Maintaining liberty your responsibility

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 5, 2026)

Every system people create takes effort to keep working. Someone must keep fixing the problems which otherwise pile up until the system fails. None are "set it and forget it". This is true for all systems of government: democracies, constitutional republics, monarchies, and communist dictatorships.

It even applies in the absence of a system of government, as detractors of anarchy like to point out while they carefully ignore how the same applies to the system they prefer.

Yes, in the absence of government, evil, power-hungry crooks, with the assistance of irresponsible cowards who prefer to live as cattle, will keep trying to impose a government. Just like those who manipulate every governing system to their advantage so they become the ones with the power and the easy wealth. Someone will have to stop them every time they try it.

Everything must be maintained as it breaks down. Nothing is permanent. You can't escape the need to fight entropy.

Why would people who justify not doing something because it isn't permanent brush their teeth, bathe, or eat? They must see no point in cleaning the house or washing laundry. The clean doesn't last forever, so why bother? They must not see why it's necessary to keep fueling their car, because they'll only have to do it again later. It's a strange, childish way to live.

Those who cry "but warlords will take over" in the absence of government ignore reality. It already happened. It's how we ended up replacing a free America with the United States empire through the Constitution. That was the time to rise up and maintain the liberty which was being stolen. Warlords took over, and the people cheered.

I have been blamed for not protecting the Constitution from domestic enemies who violated it and got away with doing so generations before I was born. It's an odd accusation.

The system we are currently living with is a trap. It wasn't properly maintained, plus the seeds of its own destruction were planted at its founding. It's not corrupt, because it's working exactly as designed; those who gain power from the system tried to hide the design from you.

Establishing a state was the mistake. The best part is no part; don't waste time trying to fix what shouldn't exist. The choice is between liberty and government, which can't coexist. Defending liberty against the entropy of those who would govern is your never-ending responsibility.

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

Is sadness a consequence of awareness?

It makes me sad to be aware of all the liberty we are missing out on- all our rights that are being violated- just because so many people don't want to be responsible for themselves, but want someone else to tell them how to live. 

To protect them from their own incompetence. 

Because of someone's fear.

I don't want to be sad.

But being unaware of the situation wouldn't change the reality. Pretending it doesn't matter won't make things better. Ignoring the problem won't make it go away. 

Ignorance isn't really bliss; you'll just be surprised when the police state catches you in its gears.  I know- I've seen it happen to people who denied the situation because the denial was comfortable... until it wasn't.

Yeah, it makes me sad to see how many people are content with government stealing liberty and violating rights. But there's no going back.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

That divisive trial

I'm torn.

Yes, I believe that woman murdered her children. 

I'm also aware that government lies to get the verdict it wants. My belief that she did it, based on hearing that she confessed and that there's plenty of evidence, is only that: a belief. I wasn't there, so I can't know for certain- and I never will.

I still believe she did it, for what that's worth.

Yes, I believe she is/was insane. Insane, but guilty. I don't believe insanity or hormonal issues absolve a person of responsibility for their archation. 

If that were the case, a lot of convicted and admitted rapists should get a new trial since testosterone is sometimes called the violence hormone.

I'm in favor of jury nullification. I think it applies when you believe the person did what they are accused of, but "laws" prohibiting the action are illegitimately prohibiting something every individual has a natural right to do. I don't believe that fits in this case because no one has a right to kill their defenseless offspring.

I also believe a government court is the least credible place to seek justice. They are designed to punish, not to provide justice. Those children will never receive justice by caging ot killing the woman who killed them. Justice is out of reach; it's not an option here.

I wouldn't mind too much if every jury trial resulted in a mistrial to demonstrate the absurdity of the ritual. Of course, if government can't get the outcome it seeks through a jury trial, I expect they'll dispense with that in the small percentage of cases that still go that route. They'll skip right to the punishment phase. Maybe a jury trial complicates this.

