Skip to main content

Today's Degenerate Politics

Law may properly intervene only where one's actions harm another person, without their voluntary consent.

Government is not about any particular morality. It should be about banning force in human relationships so that all individuals may operate under whatever moral choices they think best. Almost all choices are moral because almost all choices affect our long-term lives, happiness and survival in some way. 

By guaranteeing each person the freedom to pursue their own goals in any way they want (absent force) we will evolve as a society much more quickly than if a thug or gang forces everyone to live according to their particular choices - because we will see more quickly what works and what doesn't. And more fundamentally, we will live as *men* with our minds - instead of as animals do, by brute force.

Our experiment in freedom has devolved into two rival gangs constantly vying to control government's power in order to restrict the freedom of choice of others.

Those of us in the Liberty movement must explicitly and loudly identify this fact, and explain to everyone who will listen how it's up to them whether they want to have a civilized society of persuasion, or a barbaric society of force.
about a minute ago · Like

Everyone is entitled their opinion. But you are not entitled to force that opinion upon others, through law, coercion, threats, or force.

So conservatives, this means you. Stop trying to control what adults can do in their own homes. Stop trying to insert your religion into government. Stop trying to punish people for behavior that is none of your business.

And liberals - this means you, too. Stop telling me how to run my business. Stop telling me what products I can make, how much I can sell them for, how I structure them, or who I sell them to. Stop it.

Stop arguing over who gets to hold the gun. Stop arguing over who gets to control the lives of others. NEITHER of you have any right to control the lives of others. Period.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Murder in the US

In 2011, I calculate the overall US murder rate as 4.6 per 100,000 population.

But if you recalculate this, and assumed that black men murdered at the same rate as everyone else, the overall rate would drop to 1.9 out of 100,000 population. That would give the United States the 147th highest murder rate in the world - or, the 60th best.

The insane disproportionate murder rate among US blacks is why the overall US murder rate seems so high.

I don't understand why liberals refuse to talk about this. I don't understand why blacks refuse to talk about this. Blacks are just as often the victim as the offender - almost SIXTY PERCENT of murder victims in the US are black. Shouldn't they care about this? Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to talk about this? Yet they are silent.

And it's not like this is any secret. This culture of violence, abuse of women, and plain thuggery is paraded around daily in pop music. It's glorified on TV shows like "The Wire…

The Root of Violent Extremism

We are too flippant about writing off violent extremists as "crazy", "psychopathic", etc.

Just because *we* have a hard time conceiving of doing violence to others, does not mean that those who do are insane.

Hitler was not insane. Hitler was evil. There is a distinction.

To be insane, to be "crazy", means you cannot understand the difference between right and wrong.

People like Hitler, like ISIS, these people are *evil*. They have, in what they believe to be a rational process, *chosen* to embrace a death-worshipping morality.

Such thinking is going to lead us down wrong alleys in dealing with violent political extremism.

Unless we understand the various reasons why such people embrace philosophies of death, we cannot combat the root causes and defeat violent extremism.

Obama's "they need jobs" is a juvenile approach at this. But you simply cannot ignore and dismiss the reality of life in the countries that are the flash-points of extremism…

Transparency needed in investigations of police

I have not sat on a grand jury any time in my life. I am disinclined, having not pored through records, nor listened to dozens of witnesses, to second-guess the difficult decisions these jurors have had to make.

HOWEVER. There is a clear problem of trust going on, and it stems from a couple different sources.

1) Grand Juries are usually secret. There are good reasons for this. Simply investigating whether a crime might have occurred, which is what Grand Juries do, collects a lot of evidence which could put people's lives at risk, or could be embarrassing. You want folks to feel free to talk. And you don't want the person being investigated to get unduly smeared.

However, the flip side of secrecy is that the lack of transparency can lead to a loss of trust. Clearly, in the two incidents discussed recently, many people who have no idea what went on in the GJ's or what evidence was presented, know, they just KNOW, an injustice was committed! And, because they have no opportun…