Prickly statists

Statists don't like being recognized as statists.

They really don't like it when you point out the implication that this means, in this specific area, they are intellectually lacking.

They may be a rocket scientist, but as long as they believe there exists a "right" or "authority" to govern others, they aren't as smart in this specific area as those who realize no such right or authority exists or can exist.

I don't know trigonometry, but I don't get mad if someone points this out. That would be silly. I can't know everything (as much as younger me wanted to). So, when someone who does know trigonometry tells me something related to that specialty, I don't get mad at them or try to mock them for thinking they know more about it than I do. That would be stupid, because they do. Ignorance is guaranteed; stupidity is a choice.

I realize people can't just stop believing what they believe, nor can they just start believing something they don't believe. It's really not an option or how the brain works. Maybe they can eventually learn their way out of it, but statists aren't often motivated to do so. They believe they're right, so they avoid learning anything that might show them otherwise. Whether it's history, economics, or ethics.

We all start out as anarchists, most of us (including me) become statists to some degree as we grow, then some of us manage to learn our way out of it if given the opportunity. Those adults who don't mature out of statism are to be pitied, and only mocked if they strut around being a statist clown who advocates violating others to promote their superstition.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Government destined to self-destruct

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 4, 2025)

Trying to save government from itself is a fool's errand. DOGE- the Department of Government Efficiency- failed. Elon Musk and his team found lots of waste and fraud, but seem to have misunderstood how determined government is to not be saved from financial ruin.

Look how hard different parts of government are working to make sure every cent currently being spent continues to be spent in exactly the same way. Then they lie about everything to fool the public into complaining about the possibility of money being saved. "You're killing children if you take away this money" works on people who aren't able to think critically about the claims.

So the money will continue to be funneled into all the same waste and fraud.

Some people believe this is corruption. Silly people. It's not corruption- it's government working exactly as designed.

Even when shown "This is what you must cut to avoid the financial collapse of government", they can't do it. If some waste and fraud were eliminated, every "saved" dollar is seen as a dollar to be spent elsewhere. Usually sent overseas to support other evil governments and their wars. It's more important to keep the Military-Industrial Complex happy than to stop spending themselves into oblivion.

And it will be their oblivion. They are heading for a cliff and can't bring themselves to so much as slow down. As long as they can get by with it a few more years, they can blame their political opposition when the end comes and be safe from you.

Don't let them fool you. It's not "The National Debt"; it's not your debt. It's Congress's debt. No matter how much I'd like to have one, I can't order a brand new Cybertruck and then say I'm doing it for your benefit- on your behalf- so you must be forced, at gunpoint, to pay for it. Oh, and if you try to actually use it, you'll be thrown in prison because it's not your property. Yet this is how government works all the time in every case.

The good news is, although government will self-destruct, you'll be fine as long as you haven't tied your fate too closely to the fate of government. If you have, it's time to decouple. The US federal government isn't America; it isn't the people. Watch it spend itself into a gluttonous death while you make plans to carry on after it's gone.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

"That’s your business"

There are a lot of things where, whether I like it or not, I'll say "That’s your business". And I'll stay out of it.

Until you decide to impose on others; violating their life, liberty, or property in some way. Then it’s my business.

This is something many people get wrong. You do you, unless “doing you” involves coercing others to accommodate you in a way that violates their rights.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Seeking compensation?

When I was younger, I saw some things as a sort of compensation for being subjected to government. "At least we have NASA." 

As I matured, I came to realize that it's poor compensation because it's worse than the alternative. 

NASA works harder to keep humans trapped on Earth than to explore space. That doesn't mean I think you're wrong if you get excited about a NASA mission. It's still compensating for the bother of tolerating government. 

In a way.

I'd say the same about roads, a "justice" [sic] system, social safety nets, "security", etc. If you feel you've been compensated in some way with these things, I'm not going to attack you for it. Unless you fight to keep government because of something like this. Or try to force them on me and prevent me from seeking my own alternatives. Then, I will oppose you on that topic.

I'd gladly give up every single thing I get in "compensation" for government if government would go away. Liberty is superior, and government and liberty are mutually exclusive.

-

Thank you for reading.