As always, I'm against imprisonment, partly because it is funded by theft, thus leaving the victim victimized twice. Also, because it is Crime University. Third, because it is too easy to use for political purposes. Plus, it doesn't provide restitution, but punishment.

I would much rather leave bad guys out among the general population, who are completely aware of what they did. Don't attack them to punish them, but watch them (not with government spyware, though, since that isn't public), and if they try to violate anyone else, they (like the others who do the same) would likely be Darwinized from a free society. That's usually the best outcome, even if some think it's harsh. Otherwise, as long as they never archate again, leave them alone. 

As always, there's a possibility that I'm completely wrong in my views on this case and everything else.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

What's left of the Bill of Rights?

I have objections to the Constitution, seeing it as a betrayal of everything America could have been.

However, IF each of the amendments in the Bill of Rights had been followed to the letter by the fe(de)ral government, and enforced by each individual whom that government sought to violate by ignoring the Bill of Rights, then things today would be a lot better than they are. Not perfect, but objectively better. (Except for the poor government-supremacists, who would suffer from hurt feelings.)

As it is, every amendment in the Bill of Rights- with the possible exception of the 3rd Amendment*- has been torn to shreds by the authoritarian maneuverings of the feds; endlessly justified by government-supremacist citizens who don't care about rights or liberty, but only about giving government illegitimate power.

I say the possible exception of the 3rd Amendment* because I consider being taxed to support (house, clothe, and feed) illegal standing armed forces in perpetuity to be a clear violation of the spirit of that amendment, if not the letter of it. Some would disagree (but they're wrong, of course).

If we never have "peacetime" because the criminal government keeps starting armed conflicts, that shouldn't be my problem.

So, as I've said before, the Constitution is effectively dead, and its only utility at this point is to show how deeply criminal the US government has become.
And, the Constitution was a mistake in the first place- the result of an unethical conspiracy to establish a nation-state in place of a free America.

The founders didn't trust liberty, but wanted to be governed- or more likely, to be the governers. We are paying the price.

-

*Third Amendment-
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

"Great Reset"? I'll go one better

Fellow frogs, the pot is boiling.

To avoid an open-air prison ("open-air" until the Rulers decide to close us in), the whole thing is going to have to be turned off. Unplug it, count to 10 years, then plug it back in- see if it works.

Claire Wolfe Time has come and gone, and nothing was done. 

We acted like the push for "safety" was a mere difference of opinion.
We let political criminals impose anti-defense "laws", place cameras everywhere to spy on us and track us, and install shut-off switches in our essential utilities so we can easily be punished for wrongthink.

I like the benefits of technology, but the control freaks are making this reset necessary. It has to be done if there's to be any shred of liberty left. The benefits of allowing government access to technology no longer outweigh the costs.

It would be great if we could just cut off government's access. Either by making it impossible for government to use technology beyond wooden sticks and twisted grass strings, or by eliminating government altogether. Then, the people would still have the benefits of technology. But that's not in the cards.

So, as rough as it would be, we need a Mother of All Solar Flares to fry all the electronics. If that's what it takes to blind and neuter the creepy Watchers, then that's what is now essential if humanity is to have any future worth living.

Bring on the Greatest Reset.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

A negative "cult of personality"

A "cult of personality" has a flip side; a negative. Currently, this is seen most clearly in TDS sufferers.

Look, I hate a LOT of the things Trump does. A lot of them, and I hate them intensely.

Those in the negative iteration of the Trump cult of personality don't seem to hate what he does, especially; They just hate him. 

If their favored political criminal was doing the exact same thing, they'd be defending it.
Just like those in the Trump cult of personality would hate the crap he does if it were a different politician doing it.

You know this is true.

If the person matters more than the action, it's probably not rational. I've fallen into this trap, too.

I'm not saying it's good or bad. But it is political, and as we all know, politics makes people stupid.

