Saturday, August 17, 2019

Guns-- Time to try something different

I recently heard an anti-gun bigot saying, in relation to mass shootings, "What we've been doing isn't working. It's time to try something different."

He's right, but I'll bet he doesn't know he's right.

What his team has been doing isn't working. It's never going to work... unless the goal is to make mass shootings more common. It's time to try something different, all right. It's time to stop trying (or pretending to try) to prevent mass shootings with more "laws" which make it safer to be a mass shooter.

Past time. Long past time to get rid of all the anti-gun "laws". All of them. Every single last one. Stop giving mass murderers what they want; what they need. Stop providing them with pools of unarmed-- disarmed-- potential victims.

Maybe disarmed victims are what the anti-gun bigots want. It's not what I want. I want mass shooters to die in their attempt to kill people.

If you advocate anti-gun "laws" you are helping losers become evil losers. You are empowering them to murder more people. If the NRA "compromises" yet again they deserve to die as an organization.

So, yeah. It's time to try something different because what you've been trying isn't working.

Not one more inch.


Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Friday, August 16, 2019

American SS: celebrities?

I never thought I'd see the day when uniformed SS officers would go strutting through America and be received as celebrities.

Yet, I've witnessed it myself.

I took my daughter to the fair Wednesday evening. She had a friend along so I stayed out of their way. I wandered a bit, then found a seat and sat to people-watch.

Suddenly I saw what I took to be a group of SS officers marching in my general direction. I felt disoriented by the sight. I wish I'd thought quickly enough to take a photo (I also wish my phone settings hadn't randomly and secretly changed to a lower resolution camera.)

I did manage to snap a couple of pictures (the top two above) when they stopped and milled with the crowd for a bit. I think one of the Brownshirts who came up to chat with them noticed me taking pictures. They were posing for pictures with people (their fans?), and I even think I saw one signing an autograph. And I just sat there thunderstruck at seeing SS officers being treated like celebrities.

I was so struck by the similarity that I did an image search for an SS uniform. Yeah, that's what they were wearing.

Seriously, apart from the red armband and the silly hip flaps, and the fact that some of the uniforms were short-sleeved, the uniforms were standard SS-- with U.S. touches and details, of course. This is the American SS-- what the German SS evolved into.

I know there's a mental trap here. Appearances don't always mean what you think. A coral snake and a scarlet kingsnake look similar, but they aren't the same thing. But the similar looks aren't exactly coincidental. If you don't know the difference you might run away from-- or kill-- the kingsnake because you believe it is venomous. The similar appearance means the kingsnake will be treated like a coral snake because it looks like a coral snake. To know these officers proudly wear something that looks nearly indistinguishable from a German SS uniform also means something.

Police are scum.


Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Thursday, August 15, 2019

My scary manifesto

(All the evil losers seem to be posting manifestos-- or at least manifestos are posted and being attributed to them. Why do only the crazy losers get to write manifestos? I think I'll take a crack at it.)

--My Manifesto--

You do you; I'll do me.

I accept that I, as a human being, have no right to initiate force or violate property rights-- both those concepts being covered by the statement: I have no right to archate.

You also have no right to archate, but if you do anyway it's your problem.

I believe that if you are doing something you have no right to do, you are doing something wrong. If you make a habit of it you are one of the bad guys.

I don't believe in punishment, which I see as revenge.
I do believe in defense.
I also believe in justice, which is punishment's polar opposite. I won't go after you claiming "justice", although if you violate someone and don't pay restitution I will not lift a finger to help you in any way. I will then advertise the fact and hope you die alone, exposed to the elements and starving for food and water. But it's not my job, nor any human's job, to do what nature will take care of just fine without my help.

I don't believe there's any such thing as a "right to govern" and see all attempts to govern anyway as archation; as attacks on the life, liberty, and property of others. I'm not obligated to stop you-- but I won't step in and prevent consequences from paying you an unpleasant visit. Play stupid games; win stupid prizes. And I may exercise the right to defend myself and others from your violations-- at my discretion. If you choose to violate others, watch your back forever.

I don't recognize your political government nor its "laws" as anything other than thuggery. The reality is that there will always be bad people around. I won't let them dictate the terms of my life. Some bad people aren't somehow "better" than others. If you continually choose to archate you are the same as every other person who continually chooses to archate.

If I try to impose myself or my values on you, you have the right to stop me. Whatever it takes. I have the same right if you are the one trying to impose on me. It doesn't matter if this imposition and violation is called a "law" or an opinion.

Live and let live. Anything less is barbaric.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Wednesday, August 14, 2019

Jury Duty day

If this posts, it means "my" jury duty didn't get canceled at the last minute and I'm sitting in the courthouse. Hoping I'll be allowed to do some good.

Support FIJA.

Watch for updates below if you're interested in this sort of thing.

UPDATE: Well, the case was settled out of court but they forgot to update the website. The girl who does that was on vacation when they settled and didn't think of it when she got back to work. "You didn't call?" No, I checked the website like it said I could. And these are the people who know better how to run your life than you do.


Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Anti-gun laws always wrong path

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 14, 2019)

In the wake of the recent mass shootings and the hype surrounding them, people are asking "why?" Simpletons parrot the popular answer: "guns". Sensible people know there's no single the rest...

Thank you for helping support

Tuesday, August 13, 2019

A rude and unreasonable demand

From the link on "compromise" below

You can't compromise liberty. There is no compromise between liberty-- doing all you have a right to do-- and someone's unreasonable feelings.

And yet, that's what rude anti-gun bigots demand.

No one has the right to demand someone else "give up some liberty". There is no such thing as "too much liberty", so there's never any conflict.

When you are living your liberty you aren't violating anyone in any way. It simply isn't possible.

Those whose feelings are hurt by this truth just need to grow up and get out of the way. If they are scared or offended it's a sign they are not sensible. If they demand you "compromise" your liberty for their feelings they are the bad guys. You have no obligation to deal with them. You certainly have no obligation to give up some of your liberty to make them feel better.

It wouldn't work anyway. People who demand you compromise your liberty are broken people. They'll never feel better because the problem is inside them. Nothing you give up will ever be enough for them. They'll always demand "just a little more".