Tips are supposedly tax-free now, right?
Leave a tip.

"I can see where you went wrong"

If you can’t at least comprehend, on an intellectual level, where “the other side” is coming from, and put their argument into words (as well or better than they can), you probably don’t understand your own argument as well as you believe you do.

That doesn’t mean you believe they are even a tiny bit right, just that you can see where they’ve gone wrong. Which is useful.

Sometimes it's dangerous to publicly express their views, even as a method for countering them by steel-manning them, because someone will take it out of context and use it against you later. It's still good to be able to do it in your own mind for your own clarity of thought.

Who knows, it may even cause you to realize something you never thought of before.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Be stubborn about accepting reality.

Having an ideology is only a bad thing when it's wrong.

When it's right, it's the same as accepting reality. You really don't want to be taking the other position.

To call someone who accepts reality, in the face of majority pressure to reject it, an "ideologue" should be embarrassing. If, that is, the one attempting to hurl an insult (and failing) is smart enough to realize what they're doing. Most aren't.

I am an ideologue when it comes to liberty. And when it comes to rejecting liberty's opposite- slavery. It's not possible to make me ashamed of this because it's the right position to hold. 

-

Thank you for reading.

Tips are supposedly tax-free now, right?
Leave a tip.

One Big Bureaucratic Blunder, added to those which came before

Enjoying your independence; your rightful liberty?
Or celebrating the State that does all it can to enslave you while telling you how free you are because of it?

No one has a right to impose legislation on others. Nothing can create such an imaginary "right". 

If a legislator wanted to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem, he or she could start eliminating legislation that violates life, liberty, or property. Why won't any of them do that?

Also, judges and Supreme Courtjesters could toss all such "laws" aside easily. Especially the ones that clearly violate the Constitution. There's no real reason to wait even a minute. Why won't any of them do that?
Yes, they'll pick and choose, based on their own politics, but none are principled. I suspect that's a prerequisite for the "job".

The lie that it requires new legislation to overturn previous legislation is just that: a bureaucratic lie, told to promote bureaucracy at the expense of liberty. No real law can violate life, liberty, or property. Most counterfeit "laws" do. And that's all legislators deal in. Nothing helpful; only harmful.

It doesn't matter what cutesy name you give it- it's well understood that most legislation does the opposite of what its name says it does anyway. Does a "law" violate life, liberty, or property? If so, don't wait around for a gang of political criminals to admit it can't be a real law. Stop complying.

In the title, I called it a "blunder". That's not true. It is intentional evil, imposed on people too weak to say "no". All legislation is.

Today is Independence Day; F&%# Government Day. The world would be a better place if we took that sentiment to heart and acted on it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Institutionalized ridiculousness

Government is ridiculous. Not any specific government; the very concept. Why would anyone fall for it?

Just look at what government is, how it is done, the claims its supporters make, and what it actually does. And then look at the people who still believe in it in spite of everything. Are they blind? Mentally incompetent? Both?

There’s no legitimate government. It’s all a sham. But that doesn’t mean you can’t make fun of specific political criminals, branches, or agencies when they do something that gets your attention. Pit them against each other. Use their own stated beliefs against them. Poke fun when given the opportunity. They’ve all earned it. They work for the most ridiculous thing in the world, after all.

Is there anything more ridiculous? Maybe, but more likely, it would be a tie between equally ridiculous things. In that case, government still wins by being more evil.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Don't let your tribe control you

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 28, 2025)

Humans are tribal. They'll join or create tribes around anything.

There are tribes around sports teams, clothing styles, music genres, and movie franchises. There are tribes based on careers, vehicle preferences, and phone brands. Tribes are based on diseases, health conditions, and disabilities. There are political tribes. There are tribes based on the country you live in or where you were born. Tribes form around religious beliefs.

Tribes can be literal, virtual, or somewhere in between.

Each individual can be in many tribes if those tribes aren't in open conflict.

Tribes can be fleeting- centered on a single event or temporary condition, and fade over time- or they can last thousands of years.

Most tribes contain sub-tribes, with sub-tribes of the sub-tribes. Religious tribes are notorious for this.