I looked online, and while Grok admits this "negative cult of personality" is a real phenomenon, it says it doesn't have a specific name. It should.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

There's only one word...

This is my 20-year blogiversary! That’s 7,305 days, and 8,101 blog posts.

I feel this should be significant in some way, but in what way? I don't know.

The world- and America, specifically- is so much more authoritarian now than when I started writing here. Hopefully, that's a coincidence, or inertia; a correlation and not causation.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Services can be provided sans government

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for September 2, 2026)

I don't want or need to be governed, but I still want a few of the things people claim government does or provides. 

The difference is, I want these things provided voluntarily, without taxation or other forms of coercion. If something isn't essential enough for people to chip in and fund, it needs to go away. Forever, or until enough people decide to pay for it without being forced...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

Good rule of thumb: Mind your business

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 29, 2026)

People who believe they have a right to not see or hear something they don't like are one of the biggest roadblocks to liberty. They imagine they have a right to not be offended. This nonexistent right is more important to them than letting others use their own property as they wish.

Offense is subjective. What offends you doesn't offend others. Something about you offends someone. It sets a dangerous precedent to attack others based on what offends you.

Being offended is a personal character problem, not a condition which creates a right to control someone else. The obligation is on each of us to respect the right of others to do what they want as long as they aren't harming anyone.

If you're offended by the sight of someone's tattoos, piercings, opposite-sex cosplay, or by the words they use, you need to mind your own business unless they violate your life, liberty, or property in some way.

Some people are offended if you don't have a uniformly short, green monoculture called a "lawn" surrounding your house. I prefer seeing a healthy, diverse system of native grasses and other plants which don't require a dangerous waste of water to sustain.

If you're offended by someone's private property, remember it isn't yours to control. As long as it isn't breeding swarms of rats, flies, or other vermin to cause you actual harm, you have no claim against the owner. If it is causing you harm, you are owed restitution, but not control of their property. No one loses their rights because of how you feel about what they are doing.

Those who lust for the power to control others don't like this fact. They want to do what they want while preventing or punishing others for doing what they want. When this hypocrisy is pointed out, they'll lie about how this "offensive" view or "offensive" speech actually violates them in some way. It doesn't.

This applies doubly if you represent government interests and believe it gives you the right to control others and their property or their speech.

Remember, government doesn't legitimately own anything or have any rights. Everything it possesses is either stolen from the rightful owners or purchased with stolen or counterfeited money. If you want to be bothered by something, be bothered by that. Don't use this illegitimate gang as a tool to violate others. That's uncivilized and should offend everyone.

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

Is it necessary?

The recent water crisis we've gone through locally made me realize something about myself. Often, before I do something, I ask myself if it's necessary.

Every time I turned on a faucet for the past few weeks, that question crossed my mind. Along with, just how much water do I need for this? Right now?

It made me realize I do that to myself all the time, with other issues.

Is it necessary to spend this dollar?
Is it necessary to go? Is it necessary to drive there?
Is it necessary to do this?
Is this argument necessary?

If it is necessary, I do it with open eyes and (usually) a clear conscience.

Often, I realize something I was about to do isn't necessary, and I don't do it. 

If it's not necessary, that doesn't mean I won't do it. Some unnecessary things are important enough- to me- to do anyway, but it's good to do them with that understanding; not mindlessly on autopilot.

I also know there are things I see as unnecessary that others feel are very necessary. Government, for example. Too bad they can't have their "necessity", but keep it off my property and out of my life. Because liberty is necessary for me, and their government fetish prevents it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Being mainstream would be easier

Sometimes I wish I could fall in line with the mainstream of society. But then, we’d both be comfortably wrong.

I know... this isn't the first (or even the 100th) time I've thought this.

Everyone who advocates that others be governed has some issue they'd be willing to see the State kill you over to prevent you from doing what you have a right to do. Just because they don't like it.