I don't want to be mean to anyone, but I'm not going to act as though anyone demanding someone else give up "some" liberty is being reasonable. They aren't. They are being rude, nasty, childish, and irrational. They can't be taken seriously, but they are a serious threat.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Monday, August 12, 2019

Don't become like the evil losers

There are many factors that contribute to a loser deciding to become an evil loser and shoot up a bunch of innocent (or even random guilty) people.

However, the statist knee-jerk reaction to enslave us all with "laws" for the acts of a few is just as bad as shooting into a crowd of innocent people. It absolutely is.

"Laws" kill people, including innocent people. That fact is swept under the rug by those who want to impose "laws". All "laws" are enforced by death, no matter how trivial, but that's not the only way they kill people.

If you are prevented from having the proper tools for defense when you need them, people may well die. Many already have.

If you advocate "laws" you are no better than those who gear up and go into a crowd and start shooting. Yes, some "laws" are less horrible than others-- those are the unnecessary "laws". But the very idea of-- the superstitious belief in-- "laws" is toxic to society. Don't go down that path. You can be better than the evil losers. Act like it.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Sunday, August 11, 2019

Limiting liberty never good for people

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 10, 2019)

There are few things I enjoy more than helping people.

In the past few months, I've opened a car for a neighbor who locked her keys inside it. Twice. I gave a military-style can opener I was carrying to a guy who was unsuccessfully trying to buy a can opener.

I hold doors for people, I hand them items they drop, and do my best to help whenever I see the opportunity.

I just put in a two-week stint helping my family with a fireworks stand. It was like one of those harsh character-building programs, except it didn't cost anything. There was even the potential to make some money, although that didn't pan out.

Still, I was helpful to those who needed me when they needed me.

The thing is, helping people makes me happy. It's good for the person I help and it's good for me. It bothers me when I miss an opportunity to help because I'm distracted or self-absorbed. I want to pay attention to people's needs and do what I can.

I like people and I like helping. It's why I promote liberty and responsibility. Nothing helps people more in the long run than helping them realize the benefits of embracing liberty; recognizing their freedom to do everything they have a right to do, even if they don't choose to exercise it all. Limiting liberty is never good for people. Even if liberty scares someone, it's the fear which is harmful, not the liberty.

If I didn't like people very much I would convince them their rights come from government and can be limited or lost. I would tell them the Bill of Rights gives them rights, not the truth that it only applies to government by making it a serious crime for government to violate-- in the tiniest way-- any of the enumerated rights plus all unlisted rights which are placed off-limits by the Ninth Amendment. 

I would use collectivist phrases like "our government" and "our president", and dishonest terms like "your taxes".

I would want people to be dependent on government and its handouts.

If I didn't like people very much, I would celebrate laws and those who enforce them.

If you ever see this change in me you'll know I've stopped liking people. I've stopped wanting the best for them and would rather see them suffer. Be afraid!

Otherwise, I'll keep helping however I can, whenever I see the opportunity.

Thank you for helping support

Slavery gaining steam-- Revenge by "law"

"Red flag laws" are becoming all the rage. Or, as I call them: "Bitter Ex-Wife Revenge and Empowerment Acts". Because you just KNOW that's how they'll mainly play out.

Well, has written a piece on where these bad ideas came from, how they "work", and some of their consequences.

Seems to me only a pathetic coward would use a "red flag law" instead of doing the hard work to defend the innocent herself/himself-- if there were a credible threat.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Saturday, August 10, 2019

Stand up

Somebody's got to stand up and say "No". But I know it's not easy.

I don't know if I'm the right person. I don't know if I'm up to the task or strong enough. But I'm doing what I can... and it has cost me.

I know it would probably be smarter to keep my head down and be quiet. I have caring online friends who remind me of this from time to time. I know my family would prefer it. I would probably be a lot more outwardly comfortable and have a lot more money.

There's always that temptation to just pack it in-- especially when the money gets really tight or when I get ganged up on for not pretending aggressive, thieving gang members are heroes when they happen to work for government.

But, if I did could I really live with myself?

I don't know. I've never been good at going along to get along. I always let something slip, even when I'm trying to bite my tongue.

I guess I'm destined to be broke and unpopular, especially when I see what would be necessary to "fix" that.


Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Friday, August 09, 2019

Understand what you ridicule

I'm beginning to wonder if the person more dangerous than the overt anti-liberty bigot is the person who doesn't even understand what liberty or natural human rights are to begin with. Ignorance may be even more dangerous than openly advocating evil. Of course, ignorance can lead one to openly advocate evil, too.

I saw a lot of ignorance after the evil losers' recent shootings.

Scott Adams is a prime example.

He advocated (while denying he was advocating anything) a lot of anti-liberty ideas founded on his utter lack of understanding of liberty and rights, and of guns and human nature (which surprised me*)-- and on his rejection of the concept of ethical principles. Of course, he claimed anyone who stood firm for human rights is "dumb" and hinted they are not part of "the adult conversation"-- his go-to for shutting down people who disagree on principle because they actually have principles. (Although many of his listeners seem to be as unprincipled and ignorant as he is, judging by the comments he mentions.)

He's dead wrong again.

He's not the only one.

If you don't understand brain surgery, should you be making fun of the opinions about brain surgery held by those who do understand it? Only if you are arrogant and foolish.

Well, if you don't understand what liberty is and why it matters you have no business preaching at others against it. If you don't understand guns or the natural human right to own and to carry them, your opinions on the topic are invalid. Of course, this probably won't matter to you if you laugh at the notion of ethical principles, and only want to have things your way.

Principles are scary to those without them. Principles take some options off the table. You can't excuse slavery and democide without ignoring principles or making up fake "principles" which leave room for such things. They don't even know how to talk about things and events without relying on utilitarianism and pragmatism. So they try to trivialize or ridicule principles.

Adults have principles.
The childish person just excuses whatever they feel like doing by finding ways to justify it after they've decided to do it. If you can't grasp the fundamentals of the topic of conversation-- be it brain surgery, liberty, or guns-- this is even easier for you to do.