Some tribes spawn from a shared dislike for another tribe. The anti-tribe forms mainly to show everyone you aren't in the hated tribe. These anti-tribes often become tribes of their own. The anti-Trump tribe arising as a reaction to the Trump tribe being a perfect example. They feed on each other.

Tribes can be good or bad. Helpful or harmful. They can bring people together or cause wars.

You may have an opinion about this basic human characteristic, but you won't eliminate it. There's probably even a tribe based on arguing that humans aren't tribal.

Okay, so humans are tribal. What does this mean for you? It means you don't have to take it personally when someone is against you. It may not be them, but their tribe. People substitute tribal collectivism for individual thinking and reasoning. If they believe their tribe, almost as though it's a living thing, holds an opinion, those who identify most strongly with the tribe will automatically hold the same opinion. It's inconceivable to go against the tribe's core beliefs.

You can accept the tribal nature of humans and use this knowledge to understand how others may see the world. Why they do the things they do. Why they seem driven to fight you or control you. Maybe you can use this realization to get along better with those in tribes you don't understand or don't like.

What are your tribes? Do you have good reasons to believe what you do, or are you simply parroting what you think one of your tribes wants you to believe? Enjoy your tribes, but don't give one too much control.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Funny in a sad way?

On X, I had someone follow me and start "liking" and commenting on lots of things I'd posted.

On my "share" of a recent post ("Politics is poison"), the person commented, "That’s why we need a president who isn’t a politician."

To which I responded. "I don’t need a president at all."

This elicited, "Well then. Ok." and a quick unfollow.

The statist mindset is sticky. It makes it hard to see reality. When cold, hard reality shows its face, statists often run away.

Earlier, someone had posted "Delete one thing from Earth that you think would make it better- What are you getting rid of?" 

I responded, "The superstitious belief in political authority. Larken Rose is right, it's the Most Dangerous Superstition." 

Some guy told me, "You haven’t thought this one out too deeply", and I replied, "Please explain". So far, nothing but silence. 

He probably can't explain; he just doesn't like it. Maybe it shows him something ugly in the mirror.

I've gone over, in my mind, possible responses he might come up with. Some based on bad assumptions; others based in fantasy. Maybe he's assuming I think this is the only thing worth deleting (I don't). Maybe he's confused about "better" versus "perfect". Or, it could be something else.

I'll keep waiting to see if he comes up with anything.

Politics makes people stupid. Many of them are then all too willing to show you just how stupid it has made them.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Environmental devastation

I have this uncomfortable suspicion that if the world- the natural environment- is ever irreversibly destroyed, it will be due to misguided attempts to save it.

Attempts that involve socialism; giving government ever more control over everything. Allowing more government "ownership" of more land and resources.

I've witnessed things leaning in this direction in the past, and I don't trust government to get smarter any time soon.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"Authoritarian!"

All political government is authoritarian.  Authoritarianism is the whole point of trying to govern others. There’s no alternative kind of political government.

So, when I see a statist complaining about some authoritarian government he doesn't like, I'm amused. 

Is he stupid, gullible, or dishonest? Perhaps a combination of those and more.

I know that, as a statist, he'd be fine with an authoritarian government that was doing the evil things he wants it to do. He's only upset that it's doing evil things he doesn't like.

The weirdest statist is the one complaining that a government is authoritarian when it's actually being less evil and authoritarian. It does happen. Like when a statist complains that getting rid of anti-gun rules would be "authoritarian". Methinks he doesn't understand what he's yapping about in that case.

But, if he were smarter, he wouldn't be a statist.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

A world without rights

If no one believed in or respected the rights of others, what would the world be like?

Would anyone survive?

This is the world pushed by those who believe in political authority and government. It’s a world without rights. Without liberty. With only privileges and permission- subject to the whims of those with power.

It’s death. 

When anyone disputes the existence of rights, ask them what the alternative would look like. Then see how they try to escape what they are advocating.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"What radicalized you?"

The thing that most radicalizes people against government is watching what government does.

This may be why the people who are the least aware are also the most pro-government. They may only pay attention to what government promises.

Even in that case, I'm against most of the things it promises. I don't want government's idea of "safety" and "security" imposed on me. I'll take the real dangers of liberty over the imaginary "safety" of being governed.