This includes "libertarians" who have some issue they'll defend the State's position on. And there are a lot of them. I suspect some are lying because they don't want statists to think badly of them, or they have seen how libertarians who stood up to the authoritarian narrative were treated in the past. I get it. 

They'd be better off keeping their mouths shut than defending the State's position, but they don't.

A current example is public spyware. I can't get over the supposed libertarians who are defending Flock cameras, using the excuse that you don't have the right to not be photographed by a random stranger in public. That's not even close to the same thing.

If a random stranger took photos of you in public places, then used the information gained in those photos to track you down to rob, kidnap, cage, or murder you, you have the right to use deadly force against that stranger. (The State might dispute this, but the State is often wrong.)

You have the same right if that stranger works for government and uses Flock spyware, but you aren't "allowed" to defend yourself in this case. No matter how blatant the violation or how immediate the threat. Why do these people pretend they can't see the difference?

If the "law" allows you to be photographed and tracked so that your life, liberty, and property can be violated, the "law" is wrong. If the "law" forbids you from defending yourself from someone doing this, the "law" is wrong.

I'll stand up to those who say otherwise, and I'll question their motivations and their ethics.

But, I admit life would be simpler if I just went along with the mainstream and begged for safety instead of demanding liberty. Instead of sticking up for uncomfortable rights and inconvenient liberty.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

More theft equals "the best life's"?

Statists get really upset when it is pointed out that taxation is theft. European statists- or statists who have a fetish for spending the stolen money according to the European model- most of all.

I had one educate me with this brilliant observation:

"Go to Europe dummy, they pay more in taxes and live the best life’s. Your taxes are stolen to,build a basketball arena instead of giving you a healthcare program. Stop electing a**hats that squander your taxes -problem solved"

There is so much wrong there; it's hard to address it all. I responded:

"Yeah, I see how your "healthcare" programs work. No thanks. I can spend MY OWN MONEY better than anyone else can spend it for me."

Maybe he's the one who should go to Europe, since he likes their taxation so much.

I also could have pointed out that paying taxes is the problem, not necessarily what the stolen money is used for. My objection isn't that the money is stolen then squandered, but that it is stolen at all in the first place. 

I could have pointed out that "the best life's" is subjective. Higher taxation isn't going to improve my life in ways that matter to me. In fact, taxation lowers the quality of my life considerably.

I could have pointed out that I don't support anyone being "elected" to rule, but statists impose these people on me regardless of my wishes. Electing different political criminals isn't going to fix things, or magically change taxation into something other than theft.

His "solution" solves nothing. But people like him are so hypnotized by statism that they can't even imagine an alternative. And, he's rude.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Technology- good and bad.

I am not a Luddite or anti-technology. I like new technology- when it improves my life.

Spying on me, tracking me, and controlling me is not an improvement to my life.

Nasty little cowards who are afraid of the world and want Big Brother to keep them safe feel otherwise. Unfortunately, a lot of new technology is tailor-made for them. They beg for it, and someone is creepy enough to give it to them. Or, more accurately, someone will create it and sell it to The State, which is evil enough to use it against all of us on behalf of those people. For "safety".

Because of this, I can relate to people who are anti-technology. I'm trying not to join them, but I understand where they are coming from. They are better people than those making and deploying technology to spy, track, and control the rest of us.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

An intelligent refutation of libertarianism?

I've never read an intelligent refutation of libertarianism/anarchy. And I've encountered a lot of attempts to do so! Thousands of them.

Instead, I've seen intelligent people grasp at straw men, misunderstand the topic, deflect, project, and flat-out lie. 

As soon as I read "The problem with libertarianism is that,  just like socialism, it...:" I know I'm in for some weapons-grade enriched Retardium.

Personally, in all these tactics, I only see their irrational fear. Regardless, they invariably believe they've done what they set out to do. 

Unfortunately for them, that's not the case.

It's obvious they care more about hating liberty and loving government than about getting it right. Why? Because politics. 