*He suggested that in a hypothetical world where all AR15s are pink, losers wouldn't feel "cool" using them to murder people. He's wrong about that. In a world where all AR15s are pink, pink guns are "cool". Just like black guns are "cool" in our world. It's not the color which makes the gun "cool", it's the gun that makes the color "cool". I'm almost shocked someone who claims to understand human nature so well could miss that so badly.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Thursday, August 08, 2019

I oppose all "laws"

I'm against drug abuse, but neither can I support prohibition.

This is difficult for some people to understand, no matter how many times I try to explain. Why? Why isn't it clear?

It's exactly the same way that I'm against shooting innocent people and I'm against anti-gun "laws".

Even if I'm against something, it doesn't imply that I'm for the government knee-jerk "solution". I know those government edicts only make things worse. Why would I support that? You can't solve a problem by doing more of the thing which contributes to the problem.

No, "laws" aren't the only factor causing drug abuse and mass murder (just for 2 examples), but they are a contributing factor. One which I completely, whole-heartedly oppose in every case.

I don't ever support "laws" or those who impose and enforce them. Never. Not even when I see a problem I want solved.


Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Wednesday, August 07, 2019

Education needs separation from state

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 7, 2019)

Once again we approach that saddest time of the year: when the majority of parents send their kids back to school; back into the local government concentration day-camps.

If you're someone who mistakes schooling for education you probably believe this is the rest...

Thank you for helping support

Tuesday, August 06, 2019

Politics makes people stupid

I'll say it again: Politics makes people STUPID!

I listened to someone defending and supporting Trump where they had to discard their life-long touted principles to do so. Just because they want to keep out "those people" and are grateful there's no "President Hillary". And perhaps because they like ritual human sacrifice. Disgusting and stupid.

Then I overheard some other people complaining about higher property "taxes" (ransom) and blaming Trump. What I didn't hear was a reason beyond that they hate Trump so it must obviously be his fault rather than the fault of those who actually impose and collect the ransom, "or else". Just so stupid.

Then you have other people begging government to violate their right to own and to carry weapons with "laws" because some evil losers who ignored "laws" murdered a bunch of people in places where the right to carry weapons was already thoroughly violated. Stupid, self-destructive, and evil.

Over and over, whenever politics becomes the topic of conversation, I see otherwise sensible people lose all their sense.

People believe politics is their Savior or their Satan-- depending on their momentary focus. They even manage to hold both of these contradictory beliefs simultaneously. Crazy!

Politics is antisocial. It is the use of theft and aggression instead of cooperation and trade. Politics makes people stupid.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU can decide if I get paid.

Monday, August 05, 2019

Feelings are immune to reason


Writing is my job.
I hope I add something you find valuable. If so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

How many?

I'm not going to accept blame for something I didn't do.
For something I oppose in the most fervent way possible.
Something that the popularly pushed "solution" would only make worse.

Writing is my job.
I hope I add something valuable... if so...
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Compounding the stupid

If you believe the way to stop mass shootings in places which prohibit guns is more "gun control" [sic] then I guess your solution to a plague outbreak is to add more plague-infested fleas.


Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

The anti-gun bigots' silly strawman

Anti-gun bigots have a "new" favorite strawman. They demand to know why the right to own and carry weapons (they'll sometimes mischaracterize this as "Second Amendment rights") is more important than the right to not be murdered.

The dishonesty-- or ignorance-- displayed by such a question is absolutely stunning.

You and I have the natural human right to own and to carry weapons. No one has the right to use those weapons to harm someone who isn't currently violating the life, liberty, or property of another. There is no conflict, and at least some of those anti-gun bigots know it.

You also have no right to make up "laws" which violate anyone's rights in any way. And since that's what all the harmful "laws" do, those who support these "laws" are currently violating life, liberty, and property. Not smart.

You have no right to make up anti-gun "laws". You can't delegate a right you don't have (because it can't exist) to someone else. If you try to do either of those things YOU are the bad guy. Just as bad as the evil losers who inspire your calls to action.

Anti-gun bigots would have us live (and die) in a failed society where only the government goons and freelance thugs are adequately armed. That's not civilized. It's prison.

Burn their strawman to the ground and leave them exposed as the bad guys they are.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Sunday, August 04, 2019

Keep American spirit of 1776 alive

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 3, 2019)

America was born in an act of secession. Those future Americans told an overbearing central government-- the world's most powerful empire and military at the time-- it was no longer welcome. It had lost the consent of the people.

Of course, the overbearing central government didn't want to let go. They never do. It had to be convinced. Its military had to be defeated and sent away.

It's a precedent which should be continued to this day.

Washington D.C. is much worse, by every measure, than King George III ever dreamed of being. The overbearing central government America is now burdened with steals many times more in taxes than its British predecessor did, and claims to have the imaginary authority to watch and control every aspect of our lives. Not only the lives of Americans but the lives of people all over the globe. This is the height of arrogance. Washington D.C. has become a global empire.

A global empire can't last. They never do.

How much will Americans put up with before they finally tell this overbearing central government to pound sand-- and back it up with meaningful action after the inevitable refusal?

Federal supremacists believe Abraham Lincoln's war settled the question of whether states are allowed to divorce the Union or are obligated to be eternally crushed under the heel of a relationship which no longer benefits their people. Any union which can't be withdrawn from is no longer a union; it is slavery. I never support slavery under any conditions-- in fact, I'm more firmly against slavery than is anyone who believes in governing others.

Slavery was already dying out in the Western world. It would have soon ended in America, too, without killing multitudes of Americans and rejecting the spirit of the Declaration of Independence in the process.

Even if you don't want to secede from Mr. Lincoln's union, you should keep the threat alive in the minds of the politicians and bureaucrats in Washington. A credible secession movement might slow the growth of the American police state. If it doesn't, you may eventually change your mind.

It's not that I believe the fifty state governments are better. They need to be seceded from as well, but it can wait.

America began with an act of secession; I believe secession is something the real American spirit can't survive without.

This Independence Day, keep the American Spirit of 1776 alive. Celebrate the honorable American tradition of secession.

Thank you for helping support

Enough enabling, already!