I've watched government destroy the environment with its programs to save it (from you and me).

I've watched government make people less safe from freelance criminals with its programs to save us from "gun violence".

I've watched government destroy liberty while preaching "freedom".
I watch as government steals property to fund gangs they claim are there to protect your property.

I've watched government murder children to "save children".

Even if those who work in government had good intentions (fewer of them do the "higher" they get), they are incapable of delivering. Watch what they do, not what they say they will do.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Diversity is ...?

Diversity of talents, abilities, and skills is strength. This is how you increase the competence of your group.

Diversity for diversity's sake, for appearances, is weakness. It is how your group loses competence. This type of diversity causes division and conflict. 

Diversity of things which don't matter, such as race, sex, sexuality, religion, etc., which is what political people mean when they call for a focus on "diversity", is bad for any group. Especially when you reject the healthy kind of diversity in favor of chasing this toxic kind, so you can have a hive mind that all think alike but look/act* different.

I wish it weren't so, especially when the majority is so wrong, but it is. Denying it won't change anything.

If you encourage the healthy kind of diversity, you'll probably wind up with plenty of the people you'd get by focusing on the unhealthy kind. But they'll be more likely to improve your group rather than destroy it from within. That's better for individuals, so it is better for society.

*Act different in matters that don't matter.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Respect not automatic; it must be earned

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 21, 2025)

Some people think the lack of respect is one of the biggest problems society faces. I think the problem is people who haven't earned respect thinking they deserve it anyway.

Respect isn't automatic. It doesn't come with a job or position. It is earned. The way to earn respect is to be respectable; to respect the life, liberty, and property of others.

The fastest way to lose my respect is to try to control people. You'll also lose my respect by demanding respect while behaving in ways that don't earn it.

People who believe in the magical quality they call "authority", and who imagine themselves to possess this quality, are never going to earn my respect. It's pointless for them to try, since they sabotaged their efforts the moment they tried to skip to the front of the line.

I've never seen anyone who earns respect demanding to be respected. If someone feels this is necessary, it's a sign they haven't earned your respect.

If I believe they have the power to hurt me, and are likely to do so, I might fear them. Fear is the opposite of respect, but it can look the same to the bad guy. This pretend respect isn't real; it's a thin veneer which won't stand up to time or pressure.

I think a respectful attitude should be the default until you find out whether it can be real. I tend to treat people as though I respect them until they either earn my real respect or show me why they can't be respected. I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they show me who they really are. At that point, they've either earned my respect and made it real or lost any chance at having it. I won't be faking it, either way.

If you feel you don't get the respect you deserve, look at your own behavior. Have you earned respect, or has your behavior chased away any vestige of respect you might have gotten by default? Have you cornered everyone around you into lying and pretending to respect you while they loathe you- or ridicule you- behind your back? Do you bully people into pretending they respect you while being the last person on Earth anyone would genuinely respect? How do you think this will work for you in the long run?

Earning real respect is easy enough, but there are no shortcuts.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

Statism is Utopian

No one is more Utopian than those who try to tell you that liberty is "Utopian".

It seems counterintuitive… until you’ve encountered a bunch of them over the years. Then you’ll see it’s true.

At some point, usually in the first sentence or two, he's going to try to lump you in with communists, as though this "wins" the argument in his favor. In truth, it's just a sign he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's embracing the same lack of understanding of human nature that the communists do, and he's blind to it.

Statists will tell you people have to be governed. That people will demand to be governed. That without being governed they’ll… well, they’ll do exactly the same things they do while being governed by politicians- flawed people who do the same things the people they govern do. But who generally write rules that pretend that when they do it, it’s not bad because they have "authority". 

They're insisting that not being gullible and handing your power to political criminals is "Utopian".

It’s Utopian to pretend this isn’t crazy. 

Utopia is not an option. No matter what.

Bad people exist. They always have and always will. The most dangerous of these bad people seek political power. They don't go away because of the widespread belief in government's existence, nor will they vanish if that belief is eradicated. It's Utopian to pretend otherwise.

