Archive for the ‘immigration’ Category

For your own sake- just don’t

December 8, 2016

If you hate (or fear) someone so much that you feel the need to advocate government to deal with them, you may not be on the side of liberty.

I see some do this with “immigrants“, “drug” users or dealers, bigots, etc.

You probably ought to realize that the State is a bigger threat than anything you might want to use it against. It’s like aiming a shotgun at your own head because you want to kill the fly on the other side of you. Using the State may seem like the only way, but it is ultimately suicidal in every case. Just don’t.

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Advertisements

I will continue to defend liberty

November 16, 2016

(My Clovis News Journal column for November 16, 2016)

In the wake of the election, about half of those who continue to play the voting game are pretty upset because the candidate they didn’t want to win has been foisted upon them. Or because the one they wanted, lost. This time around it was hard to see the difference in all but a few rabid fans.

Many of you are scared of what America will become during a Trump presidency. You fear a Trump administration the way others feared a Clinton presidency.

Perhaps you fear Trump will be the exception; the one candidate who won’t begin breaking campaign promises the instant he takes the oath of office. I believe your fears are unfounded…read the rest

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Appreciating small "favors"

November 13, 2016

I don’t v*te, so I obviously don’t v*te for “the lesser of two (or more) evils”.

That doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate when one of the lesser evils gets imposed on me instead of the greatest evil.

And, make no mistake, I am firmly convinced, due to decades of experience, that Hillary Clinton was that greatest of evils.

Just because I’m relieved the blizzard hit my house instead of the tornado doesn’t mean I wanted the blizzard. (OK, bad example- I generally love blizzards. But you know what I mean.) I also don’t believe it would make any difference if I petitioned the weather and requested the blizzard over the tornado. I’m better off preparing for both rather than begging the atmosphere to respect my wishes.

I’m slightly relieved when the one I believe (and it is ONLY a belief) I’m better equipped to survive strikes. I won’t choose a lesser evil, but I’m glad to avoid the greatest evil.

Yes, Trump has many insane ideas which would be disastrous for liberty- “stop and frisk”, a border wall and mass deportation, and “protectionism” of various sorts. However, I expect him to break those promises- as all presidents do- if he doesn’t get assassinated by the Hillarites first. That’s why even his scary promises don’t worry me too much. I will still oppose “laws” which violate anyone’s Rightful Liberty, no matter the justifications, no matter who they come from.

Whatever happens, I will continue to behave as I always do; hoping for the best while preparing for the worst.

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

"Why don’t they talk ‘Murican?"

November 12, 2016

Sometimes it’s expressed “Why don’t they talk right?” or “Why can’t they just learn to talk like us?

Usually said by people whose grammar is atrocious.

Sometimes I think people see more evidence of intelligence and humanity in the look in a dog’s face than in the conversations of people speaking a language they don’t understand.

But they forget that window works both ways.

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

I come not to praise democracy…

October 14, 2016

I’m always seeing these embarrassing videos praising democracy and telling people why they should v*te.

What a crock of male Bos taurus fecal matter.
Here’s one example, and my response to it.

Video link

Sayu, you are badly off-course. Democracy isn’t something to strengthen or promote. There is no good in it. It is mob rule. (As is a republic, which will always evolve into a democracy anyway. Before someone gets their constitutional panties in a wad. Both are just mob rule- “majority makes right” is wrong.)

Governing yourself is a good idea. Even necessary. Governing your neighbor? Well, that just makes you a thug- whether you do it personally, or v*te to have someone do it on your behalf.

Publicly praising democracy is the same as publicly praising other forms of theft, rape, kidnapping, and murder. Don’t do it- and if you insist on doing it anyway, own it. Accept what you are praising and promoting. Understand why this makes you a bad guy. Understand that your condemnation of your critics is as empty as the protests of any other bully when people stand up and refuse to pretend you have some imaginary “right” to bully them.

Calling what politicians do “public service” is a lie. A nasty one which harms the innocent.

It doesn’t matter what “race” or gender a politician is, or where it was born or hatched- NO ONE has the right to violate another using the excuse of governing.

A good politician (if such a thing were possible) wouldn’t advocate for (or against) anyone based on “race” or gender or anything else, because all humans have equal and identical rights. It wouldn’t matter who or what that politician is.

If you violate one person, you are violating everyone. If you leave everyone to live their life as they see fit (free of archation on their part), and free to defend their life, liberty, and property from those who violate them, it doesn’t matter who you are. Just like it doesn’t matter who you are if you violate others.

It doesn’t matter who is governing- it matters that you allow governing to happen right in front of you. That’s wrong.

You do get one thing right though: You admit that politics is about fear and taking things away from others. And yet, you want to promote more of this. Sayu, politics makes people stupid. Looks like you are suffering from exposure and you need to find a cure. Or, at least take that first step. You can’t even know the meaning of liberty or freedom until you turn away from politics. I hope it’s not too late for you.