Another evil loser killed a bunch of people. This time at a mall and Walmart in El Paso, Texas.

It infuriates me that anti-gun bigots keep making this type of event more likely.

He, or a comparable evil loser, would have free rein at the local mall and Walmart. Because both of those places post "No Guns" signs. The stupid behind this sort of "thinking" astounds me.

I see people ignore the signs and open carry while shopping in the local Walmart. People who are obviously not Blue Line Gang special flowers. Probably unintentionally-- New Mexico is an open-carry state, after all. I've never seen the Walmart management throw anyone out for ignoring the "We don't care if you die" signs. But they are there as an invitation to evil losers, regardless. They make the customers and employees much less safe by their presence. If I were rude and didn't mind drawing attention to them I'd thank them for their service.

The local mall lost some of their "No Guns" signs over the past few years. You can actually walk in some entrances which don't have the insults posted by them. But one entrance that I know of still has one by it. I don't go there enough to have noticed whether people ignore that sign-- but you know they do.

If anyone ever decides to go on a murder spree, they aren't going to change their mind because guns are "forbidden" on the property. They'd just be able to murder uninterrupted for longer than they would if someone was shooting back. And all metal detectors at the door would do is cause the evil losers to come in shooting... while the useless alarms blare.

Anti-gun "laws"-- "gun control [sic] laws"-- KILL. Enough is enough.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Friday, August 02, 2019

I'm back!

Thanks to some help, I'm back online.

It'll take me a little time to get caught up-- I wasn't prepared for this outage. (Shame on me!)

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Wednesday, July 31, 2019

I'll be back

I thought I had made it through the squeeze but I was wrong.

I'm going to be without internet for the foreseeable future unless unexpected donations or subscriptions-- above and beyond-- come in. Thank the fireworks stand for the problem.

I had posts scheduled for last week so no days would be skipped. But those have run out and I'm writing this on my phone. I don't have a good way to crosspost from the phone so this won't show up anywhere else other than, maybe, Facebook.

So if you miss my posts for a while you'll know why.
I'll be back.

I try to err on the side of liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 31, 2019)

There are many things I don't know. There are things I think I know but I get wrong. There are also things people may believe I'm wrong about, but I'm not-- a topic for another day.

When I'm wrong, I want to be wrong in the least harmful way the rest...

Thank you for helping support

Tuesday, July 30, 2019


I guess there's no way to embed a BitChute video, so here's the link.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.
I've gained one supporter and lost two in the past month.
That's going the wrong direction.
Can you help?

"Eric Garner had it coming"

I've been mulling a recent interaction with a copsucker ever since it happened, and I'm still bewildered by his delusion.

The guy was talking about the proper way to do a chokehold, which made me think of-- and bring up-- Eric Garner.

According to this guy, Eric didn't die from being choked. He died from a heart attack he started having before he was choked.

I have to wonder (if it's even true he technically died of a heart attack) whether he would have had a heart attack if the Blue Line Gangster hadn't been in the process of accosting him. Any encounter with an aggressive, armed gangster is going to be stressful. It can trigger a heart attack-- this much should be obvious to anyone. I mean, I don't know of anyone who would deny that a violent home invasion or mugging could trigger a heart attack in the victim. Why would an attack by the Blue Line Gang be an exception?

The copsucker objected to me referring to the cops as a gang because no "gang" of cops showed up until after Eric began resisting-- before that it was just one cop doing his "job", even if I don't agree with the law he was violenting imposing. And of course, the cop "had to" call backup, because Eric was trying to prevent his own kidnapping... I mean "resisting arrest".

The copsucker claimed it was all Eric's fault because he was a known "criminal" (even though the guy admitted the law he supposedly continually broke was trivial-- selling individual cigarettes without giving the government a piece of the action).

According to this guy, none of it could be the cop's fault anyway because once a cop says you're under arrest he has no choice but to complete the arrest. Even if it kills you. That's how they are trained, so you just go along and sue later if you believe they were wrong. If you survive, that is.

I was reminded of this apologist when I heard Scott Adams say he would have been fine with it if the NYC Blue Line gangsters who had water dumped on them had shot some of the bucket bearers.

Support for cops is like a mental illness. Maybe it is one.

They-- the cops and copsuckers-- are painting themselves into a corner they aren't going to enjoy.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Monday, July 29, 2019

Government is irrational

Government-- specifically, statism-- is irrational. Let's look at what "rational" means:

1. agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible:
a rational plan for economic development.
2. having or exercising reason, sound judgment, or good sense:
a calm and rational negotiator.
3. being in or characterized by full possession of one's reason; sane; lucid:
The patient appeared perfectly rational.
4. endowed with the faculty of reason:
rational beings. 
5. of, relating to, or constituting reasoning powers:
the rational faculty.

I already see a flaw. "a rational plan for economic development". If it's a plan which involves anti-economics-- politics-- it isn't rational. And you know that's the kind of "plan" they are referring to. This is why I'll check dictionary definitions, but don't automatically trust them. They have a lot of biases included.

But, back to the irrationality of government.

Government, specifically statism, is not "agreeable to reason". If it were, there would be no statists. Instead, it is based on a superstition; a "just so" story written to explain something in a fictional manner to simpletons who are assumed to be too stupid to understand reality.

You can't disprove it with reason because it isn't based on reason. It is based on feelings and wishes. This is why the perfectly logical, reasonable, sensible, ethical statement "taxation is theft" sways so few statists. They are not agreeable to reason.

And the rest of the definition hinges on that first one. Government fails the first one so it, therefore, fails them all.

Government is irrational.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Sunday, July 28, 2019

Illegitimate laws poison society

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 26, 2019)

One way you can tell laws are not legitimate, ethically or morally, is in the way they vary from place to place. Those of us who live near an arbitrary political line-- a state line or a national border-- have the opportunity to notice this more easily than others might.

Something which is legal on one side of the line becomes illegal once you cross it. Without otherwise changing your behavior in the slightest you can go from law-abiding to criminal, by law, simply by pacing back and forth across this imaginary line.

