are happy with you as long as you don't point out the bad things done by the politicians they follow. As soon as you do, you're the devil. Tomorrow, when you point out the good done by a politician they like, they may forget your previous transgression. Or they may not.

No politician is worth following. This is how you waste time you could be using to do things you have a right to do. Things which would make your life richer and fuller. Yet, you're spending your future on a politician. Support and fight for liberty instead. This would make a positive difference.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Don't offend the imbeciles!

I'm not sure if government is composed of imbeciles, or just working for the imbeciles. The result is the same. They hate when people tell the truth!

As do most statists- of whom the same question could be asked.

Either way, truth is their enemy. It offends them.

They don't like it when people are able to think.

They can try to ban thinking. 

It won't work. 

So they'll fall back on censorship and "cancelling" those who continue to tell the truth; those who think outside the lines they are only allowed to "think" inside.

The imbeciles will continue to be offended. Not because of what the intelligent people say, exactly, but because the imbeciles won't understand it, but will "know" it's about them and their delusions and lies.

It's a them problem.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Use your brain

Liberals and conservatives are both wrong. 

Just in (some) different ways.

Both are authoritarian.
Both love prohibitions.
Both are socialists. 
Both fear liberty.

It's only in the minor details where they disagree.

Use your brain. Don't be a statist.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Nothing is truly forgotten

I recently experienced another example of a long-buried memory popping into my brain. Even more buried than the nearly forgotten onions I mentioned a while back.

This time, for no reason I'm aware of, a theme song from a television show that was on the air when I was 3 years old, and that disappeared to never show up in reruns (as far as I know), suddenly started running through my mind. The song brought with it a dim memory of the show.

I hadn't thought of the show since it aired. No one ever mentioned it to me again. But the theme song was in my head and made itself known, and when I looked it up on this electronic wonder, it was just as I remembered. 

Brains are kind of amazing!

Again, this gives me hope that things you and I have said to other people, including to our kids when they were young enough to listen, will stay with them far into the future. Maybe pop back into their minds when they least expect it, but when it's needed. 

If you value liberty and have talked about it to anyone, there's a good chance it's still embedded somewhere in their neural network. Maybe long after you and I are gone, words we once spoke will still be doing some work behind the scenes. (That's not counting things we've written down for posterity.) I think liberty gets in your head and makes a home there, waiting to be called up to work. 

Stranger things have happened.

Liberty is a natural human need, even if most people have been brainwashed to think it's not. Keep infecting those around you with the liberty virus. Your great-grandchildren will need it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Either way, you have a part to play

If society is doomed, you and I aren't going to save it. Authoritarianism is too popular. People who don't buy into- and use- political "authority" are at a disadvantage because of this. The best you can do in this case is to resolve to be part of, or encouragement for, The Remnant.

If society isn't doomed; if the problems will work themselves out, then maybe you and I can be a small part of that. Help spread ideas that will help others solve the problems. Keep poking holes in statism's lies. Keep pointing out the inconsistencies and hypocrisy. Keep finding and creating alternatives. 

And decouple from the State.

Keep yourself on course. Do right. Avoid doing things that make things worse. Maybe you'll inspire others to do the same, and if society isn't doomed after all, perhaps your legacy will be to be a part of what keeps it from collapsing.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Decouple from government

Decouple from government. Decouple from the State.

I know it isn't always possible, but it would always be better for you. And, by extension, better for society.

Don't rely on the State. 

Don't be dependent on handouts from the State. This doesn't mean you should feel guilty about using government's roads- you are forced to fund them, and you have a right to use what you pay for, even if you know there are better ways. 

Don't count on government coming to save you when trouble strikes. It's as likely to send its incompetent, drug-addled employees to shoot you as to save you. You're your own security force. Your own emergency response.

Don't work for the State (unless you can monkeywrench it from the inside without joining The Dark Side and fooling yourself about what you're doing). 

Don't get tangled up in worrying about the problems government faces. Especially when it tries to fool you into believing its problems are your problems. Decoupling from the State will make you safer.

Don't base your opinions on the opinions of political criminals. Don't ask whether every little thing you want to do is "legal". Assume liberty.

In every way you can, make sure your fate isn't tied to the fate of the State. It will then be easier to ignore it to death.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Liberty a powerful right you own

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for April 16, 2025)

Last week, the news of the dire wolf's de-extinction was everywhere. It didn't take long until calmer voices pointed out that these are not really dire wolves, which weren't even wolves, just gray wolves genetically altered to have what someone believes were some dire wolf traits.

The kind of liberty most people offer is similar. It's not real liberty; it's authoritarianism with a few tweaks of what some politicians believe real liberty might be like. They'll claim to support liberty to get votes- until it threatens government power. This isn't liberty at all, but a watered-down version where government allows you to do some things you already have a right to do, as long as you don't bother government too much.

This mutated authoritarianism with a few liberty genes isn't compatible with your birthright as a human being. It's not compatible with the values America was supposedly founded upon. It doesn't look or feel like liberty because it's not liberty. It doesn't get in the way of government's plans for you; things you wouldn't tolerate if you understood liberty.

Practically everyone is familiar with the military's misuse of the word "liberty", where the word is used to mean its opposite: "limited freedom, with permission". This way, they can ensure no one knows what they are supposed to be fighting for. Their loyalty is to the US Federal Government, not to American liberty.