A big “thank you!” to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn’t keep doing this without you.
I need to increase my monthly subscriptions by $55 to get to where I need to be. If you are a regular reader and hear your conscience whispering that you would feel better if you returned some value for value, I won’t disagree.



(Steemit link)

Judgmental, but not controlling

October 8, 2016

For all my faults, I am not a controlling person.

I notice that things others do, things which don’t bother me in the slightest, drive some people nearly insane. I look and try to figure out what the exact problem is, but all I see is “they are doing something I don’t like!!

As long as a person isn’t archating, I’m going to be pretty much OK with whatever they do. (If they are archating, then it’s my business because violating anyone violates everyone.) Sure, I might recognize that what they are doing isn’t something I would do, and I might even consider it disgusting or immoral, but I’m not going to get bent out of shape over it.

But in most cases I see, it’s nothing even that serious.

Whether it’s a neighbor who hasn’t mowed in ages (I can be guilty of that myself), or who has a lot of (what I see as) junk in his yard, or a house with “too many cars”, or “possibly illegal” Mexicans living a couple houses down. Whatever.

I really see no reason to start trying to tell them how to live.

It strikes me as strange when others think any of those things are their business, and I see it as wrong when they sic the State on them in order to have their opinions forced on others.  


A big “thank you!” to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn’t keep doing this without you.
My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it’s a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions.


(Steemit link)

The answer the NRA should give

September 24, 2016

A blog I often enjoy and agree with (although I used to enjoy more and agree more often) has increasingly embraced a disturbing anti-liberty agenda on one small issue. But, with regard to liberty, is any issue truly small?

He asks a question of the NRA, which he says they refuse to answer.

Well, OK, I will answer for them, but he won’t like my answer much.

“Can you produce credible data – not opinion, not anecdotes – something that can be independently validated, that ‘amnesty’ and a ‘pathway to citizenship’ for MILLIONS of foreign nationals in this country illegally (and legally, with CURRENT culturally suicidal policies) WILL NOT overwhelmingly favor Democrats and anti-gunners?

“Can you show us your sources and methodologies for determining this WILL NOT result in supermajorities in state and federal legislatures that will then be able to pass all kinds of anti-gun edicts?

“And can you demonstrate how this WILL NOT result in nominations and confirmations of judges to the Supreme and federal courts who will uphold those edicts and reverse gains made to date?”

No. But it’s a false choice: enforce government borders or enforce anti-gun “laws”. Both are unethical, immoral, unconstitutional and a violation of natural human rights. It’s the same as the false choice between enforcing borders to keep out “illegals” and keeping welfare going. Liberty isn’t piecemeal, and you can’t keep the bits of government you like (“borders“, welfare) and get rid of the parts you don’t like (BATFE, gun “laws”).

This is also what happens when you allow people to v*te on other people’s rights. That’s never going to end well, no matter what unethical “laws” you enforce, using the justification that you are trying to prevent something else.

Again, when you allow government to exist, and to violate people’s natural rights, you are going to get results such as this. You can whine about the reasons and results all day long, but until you address the root cause, you’ll get nowhere.

Government is a violation of human rights- the right of association, property rights, the right to own and to carry any weapon you wish everywhere you go without ever getting government permission, the right to make an agreement with anyone to work for them, rent from them, buy from them, or visit them. Once you start letting government bullies ration and violate these rights, you can’t be shocked when they don’t stop there.

Rights are not up for a v*te. The rights of a vast majority don’t trump the rights of the one. Not ever, under any circumstances. Bad guys will always be trying to violate you- right now the worst of them just happen to call themselves “government”, but they are no more legitimate than any other rapist or mugger. To pretend otherwise just gives them power.

The problem is the “system” you support and legitimize, not the fine details of how it violates people or their property. Play stupid games; win stupid prizes.

Also, as I have pointed out in the past, when you make people see you as someone who treats them as an enemy, how can you be surprised when they join the other side? You are cutting your own throat, and whining about the guy who made the razor you stole from someone else.

I am not a fan of the Constitution, for reasons which I feel should be quite obvious. But, many of those who advocate gun rights, while also advocating violating other rights, claim to be. So the weight of this inconsistency is on them. Which makes this next section stick out badly:

“And then can you then justify why NRA — mandated by its bylaws ‘To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States [and] To promote public safety, law and order, and the national defense’ — remains deliberately indifferent to the gravest threat to the right to keep and bear arms facing us?”

Because immigration control is in violation of the Constitution. You can’t “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” while supporting something which is unconstitutional. It’s bad when presidents do it, and it’s bad when the NRA does it. If you are OK with violating it for one reason, why object to violating it for reasons other people have? If “immigration control”, in violation of the Constitution, is OK, why is “gun control”, also in violation of the Constitution, not OK? The NRA has its problems- I am a very disgruntled Life Member from way back when– but if it were to support violating the Constitution by doing as you ask, why shouldn’t others get away with supporting violating the Constitution just as much in other ways- ways that you happen to disagree with?