Laws against actual wrongs like murder are less variable. You can't take someone on a road trip to find a place where killing them for a reason other than self-defense is legal. These types of laws are legitimate... and unnecessary. A law forbidding murder doesn't need to exist before you to have the natural human right to fight back and stop someone from committing murder.

A good illustration of the arbitrary nature of laws are the various laws concerning guns.

There is no such thing as an illegal gun or a legitimate anti-gun law according to the clear language of the U. S. Constitution. You'd never know this by looking at the thousands of laws which have been passed and are being enforced by the national, state, and local political class. These illegitimate gun laws create an arbitrary patchwork for travelers to navigate in a fruitless attempt to try to stay legal as they travel.

Laws concerning the substances commonly called "drugs" are the same way. Depending on which side of a line you find yourself, you might be law-abiding or you might be a criminal.

Even kids' lemonade stands are subjected to laws. They remain legal, without permits, in only fifteen states. This is so ridiculous that one thoughtful lemonade mix company has set up a program to help kids pay fines and license fees.

Yet some people still seem to believe if something is illegal it's automatically wrong. This has never been true.

While most laws are illegitimate, you can't safely ignore them. Every law, no matter how seemingly trivial, is a threat to kill you if you are caught ignoring it. This threat isn't usually carried out immediately; those enforcing the law must normally escalate their enforcement attempts a few times before that happens. Yet it does happen.

Do you see the problem? Illegitimate laws poison society. They get in the way of telling right from wrong.

Thank you for helping support

Fireworks stand update.

Well, that turned out even worse than I feared. We lost money on the fireworks stand.

I realize I have a near-magical ability to cause money to flee from my presence, but this is ridiculous. We were told we would "make so much money" from running a stand, by someone who has been running one for 30 years. All the qualifiers cropped up after we were committed.

I had been afraid we would end up not making much, but now that my dad (who was actually running the stand) has gotten the check from the fireworks company, we discover that they didn't pay us 15% of what we sold, but 15% of their profits on what we sold-- a big difference. One which we have no way of verifying and which wasn't made clear in the paperwork, if it was mentioned at all.

I've already written about the troubles we had. But I was still believing we would end up with a little money out of the two week's work. Nope. It cost us more to run the stand than we got in the end, which was $298 split two ways after some of the operating expenses were subtracted. And those operating expenses didn't include things like the gasoline for running back and forth between home and the stand. Plus they required us to buy other supplies-- some of which we didn't actually need. Almost every issue we had we were told "that's YOUR responsibility".

Well, screw them.

Needless to say, I am not very impressed with Mr. W Fireworks right now. Not impressed at all.

Their lack of support was appalling. Their lack of communication was almost as bad. I don't feel they were honest dealers. If you ever decide to run a fireworks stand, avoid that company. And if I buy fireworks in the future, it won't be from one of their stands.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Saturday, July 27, 2019

Homeschooling, ideology, and the "culture war"

Homeschooling, as characterized by someone who prefers "public" [sic] schools: "it's all about ideology first; creating soldiers for the culture war".

Sure. In some tragic cases, that is what is going on.

And how exactly is that different from government schools? What does he think government schools are doing?

Yes, some people use home education to teach their kids harmful lies while insulating them from competing ideas (truth, reality, and ethics). That's bad. They should not do this to vulnerable children.

Yet, government schools do the exact same thing-- even teaching some of the same harmful lies the worst of the homeschoolers are teaching.

If you are teaching your kids to pledge allegiance to a flag, to honor political "authority", that government is good or necessary, you are teaching a toxic ideology to kids too young to know any better-- whether they are being taught at home or in a theft-funded kinderprison.

If you expect these kids to go out and become "good citizens" while promoting your favorite flavor of statism, you've done nothing but indoctrinate these trusting children into your death cult religion. The religion of Statism. You are training them to be soldiers in the culture war, fighting for the side of statism.

It's kind of pathetic to criticize someone for doing the same thing your preferred cult is doing-- even if the details differ a little.


Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Friday, July 26, 2019

Europe is better for some

The question was In what ways is living in Europe better than living in America?

I'm not delusional. I am sure there are things about living in Europe that are better-- or that I would consider better-- than living in America. But my subjective list wouldn't be the same as that guy's subjective list. Because much of his list is based on statist lies.

  • you get six weeks paid holidays; 
(The cost of which is going to come from somewhere, and it's not out of the employer's pocket. That's just the economic reality. Yes, it is "paid", and you are paying for it one way or another. Sorry to burst your bubble.)
  • you get universal healthcare; 
(TANSTAAFL. He means "health care" paid for through theft, and rationed as bureaucrats see fit.)
  • you get a proper pension plan; 
("Proper" in whose eyes? Paid for by whom? Where is the trade-off... or does he deny there is one? Yes, a nice pension would be... nice. And maybe if the U.S. government in America hadn't imposed "Social Security" they might be more widely available here.)
  • you can live in romantic, old cities that are 2.000 [sic] years old, in houses that are 500 years old, with modern conveniences; 
(That sounds nice. Living far from any city sounds even better.)
  • weekend trips offer abundant, historical and romantic destinations at an amazing density; you could live somewhere for ten years and go somewhere new and interesting every weekend under an hour away; 
(That has some appeal.)
  • no guns; 
(He means a government monopoly on gun possession-- a police state; not "no guns".)
  • free schools; 
(Theft-funded schools instead of education. Just like in America.)
  • free universities; 
(Theft-funded universities.)
  • life and attitudes generally seem more gentle; 
(Sheep usually do seem that way. As do the wolves-- good and bad-- who want to blend in with the sheep until they strike. Don't confuse outward demeanor for a lack of inner fire.)
  • the variety is amazing - drive an hour, and you can be in a place with a different language, architecture, cuisine, and culture entirely. 
(I'm guessing he didn't travel around America very much before he moved to Europe.)

I guess if you want socialism and a police state where only the government is properly armed, Europe (excepting some of the more enlightened places) might be "better" for you. The whole world seems to be going down the socialism sewage pipe. If that's your thing, go for it.

Just so you know, the internet will be shut off at my house until I can pay the bill.
Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Thursday, July 25, 2019

Guess who got another jury summons

In case you can't read it, it says: "Proper Clothing Required: All persons entering the courtroom should be dressed in clothing reasonably befitting the dignity and solemnity of the court proceedings."