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Don't cave to fear of (freedom from) government

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 26, 2026)

I used to wonder how people could still support the existence of government. It has failed its most basic supposed mandate for over 6000 years. It has never protected the rights of the people it ruled, or made their lives better than they would have been without it. It does have a skilled and dishonest public relations team working to convince its victims otherwise, though...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

Don't participate in violating liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 22, 2026)

Liberty is a big jewel with many facets. All its facets are important, but you can pick favorites. I do. Even then, don't try to dull the shine of the facets which don't affect you as much. To someone, those are the important ones.

No one can focus on every important liberty issue. Pick a few that matter most to you, or the one most under attack at this moment. If the threat shifts, adapt.

Some people try to pass off cut glass or shiny plastic as jewels. Don't be fooled. If it obligates you to provide something for someone else, or requires someone else's life, liberty, or property to be violated, you have no right to it. Not to feel safe, to get something you need, or for your convenience. That's not liberty.

It's important to defend liberty, but more important to not violate it. Don't be the problem someone else has to overcome. Don't participate in violating anyone's life, liberty, or property, even if the current laws say you should.

If a job requires you to violate someone's rights, don't accept the job, even if you need the money. If you took a job, believing it would serve liberty and protect people's rights, but you discover it does the opposite, quit. Or at least refuse to participate in the violations. This is your primary human responsibility, even if you don't like the consequences. It's your responsibility to respect others' liberty just as it is their responsibility to respect yours.

You're responsible for defending liberty from all threats and violations, even those you personally approve of.

The biggest threat to liberty is, and has always been, government and its supporters. No other threat comes close. Even the freelance criminals you fear the most are a minor inconvenience by comparison.

No government job secures liberty; all government jobs violate natural human rights. Some are worse than others. The ones which provide a service the market would fill if government didn't are the most benign. Those no one would voluntarily fund if taxation hadn't been normalized are the ones which need to be abolished immediately. All the others fall somewhere in between, but they all need to be phased out.

Whichever facet of liberty you choose to polish and shine your light on, government is its biggest threat. If you don't spend most of your effort defending it from government, you're wasting your time.

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

How I spent my weekend

My old throwing knife has seen better days, and I decided to get a spare as a replacement before it breaks. If I were better at throwing- and sticking- the knife, it wouldn't have such a hard life.

More than 30 years ago, when I decided to add knife throwing to my Rendezvous skills, I didn't like any of the (Rendezvous-acceptable) commercial throwing knives out there. Most didn't even resemble knives.

But I found one advertised as a "throwing bowie" in the Atlanta Cutlery catalog. It was also cheap! (I think it was $20 at the time.) So I ordered it.

Back then, I was considerably worse at throwing a knife than I am now, and the brass guard broke off almost immediately. That was fine and expected. I also hated the weird hook at the butt end of the grip. It only got in the way, so I ground it off. The wood grip shattered before too long. The knife went through a few different wooden replacement grips until I replaced them with leather (secured with peened nails and washers) a few months ago. I had rawhide protecting the front of the handle scales most of that time, but it became a bigger problem than help, so it got removed a couple of months ago.

The leather handle was installed around the time I started practicing throwing my tomahawk and knife daily again. (I had taken a decade and a half break from regular throwing, just because. That was a mistake!) This handle is already showing heavy wear, but has been surprisingly resilient. As I had hoped.

Other problems soon started showing up, though.

A bad throw is hard on the knife, and some days I'm having to bend the blade back straight every few throws. That's not going to be good for the longevity of the blade, so I started thinking about a replacement before this one snaps in half and takes me out of practice for weeks. I was pleased to see Atlanta Cutlery still offers the same knife for a comparable price, and a few weeks ago, I bit the bullet and ordered one. (A huge "Thank you!" to my subscribers for allowing me to do this!)

The shape of the blade is a little different than my original one, but that's not an issue. It's probably due to differences in the particular Pakistani knife maker rather than a design change.