“Have you incorporated this into your grassroots programs?  Why not?”

No. Because of what was pointed out above. Either they can stay on mission, or they can abandon all semblance of consistency to appease those who want government to ignore constitutionality for their own agenda.

Politics makes people stupid.

I understand how critically important gun rights are. Really. But you can’t protect some rights by violating others, nor by supporting any government programs- even government programs that are currently out of favor.

Well, this post is sure to make the donations and subscriptions flow in. Ha. 
A big “thank you!” to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn’t keep doing this without you.


(Steemit link)

Don’t help cops violate others

September 21, 2016

As I was driving down the road one recent day, I saw a truck which the local road pirates had stopped. I don’t know why, or anything about the situation, but I noticed a tow truck moving into position to hook up and take the other truck away.

My suspicion is that it wasn’t due to mechanical trouble- usually I see the trucks being worked on by a mechanic in that case. I suspect that for one reason or another, the cops were taking possession of the vehicle due to some “law” being broken.

Maybe that wasn’t the case this time- but it often is.

If I were a tow truck driver, I wouldn’t help cops.

Sure, if a cop called for me to come tow away a car after an accident or a breakdown, or an abandoned car, I would do that- in an attempt to protect the private property of an individual. I wouldn’t tow it to the cops’ “impound lot” though.

And if a cop called me to come tow a car that the cops were stealing, just no.

If a driver was discovered to not have a “license”, and the cops wouldn’t allow them back behind the wheel, I wouldn’t help the cops steal the car.

Or, if the driver hailed from a different tax farm, and didn’t have his mandatory government permission slips to be in this particular tax farm.

Or, if the cops found drugs or other types of contraband in the car, same thing. I would not help the road pirates steal.

My mission would be to help people and protect property, not to help cops victimize people.

I realize cops would quickly stop calling me for anything, and I could live with that. Nothing good can come from associating with the police.

And, even though I am not a tow truck operator, I can still choose to never help cops violate anyone. It is part of my pledge to my community.

My subscriptions are down about $65 from a year ago. That may not sound like much, but when you live on the edge as I do, it’s a lot. I desperately need to replace (or surpass) those subscriptions. 
A big “thank you!” to supporters of this blog. I probably couldn’t keep doing this without you.


(Steemit link)

"Everyone else does it…"

August 17, 2016
(If you use Steemit, please go there and upvote this post.)

Is it OK to do wrong, just because other people do?

Maybe for you, but not for me. I live by the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP) whether you do or not. It doesn’t matter, and your choice doesn’t affect mine. The ZAP is a promise from me to you about how I will interact with you; to tell you what to expect. It doesn’t obligate you.

If you choose to initiate force or violate my property, you might also take my adherence to the ZAP as a warning.

But, just because most other people choose to initiate force and violate private property– either in person or by sending bullies to do it on their behalf– I had better just suck it up and become the same as they are. Right?

Liberty has an uphill battle for certain. Until people actually understand the issues, they’ll keep straying off-course in the same sad ways. “Statism is bad… unless it is doing something I want it to do, then you have to go along. Pay your taxes, have your property rights violated in the name of National Borders and such. You might allow people on your property who I don’t like. It’s for your own good, and anarchy is Utopian, and no one really lives that way. Etc. etc. etc.

It’s almost enough to make a guy say “Screw it, Just go with the crowd. Eat babies, or whatever, because everyone else says it is necessary, and no one else will ever agree with you that it’s wrong.”

Almost… but not quite.

If you get any value from my writing, consider rewarding me with your financial support commensurate with the value you receive. You can also do that with zero cost to yourself by upvoting my posts on Steemit. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me keep writing without the fear of saying something to get fired over. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don’t depend on the same people always helping out.

Don’t live down to the expectations

July 27, 2016

I care that you live by the Zero Aggression Principle and don’t violate property.

I don’t care about your “race”, gender/sex, culture, job, wealth, “nationality”, or anything else… as long as you live by the Zero Aggression Principle and don’t violate property.

It’s so simple.

However, if you use any of those trivial (or imaginary) categories mentioned above as justification for initiating force and violating property, I’m not going to excuse you based on your “race”, gender/sex, culture, job, wealth, “nationality”, or anything else, either. I know you can be a good person, and I expect you to live up to it.

When you use those excuses as justification for initiating force or violating property you are also spitting on others who don’t commit those acts, but who will probably be unfairly grouped with you by ignorant observers.

None of those things require you to be an aggressor or a property violator- with the possible exception of your “job”, and you are free to quit any “job” that requires you to be a bad person to do it. And you should.

You don’t have to be a bad guy, no matter what you believe others expect of you. So, don’t.

If you get any value from my labors, consider rewarding me with your financial support. This blog is in its 10th year now. If you believe I have contributed anything to the conversation regarding liberty during these ten years, and believe I have more to contribute, help me stay online. I really, desperately could use some more help; please don’t depend on the same people always stepping up.