So, a clown costume, then. 😆

Really, I don't think I have any clothing frivolous enough to properly befit "the dignity and solemnity of the court proceedings".

So, if I actually have to show up I'll go the opposite direction and wear my Old West, Man in Black outfit-- minus the duster (too hot in August for that). It's very dignified and solemn, much more so than the court deserves.

This is just a thought exercise. It's not going to come to that. It didn't last time.

They'll either scare the accused into a plea deal before August 14, or they'll toss me out of the jury pool at the earliest opportunity. Which is a shame since I'd like the chance to save someone from the State and its counterfeit "laws".

Just so you know, the internet will be shut off at my house until I can pay the bill.
Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

Politicians shouldn't be so important

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 24, 2019)

President Trump makes people crazy. Or maybe he magnifies the crazy already present in people. It's like a superpower.

His supporters seem desperate to defend and support just about anything he does; even things they would have opposed had any other president done them---- his anti-gun edicts, for example.

At the same time, his detractors foam at the mouth over every little thing he does; always interpreting them in the most negative way possible. It's obvious he knows this and pokes them just to get an the rest...

Just so you know, the internet will be shut off at my house until I can pay the bill.
Thank you for helping support

Tuesday, July 23, 2019

"Serving" and "Fighting for freedom"

From Pixabay

How did the word "serve" become shorthand for "being an armed tool of oppressive political thugs"? I prefer people who serve those they serve, voluntarily and with unanimous consent using the economic means, rather than being a "tax" junkie who endangers me and those I love and care about. Cashiers, waiters, repairmen/women, and people like that serve. Military members, not so much. The word "serve" has become one of the most popular lies statists love to tell.

You can't "fight for freedom" by fighting people who are not threatening your freedom.
You can't "fight for freedom" by fighting for those who enslaved you to fight on their behalf.

Your freedom doesn't depend on defeating some tribal thug on the other side of the planet who doesn't pose a credible threat to anyone in America; it depends on defeating the people who are actually a credible threat to your freedom, here and now.

You are not "fighting for freedom" when you join with the greatest actual threat to your freedom and go around the world provoking others on their behalf. You're endangering my freedom, and everyone else's, too.

Yes, freedom means doing whatever you want to do. So, if your "want to" includes doing those things, you are free to do them. But you are hurting everyone else. You are an enemy of something much greater than freedom: liberty. You are free to do that, but you have no right to do so. You are part of the problem. A big part.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Monday, July 22, 2019

Am I Rong?

Well, no.

I'm sometimes wrong, but I'm not Rong.

When I saw an ad for this book over at Garry Reed's blog, I admit I wondered if the author was poking at me, personally. I mean, "Kent B. Rong"? It really seemed personal-- while being hilarious. Especially considering the nature of the book (read the description!).

I know that it's highly unlikely the author ever heard of me, and is probably just a funny coincidence. Still, I'm going to have to get this book, just for fun, as soon as I have a few spare dollars.

Good job, Kent B. Rong, whoever you are. I love this! (I hope you make million$)

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Is "Kick 'em out" preferable to "You can't leave"?

Some answers don't come easy. Even after days of thought. This is one of those. And I still might be way off-base.

I don't remember hearing about the Soviet Union kicking out-- or "inviting to leave"-- the people who didn't like the Soviet Union. People who would have been happy to leave. Instead, they didn't let anyone leave.

I don't remember hearing about Nazi Germany kicking out all the Jews and other "undesirables" instead of putting them in concentration camps or summarily murdering them. I'll bet at that point these people would have left if allowed, no "kicking out" required. But, nope. They didn't let them leave.

They forced those they didn't like to stay. In concentration camps, in mass graves, or in hiding. But the borders were closed to their egress.

Isn't that the way of all the worst states?

It's never good to round up and cage people who aren't violating others.

No, I'm not saying it's good to kick out people who want to stay and who aren't violating anyone-- it's still a rights violation. But I'd probably prefer to be kicked out than to be caged or murdered.

There are those who richly deserve to be kicked out: those who archate. But who would you curse by sending them all the murderers, rapists, Congressvermin, Supreme Courtjesters, police, bureaucrats, muggers, presidents, burglars, arsonists, etc. you're kicking out? That kind of person isn't welcome in my sphere; how could I burden anyone else with them? (Anyone for building Botany Bay 2 on the far side of the moon? Oh, wait... )

Don't worry-- I'm not going to violate anyone by forcibly kicking them off property I don't own. It would be civilized of them to reciprocate, but you know they won't.

As long as a state is kicking people out instead of forcing them to stay as prisoners (or corpses) it's not as bad as it could be, even though it's not good.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid-- and I'm pretty desperate right now.

Sunday, July 21, 2019

Market regulated just right amount

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 19, 2019)

I love watching the market work. I don't call it "the free market" because if it's not free it's not a market. Under government rules and regulations what survives is a pale shadow of a market; the more rules, the dimmer the shadow.

Fortunately even this shadow of a market is enough to make life better for everyone; much better than the more regulated alternative. I appreciate this.

Under the unfree conditions which exist in America and other "civilized" places, the market manages to survive in the nooks, crannies, and loopholes. In some cases as the "black market", where "prohibited items" are traded, and in others, as the "gray market", where legal items are traded without government permission, or without giving government the piece of the action it feels entitled to skim from every transaction. They call this skimming "taxation" and "fees".

The most visible examples of the market in action are yard sales and people selling goods and services online. Even in these cases, government rules try to prevent a market from existing; it's to our benefit that they mostly fail.

The market scares some people. They have been told that without government controlling trade, food will be poison, products will be faulty, and fraud will be rampant. I've never quite understood how-- if this is how people naturally behave toward one another-- putting some people in charge will magically change their human nature. Unless you imagine they are not human, but angelic beings, uncorrupted by the human flaws plaguing the rest of us. Sounds like superstition to me.

Fear of the market is founded upon the mistaken assumption that the market is unregulated.