This past weekend, I had some time to relax, and I used that opportunity to go ahead and shape the knife into the throwing knife I want. 

I've learned a few things about a throwing knife as I want mine to be over decades of experience. 

First, I once again got rid of the horrible hooked beak at the butt of the grip, and smoothed the wood where I removed it.
Then, I removed most of the brass guard (before it has a chance to snap off), leaving just enough to protect the anterior of the wooden handle scales. I'm hoping that works to make the wood grips last longer, but if not, it's educational. I ground and filed the guard so that it doesn't stick above the top or bottom of the blade, hoping that keeps it from snagging on the target and breaking if (OK, when) I miss.

If it doesn't work as I hope, I still have this new blade and I can put new leather handle scales on it anytime. I've learned some things about that, too.

I then took it out and gave it 6 test throws. It worked great and didn't get any damage- helped by the fact that I didn't miss the target (I did, however, stick it too weakly once, and it fell out). Now I'll keep it as a spare for when Old Bendy finally gives up the ghost. I feel a lot better having a spare, and I'm no longer worried that ACC will discontinue this model just when I need a new one.

That's partially how I misspent my weekend. It was fun.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Blind squirrels finding nuts

Everyone is right about something. Everyone! Even evil politicians.

That doesn't necessarily make them a good person, just like someone being wrong about something doesn't make them a bad person.

Whoever it is, keep the good and throw out the bad.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

But have they tried tar and feathers?

Looked at objectively, every single migrant problem is a government problem. 

Government either imported (trafficked) the migrants or coddles their criminal behavior while forbidding the victims from using self-defense (and the proper tools designed for that purpose).

I see videos from Europe, and what I see is governments causing, or at least failing to prevent, the attacks. And punishing those who actually do something about the problem- like trying to defend themselves and others.

Then, people who don't see to the root of the problem blame the criminal migrants instead of the political criminals who essentially gave them permission to do what they do.

Tar and feather the politicians, and the problem would quickly solve itself.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Verify; Don't trust

When this town's government declared a water emergency (because of their screw-up) and imposed water restrictions, I cut back on my water usage. They demanded 20%, but I was able to cut my use by 40% (my parents cut theirs by 50%).

Water is essential, and I was willing to help, even knowing that the Tragedy of the Commons meant that many people wouldn't cut back. I was not one of those calling for them to be "fined" or otherwise punished.

But, being who I am, I don't trust government. Amounts ("85,000 gallons", "4 feet", etc.) were posted without context. That always tells me someone is trying to deceive. So I took it upon myself to check the water levels myself.

There are 4 water tanks in town, 3 of which have gauges that are easy to see and read. The fourth, a water sphere tower, has no way to be read by the public. Someone suggested a laser thermometer gun, but the ones with the necessary precision to read something at the distance involved would be too expensive, so I'll have to ignore that one.

What I discovered was that the tanks weren't as empty as we were being led to believe.

I wanted to document this, so I have been photographing the water gauges every day and posting the photos online. The funny thing is that as soon as my first photos were online, the story changed a little, and it was admitted that the tanks were "almost full". (That was fast!)

I wish I had been watching in the months leading up to the crisis to see what the "normal" water levels are. I suspect we are close.

But none of that is useful for the agenda to buy the land that the city commissioners want to buy, from a crony- a deal that was roundly condemned as a bad deal two years ago when it was proposed and a petition was circulated against it. The government still wants this deal (no other) and is still pushing this as the only possible solution. They are still trying to scare people into accepting this plan.

But...

The worst restrictions have been lifted. Lawn watering is being discouraged and limited to one day per week per address. It will be interesting to see the effect of this, seeing how much water my parents used on the one day in the last billing cycle when they watered their backyard.

If it makes a big difference, I will be there to see it myself so that the rulers can't gaslight the population with more fearmongering. Combined with my open condemnation of the local Flock spyware, I'm probably putting myself in danger.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?