"Freedom" means doing whatever you want, without regard for right or wrong or the rights of others. This may be why most people prefer to use this word. If supporting government is what you want to do, you'll feel "free" while doing so. It's not as scary- or as powerful- as liberty.

"Liberty" means doing anything you have a right to do; nothing else. No one has a right to violate others. Not as part of a majority, not because of a job, and not by hiring a politician to do it for you. The right to violate others can never exist.

Respecting liberty means you sometimes have to stand aside while people do things you don't like, but which violate no one. Few people have a character strong enough for this.

Just like the dire wolf was a distinct animal, and genetically altered gray wolves aren't dire wolves, liberty is a distinct condition. If it relies on politicians and bureaucrats to agree to it, it's not liberty. It's the opposite.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Thanks for the inspiration and aggravation, Scott. Really.

I was truly saddened yesterday morning to hear Scott Adams say that he will be dying soon.

Over the years, well before he started commenting on politics, his blog posts, and then his livestreams, made me think. And, of course there was Dilbert, which was something my first wife and I shared an appreciation for.

I've had many disagreements with his views over the years. I even have a blog post label specifically to address how and why he's wrong in his thinking about guns. As I have said in the past, when he's right, he's right. When he's wrong, it's because he's a government supremacist. That doesn't mean I ever hated him.

He influenced me to be a better version of myself by challenging me (without his knowledge) to put into words why I disagree with him when I do. It's not enough to say about someone, "He's wrong". If you can't explain why he's wrong, do you even know he's wrong?

I've written many blog posts where I specifically referenced something he said on his livestream. Even more where something he said made me start thinking along a specific path that resulted in a blog post. Or two. Like this one.

I believe I have benefited greatly, in various ways, because of his influence. And even the aggravation. I expected to be challenged, angered, and inspired by his opinions for years to come. I feel a little cheated.

I'm almost positive he muted me ages ago. Such is life. I'm sincerely sorry this is happening to him, and I wish him the best in the time he has left. 

UPDATE: He made it longer than he thought he would- dying on January 13, 2026. RIP, Scott.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Don't like it? Don't ban it, just don't buy it

Banning lab-grown meat* isn't a win for liberty or for the market. 

A Libertarian Party county organization (whatever they are called) pointed this out, saying if you don't want to eat it, don't eat it.

Then, some statist control-freaks decided this was a time to pile on and mock the LP and the principle upon which it is built.

In doing so, they exposed themselves for what they are and demonstrated that they aren't as smart as they believe themselves to be.

Winning elections doesn't show that someone is correct.

Avoiding having principles so you can "win" elections doesn't make you a winner.

Having a clever insult label ("Losertarian") you can always fall back on when you have no point doesn't make you clever.

Appealing to socialism and collectivism is a statist's ploy.

Nonsense like this from "conservatives" is why I can never be a conservative. They are just as authoritarian and socialistic as their opposition on the statist Left, just less honest about it.

I don't believe in banning anything. I believe in speaking out, ridiculing, boycotting, shunning... and there are things I support people's right to use self-defensive violence to prevent happening to themselves or another victim. But banning through legislation is a bad way to do anything.

-

*I am completely open to trying lab-grown meat. Even though I don't believe in "animal rights", I don't want animals to suffer unnecessarily. Industrialized killing facilities horrify me. Shooting something in the wild is usually much more humane. Since not all meat can be obtained that way, I'm in favor of looking for other options. If lab-grown meat is safe and tastes good, I would eat it. I wouldn't force my choice on you, though.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

"86"

So much drama over a number!

What does someone mean when they say something should be "86"ed?

It's not confusing. It doesn't hinge on situational content, but on who's using it. It doesn't even have anything to do with the origin of the term.

If someone's background is restaurant-/food-related. they think "86" means to "get rid of". That's how they'll use it. That's what they'll hear or see when anyone else uses it.

If someone's background is crime/government, they think "86" means to "kill". That's how they'll use it. That's what they'll hear or see when anyone else uses it.

It's simple. 

This is why neither side thinks the other side is using it correctly. It gives plausible deniability.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

Smarter than the average bear

From time to time, I get emails in response to my newspaper columns. Most of them (these days) are supportive. In the early days, they usually weren't. (All the "haters" probably learned to avoid my columns.)

But, I get a few emails with regard to my columns that I can't classify. I can't decide if they agree with me or not. Sometimes, I'm not sure what they are trying to convey. I don't think the problem's on my end.

This happens much more often with the newspaper columns than with the blog posts, which I assume has something to do with the literacy and general brilliance of the regular readers of my blog.

Yes, that's a compliment. You're smarter than the average human! Or bear.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.

The view from Down Under

There's no such thing as a legitimate weapon ban. Nor is there any such thing as a legitimate weapon restriction. This includes licenses, permits, background checks, and keeping records of who owns what. It includes exempting armed government employees from the illegitimate rules they expect us to be slaves to.

It's not only certain Americans who understand this: some Australians do too. And I'm sure there are others in other places. Stupid and/or crooked people are the only ones who ban or restrict weapons, or support those who do. In every country or region, it's the same. Human rights don't change at the "borders".

Attacking people with weapons is unethical; nothing more is needed.
Using weapons in defense is the right thing to do. Punishing defense is evil.
It's never about the weapons; it's about what people do with them. Stupid and/or crooked people will try to make it about the weapons.

Bad guys will always be armed.
Smart good guys who ignore the opinions of political criminals will, too.

"America, Do not give up your guns." Good advice.

-

Thank you for reading.

Show your support.