The market is regulated; just the right amount. Regulated by the cumulative choices and actions of people, not by the misinformed opinions of politicians. If you are afraid of what the market would do freed from the opinions of the worst among us, you're not paying attention.

Would you buy food from a business whose customers keep getting sick with food poisoning? Would you buy a car model known to have frequent brake failures? Would you keep such information to yourself or spread the word?

If you would protect bad businesses, you're to blame, not the market. If you stop expecting someone else to do your job and hold bad guys accountable when you run into them, you'll help regulate the market in the best way possible. It's always been your responsibility, no matter what you've been told.

Thank you for helping support

Society's lies

Just go along with the covey

I've never been good at pretending lies are truth.
Not even when it makes people angry.

This has gotten me in trouble in school, in business, online, and in other social realms.

It's why I can't pretend cops and the military are heroes, why I don't buy into "transgender" stuff, why I don't confuse schooling for education, and why I am skeptical of AGCC dictates.

This is why I can't go along with the claim that government is necessary, and why I don't fetishize democracy or consider politics anything other than bullying.

It's why I don't fall for the claim that "taxation" is somehow not theft because someone made up a "law".

It's why I can't pretend rights depend on who you are, what you do, where you were born, historical documents, or the opinions of some government gang. All humans have equal and identical rights; any other claim is a lie.

I realize people may have their reasons for preferring a lie to the truth. I get that. Lies can be comforting and they often feel safe. They can make you feel better about yourself or your loved ones. They can make you fit in better with the crowd.

But I won't lie and say I agree just to make someone feel better or to be one of the "cool kids". Even knowing that this has a cost. The best I can do is to stay silent when confronted by a supporter of one of the popular lies-- there's no argument against delusion. I can't always manage even that, but I'm getting better at it.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Saturday, July 20, 2019

Government is antisocial and is killing America recently posted an article about how Washington DC has destroyed social life in America. They make a good point, and it's really sad, but the goons from the District of Criminals aren't the only governmental culprits.

Many of you know how much I enjoyed karaoke during my brief time in Pennsylvania.

I was in an unfamiliar place, abandoned and separated from anything I had enjoyed doing. I met someone at work who talked me into showing up at a little rural bar for their karaoke night-- and I was hooked.

Before that, I was more of a hermit. Never very sociable, and didn't need that. But karaoke changed me.

I left there years ago, but here in this place (which should be where my roots are-- if I had roots), I find myself in a very similar situation.

The problem is the local cops (across the state line, actually) harass drivers so badly after dark that there is only one bar left in operation-- the others which were here when I moved to the area shut down due to the police-state harassment of their patrons. I guess people stopped showing up in numbers sufficient to keep the places open. It was just too dangerous to encounter the cops (we have murderous cops in the area, too).

I'm not a drinker, but I am not enthusiastic to run the checkpoint gauntlet at night regardless, so I've never even been to the one remaining bar on one of their karaoke nights.

I've been searching for a social outlet for over 10 years and have yet to find anything. A good karaoke bar-- without a swarm of cops buzzing around-- would sure be nice.

Yes, government, at the local, county, state, and federal levels, is antisocial. I'd toss them all in the volcano to end their reign of destruction.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Friday, July 19, 2019

Government supremacy

Here's the government supremacist position, in two parts:

  • If government isn't doing something, nothing is being done.
  • If you don't want government to do something, you don't care.

That right there is a special kind of stupid.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Thursday, July 18, 2019

Boring old statist justifications

I love to be made to think. Or, maybe, led to think. I don't do well with being forced to do anything, even things I enjoy.

This is why I don't mind hearing people who disagree with me-- in some way I haven't yet considered-- laying out their thinking. It always makes me think-- sometimes for weeks. I may not come to agree with their point of view, but at least I'll have spent time considering something I hadn't considered before. How is that not fun?

But that's what's so disappointing about most statist arguments.

They are old, tired retreads. Reruns that weren't that entertaining the first time around, and are excruciatingly dreary now.

They don't make me think because they are things I thought through (and dismissed) long ago. There's nothing new there to make me think. No new points; no new twists. They don't make the effort to present something new, probably because there's nothing new to present.

The statist arguments haven't changed since the first lazy looters settled down to loot a population under the lie of "government". Statists still make the same claims that were made the first time some thug came up with the idea which we now call political "authority". It was wrong then; it's wrong and boring now.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

I prefer consequences to revenge

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 17, 2019)

If your idea of a good time is to vandalize someone's home, I have no sympathy for you no matter what consequences result.

Last year a relative's home near Clovis was burglarized and cleaned out. Through the ruthless determination of his granddaughter, all his belongings were discovered on the property of the burglar (or an accomplice) and recovered.

Now, someone has decided it was a good idea to try to destroy his whole house. The house he built with his own hands more than half a century ago.

If you think this makes me angry, you'd be on the right the rest...

Thank you for helping support

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

Don't fall for the borderists' dishonest trap

I recently encountered a question asked by a borderist. He wants to trick you into falling for his trap. I'll spare him the embarrassment of mentioning his name.

Here's the dishonest setup followed by the dishonest question:

"The question that no open-borders advocate has ever answered is, How many illegals should be allowed into the United States?"

He's a liar.

The question is phrased dishonestly so as to manipulate his audience.

I have answered a similar question. Many times. I've seen several people answer such a question in excellent ways. It's just that the correct and honest answer to a more honest version of the question doesn't serve his agenda so he'll never acknowledge it, no matter who answers.

But I'll answer the "question" again.

I'm not an "open borders advocate", I'm simply against government "borders" and for property rights. Those two things are completely at odds with one another, and the borderists should know it. They just pretend they can have it both ways. All I know is I'm opposed to his position of maximum statism. But call my position "open borders" if it makes you happy.

Second, there can be no such thing as an "illegal" if you are referring to people deemed so because they ignored unconstitutional and unethical statist "laws" against crossing an imaginary line. Just like there's no such thing as an "illegal gun" regardless of the unethical and unconstitutional "laws" the anti-gun bigots have made up. Counterfeit "laws" are without foundation no matter what they pretend to address. Again, he's using a lie to trap you into answering the wrong question.

