Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Hierarchy of Bullies

First you have the Controllers, who- in spite of the pass some people try to give them- are always evil to some degree. These people include presidents, legislators, judges- but also high ranking bureaucrats, ATF and IRS management, and anyone who makes up counterfeit rules to be imposed.

Then you have the Compliance Apes who find ways to force people to comply with the counterfeit rules. These people are either evil or stupid- maybe both in some combination. Here you have the cops, TSA child molesters, DMV drones, the ATF and IRS thugs who actually go after people, and any "government" employee who is given the imaginary privilege of stealing property or initiating violence.

Next down the hierarchy of evil come business owners who copy the behavior of any of the previous bad guys. If government does it and says it's OK, then they believe it's OK for them to do it too. So you end up with drug screening, "no weapons" policies, and other things which cheapen life and violate individual sovereignty.

Next are those who actively support what any of the above are doing. Perhaps those who will report any exercise of liberty to the "proper authorities" are also in this group, or perhaps they deserve their own special level of Hell- I can see it both ways. After all, it's not far from ignorantly thinking the above bullies are right, to actually handing people over to them.

Next come those who prey on others without even bothering to get "legitimate" by joining the Gang. These are not as numerous nor are they as dangerous, since you can still normally shoot them without never-ending numbers of their fellow thugs coming after you.

Now come the greatest mass of those working against Rightful Liberty- the people simply don't care one way or the other until they find themselves victimized. If something happens to you, well, you should have obeyed the law, or given the mugger what he wanted (plus what business did you have being there?)

Now we come to those who like freedom and liberty- unless those concepts involve leaving someone alone when they don't want to. Then excuses and justifications are built around certain justifications for government intervention, which would be seen as the evil it is if it were being done to anyone who hadn't been dehumanized first. Often the justification revolves around some "might" or "possible" or "what if". No violation has occurred, but they are convinced it is just around the corner and only "laws" and cops can prevent it. Maybe they sometimes have a point. Those who support the government's military are also in this group.

Then you finally have the people who aren't bullies at all, and don't support those who are. These are simply trying to live their lives without violating anyone else. Respecting the Rightful Liberty, property, and self determination of everyone, whether they like or agree with them or not. This is a tiny group, but I hope it keeps growing. The world- and the lives of each non-parasitic individual in it- will be so much better the larger this group gets.



  1. Aye Kent, no one likes a bully.

    Another view on 'private property' as it relates to borders, invasion, and immgration.


    1. He's basically saying what I've been saying- if actually respecting property rights prevents migration, too bad.

      It's not about "open borders"- it's about no "government borders" whatsoever, but about respecting and defending property rights instead.

      There shouldn't be any "public" property, private property should be controlled by the owner, not by politicians and their filthy "laws".

      "Free immigration would appear to be in a different category from other policy decisions, in that its consequences permanently and radically alter the very composition of the democratic political body that makes those decisions."
      Of course, there should never be a "democratic political body" making any collective decisions.

      Lew keeps pointing out the problems migrants will cause in such a socialist system, but doesn't question whether the system itself is the problem.

      So, yes, there are problems but again, borderists do everything they can to avoid the core issues while railing against the consequences they don't see come directly from what they keep propping up.

  2. Agreed.

    Way too much 'federal land' here out west.

    Texas had the right idea.

    1. "Texas" shouldn't control any land, either. Neither should counties, cities, and towns.