I've never heard a liberty lover promoting the idea that the world would be perfect if government and its violations to natural liberty were removed from society. Just that it's stupid to give bad guys a veil of legitimacy through "government".

It’s utterly Utopian to pretend government can be “limited”. That it is anything other than a criminal conspiracy. That government is necessary or even good.

As soon as some statist (who will ignorantly deny being a statist and take offense at this character flaw being pointed out) says you’re “Utopian”, you can bow out of the discussion. His opinions can be disregarded. He has told you as clearly as possible that you don't need to take him seriously. He may take himself seriously, but he’s not willing to face reality, including the reality of the depths of his brainwashing. If ignoring him convinces him he's "won", congratulations to him. It's the only "win" he'll see.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Politics is poison

Politics makes people stupid. Politics ruins everything it mixes with.

Unfortunately, people prefer politics to reality and science.
People prefer politics to morality and their religious beliefs.
They prefer politics to ethics.
People prefer politics to logic, rationality, and consistency.
People prefer politics to liberty.
People prefer politics to respect for natural human rights.
People prefer politics to peace.
People prefer politics over their own best interests, ands over the best interests of others.

This is how you can know politics makes people stupid. It can't possibly be otherwise.

Besides making people stupid, politics usually makes people at least a little bit evil. You can see this by the inevitable outcome of mixing politics with anything.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

Who spilled the Eversomuch More-So?

When I was a kid, I read a book about a character named Homer Price, and one story was about something a traveling salesman sold to the townfolk. The stuff was called "Eversomuch More-so". Anything it was sprinkled on became more of whatever it already was. Food became more delicious. But sometimes, it backfired, like when it was used on squeaky springs and they became even more squeaky.

As I remember the book, when the shaker was finally opened, it was empty. The effect had been psychological all along. (Or maybe it was more ambiguous, but that's what I got out of it. I actually still have the book- I rarely give up books, which is why I have a library in my house. I may read the story again.)

Well, it feels to me like someone put Eversomuch More-so in the chemtrails.

Crazy people have become Eversomuch More-so crazy.
Political criminals have become Eversomuch More-so criminal.
Warmongers have become Eversomuch More-so in favor of wars. 
Statists have become Eversomuch More-so statist in their delusions and superstitions.

I'm hoping liberty lovers have (or will soon) become Eversomuch More-so in love with liberty and skeptical of rulers and legislation. It would provide a nice balance to the toxicity around us.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

War-ons

Is it interesting to you how many people want to claim credit for war? ("War crimes" has always seemed redundant to me, so I'll go with the single word "war", which covers it perfectly.)

They'll say "we" did this or that thing. Really? They participated? I guess that means they can be held accountable. Right?

Of course, only the losers get held accountable. The winners get to write the "history" and pretend they were the good guys all along. They do it every time.

If you're violating someone's property, damaging it, hurting and killing people who were not posing an individual, credible threat to you or someone else, you're not the good guy.

Funny thing about war- there's often no good guy involved. It's usually bad guys against bad guys. I often don't really want either team to "win". I want both to lose and maybe learn a lesson about being a net negative to the planet. I'm certainly not going to affiliate myself with either side. Why would anyone want to join ranks with any of the bad guys?

Now, if you join with neighbors, defend each other's property from invaders, don't rely on government handouts of weapons, and respect everyone's life, liberty, and property as you defend life, liberty, and property, then you're a good guy. You may not really be engaging in "war", though.

Defenders don't invade the property of others. They don't ignore "collateral damage"- innocent deaths, injuries, and property damage- but take responsibility and do their best to pay restitution. They don't occupy the defeated territory. Cooperation, not collectivism.

And, if you use (or credibly threaten to use) a nuclear weapon, you're definitely not one of the good guys since nukes (and really, any bombs) can never truly be used defensively- there will always be innocent people harmed.

Militias can be used legitimately/defensively. Government militaries apparently can't. That's the nature of government. You may think "government is good"... if you're a moron. I can't believe so many people- not just common political criminals- hunger for war. They really need better hobbies!

It's just a shame I can't exile politicians, government militaries, and their war-hungry fans to a distant moon and let them fight it out without a way to return to Earth if anyone "wins". If you give me that button, I will use it. I'm so tired of their kind.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.