Third, "should be allowed"? "Should" in this context is a word calculated to trip you up. No one "should" be dictating numbers of visitors to other people's property. And government "borders"? Who has the "authority" to "allow" or forbid people to cross these imaginary lines? The criminal gang known as government? Make another joke. The only ones with the right to allow or forbid entry onto their private property are the property owners making this decision for their own property. Period. Government doesn't qualify.

This is why I can't take borderists seriously. Not even when they are reasonably principled on other issues. They can't even ask an honest question where government "borders" are concerned but have to pile lies on top of lies to get the narrative they hunger for. Borderists simply aren't credible, and they've done it to themselves.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Monday, July 15, 2019

BitChute and donations

I've mirrored a lot of my videos on BitChute. I had tried another video service which went under a while back, so I'm trying again.

I want a backup in case YouTube gets more censory than they already are. I pretty much lost my will to make new videos when they demonetized me (due to not enough views) and made it clear I wasn't really welcome there.

This is the same reason I mirror these posts on Wordpress. I don't trust Google to not "be evil", but they also seem to still get the most views. I feel better with a backup plan anyway.

On another topic, I sure could use an infusion of money. I've been trying to not mention it, but not mentioning it isn't really working very well for me. I got a new subscriber a couple of months ago-- Yay!-- and then last month I lost a longtime supporter, which canceled out the gain. So, if you want to, and you can, please consider making a one-time donation or signing on for monthly support.

Please follow/subscribe to me on BitChute and I may start making new videos again.

Thank you.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.


In a world with facial recognition technology, masks are necessary.

Government has no right to forbid them, because government can have no rights, and "authority" is a demented superstition.

Also, cops are allowed to cover their faces while committing acts of enforcement, so those they target must be allowed the same freedom in order to avoid falling victim to those acts of enforcement.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Sunday, July 14, 2019

Let people find their own solutions

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 12, 2019)

It amazes me how often people create worse problems while trying to solve problems.

Most problems can be solved; some probably can't. Don't give up trying to solve the hard problems, though. You never know if the Elixir of Life is waiting for you to discover just around the next bend.

The best approach is to let people find their own solutions. Most of their ideas will fail; some will be spectacular failures, but as long as no one's solution is forced on everyone else, people can keep trying different things. The more ideas which get tried, the more problems will be solved.

Often you won't know if an idea is good until you let people try it for a while. Then, if it turns out badly the people need to be free to drop it.

Even some of the bad ideas might have the seed of a real solution, just needing a little tweak to work. It's only when you set a bad idea in stone-- or in law-- that it becomes hard to reverse.

When you force a one-size-fits-all "solution" on everyone a bad idea can do lasting damage.

Most proposals for solving Anthropogenic Global Climate Change-- "Global warming"-- are like this. Whether the crisis is real or not matters little. Let people try the ideas they believe will help, but don't let them impose those solutions on anyone. This would limit what others can try and is almost guaranteed to prevent a real, lasting solution from being discovered. If one is needed.

The most tragic examples are when someone causes more of the social problems they imagine their ideas would address. Things like poverty and crime come to mind.

If your anti-poverty program hasn't resulted in a measurable easing of poverty it's time to drop it and try something else. Many times, doing nothing would be better than what is being done.

Crime is another topic where this applies. Of course, I'm referring to real crime-- violations of life, liberty, and property-- not acts which harm no one other than the feelings of politicians. I believe, from personal experience and observation, that universal voluntary gun possession would prevent most crime. Others believe a total gun ban (exempting government employees) would be the fix. Only one of those doesn't rely on forcing a rights-violating, one-size-fits-all approach on every individual in society, so only one is ethical.

If your idea isn't ethical, I'll pass, no matter how well it works. With this one limit, find your best ideas.

Thank you for helping support

Statists want you to believe you're stupid

Statists want you to believe you aren't smart enough to know how to solve problems. They say you have to trust the president or congress or the city council to do what's necessary because you can't possibly understand the issues. You don't see "The Big Picture"* and don't understand "how these things work".

How convenient for them.

Erich Fromm had something to say about this vulgar lie:

"One kind of smokescreen is that the problems are too complicated for the average individual to grasp. On the contrary it would seem that many of the basic issues of individual and social life are very simple, so simple. in fact, that everyone should be expected to understand them. To let them appear to be so enormously complicated that only a "specialist" can understand them, and he only in his limited field, actually-- and often intentionally-- tends to discourage people from trusting their own capacity to think about those problems that really matter. The individual feels hopelessly caught in a chaotic mass of data and with pathetic patience waits until the specialists have found out what to do and where to go." -- Escape from Freedom

I see statists use this tactic all the time.

  • You can't understand why it's not a good idea to get rid of all anti-gun "laws" because you don't have the wisdom and experience of the police unions, the BATFEces, the FBI, or federal judges. It's simplistic to believe you can be responsible for yourself and that an armed populace would deter archation.
  • You can't understand the nuances of "border security" because you aren't an expert. You can't just respect all property rights (including ending all welfare) and respect the right of defense-- it would be chaos.
  • You're not a scientist so you can't understand the data pointing to Climate Change. Trust the experts to tell you what you'll have to do to avoid this disaster they say is coming.

Statists need to make you believe the world is too complicated for individuals to understand. Otherwise, you might realize you don't need their god to save you. So they constantly order you to "leave it to the professionals who know best". They constantly insult you and your intelligence. They get paternalistic and condescending as they assure you "government knows best".

Don't be so uppity as to notice that their "professionals" and "experts" are always on the side of violating YOUR natural human rights and imposing more control over YOUR life.

Yeah, the world is complex. But if the average human can't understand it, clumping sub-average humans together in a gang you call "government" isn't going to magically give them superhuman abilities. Quite the opposite. I'll trust the spontaneous order arising from the self-interested actions of free individuals before I trust the "wisdom" of monopolistic government being imposed on everyone.

*I once worked for a business that I saw doing really dumb, self-destructive things on orders from the manager. Being a good employee who wanted to see the business thrive, I told this manager what I thought and his standard response was that I didn't see "The Big Picture" that only he could see.
I swear I didn't say "I told you so" every time the things I warned him of came to pass.
But I sure did think it a lot.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.