The Libertists

Currently, there is much debate over whether or not some entertainers should be forced to stand for some kind of political ceremony. Not standing is said to be some kind of disrespect to the idealism of the current view on the construction of the idea. It - those that want everyone to stand - say it is against the traditions of the people. The great irony is that I've already directly discussed this exact position in Saint Horz, the Stone Saint. The story there is called "Yoked" where at length Horz tries to remind an angry crowd of people that they have misunderstood the nature of the thing they are worried over. It doesn't work out for Horz, they try and Stone him, which fails, like all such things would. But the point is clear to the Saint, people are unreachable. They have, by bad epistemology, come to accept a method of understanding things without actually having to learn why they understand them. Such people will never be reachable. It isn't even pos

Recently a company in California told its employee’s that it would be doing away with accrual on vacation time. They told their employees that starting at a particular point there would no longer be any set in stone thing called vacation time.  Once an upon a time an employee was a person. A real thing. Self-defined. Self-owned. Self-responsible. He was his own property and his time was his to sell as he wished. In this golden age of humanity, a person could approach a business and ask to be employed by the business. The business would ask for the individual to sell a set amount of their time to the company. During the negotiation process, the individual would agree to the terms if they suit the individual's needs. For the price of that time, both the employee and his new employer agreed by contract to offer some of the employee’s time back to him in the form of vacation.  This vacation time was a real thing, like time really is, like the person and the business really are

I am for Liberty. Liberty is the only goal. Thus when asked if I am for or against the police I find that no one can even understand my answer. They believe that it is simply a yes or a no. One side or another. But I must always ask them back, "Which is of more value your life or the State?" Most people will then assume that when I say State, I somehow magically manifest that word into meaning "a group of people", which I don't, but they do and they tend to say: "That the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. " Hogwash. For it is still the actions and subsequent motion of individual persons who create an activity. It is individuals that make the many possible - The individual man starves and dies from this affliction.  It is the individual person that says of themselves that their life is of lesser value, the group does not define this for the individual. The individual creates and accepts his own miniaturization

I have a lot to say about Jury Duty, but I need to really save it for a lengthier paper. Instead, I'm going to talk briefly about specific events that occurred at yesterday's government-funded meetup.com called jury duty. "Thankful...you showed up." It was on the televisors screens. It came out of the clerk's mouths. It was part of the orientation. it was on the paperwork. It was the first thing out of the Judge's mouth, the first and last thing out of the lawyer's mouths. Every single person in the government agency was 'thankful' for us being there. They kept reminding us that we made it possible for people to have fair trials. We made it possible to follow the Constitution. We were the spirit of the whole system! Frankly, none of that can be true. Because every single one of us was there under duress, for fear of the State taking from us our means of production for not being there. Imagine this conversation: Me: You

It is not a day that goes by where I do not hear the same counter argument to individualism that permeates the classical Hegelian cognizant dissonance. This notion: for the children.  In my piece about why Colorado is absurd for wanting to pass a law that would require retail sellers of cellular phones to find out if the item was to be used by people under a certain age, I've heard "But we have to do this for the children!"  The argument is emotionalist claptrap.  It violates its own ethics  To say "for the children" one is suggesting that there is an entity, definable as a single thing, called a child. And that this entity, called the child, has an identifiable construction called self, else we couldn't isolate it as a definable individual person called Child. We call this self "conscience" - the individuals self access to its identity of things it considers good and bad - This is just part of the overall individual's conscio

Explained by example. You're sitting in your living room and mom has left to get something from the mail box, you sneak into her room, rifled through her purse and come away with six loose dollar bills. This is an example of an immoral act. It takes on this definition because it was done by an individual that realized the act was wrong and could get them in trouble. The person perpetrating this act was doing it when the mother had left the room, needing to do this thing in secret, away from observation. Now instead. You are sitting in your living room, Mother is at the dining table, you want money, you take your mother's purse, dump in on the floor and take what you want. Although the act itself still appears to be immoral, it is, in fact, Anti-moral by nature. Because the individual has no claim to morality or avenue by which to determine if the act is a valid way to deal with other people. This particular person holds no meaning, no way to say such an act is inappropr

Citizen: You will have to pause between slides to read each slide This so-called training is like any other training you will find in corporate America. All of these objects that management call training are actually immoral indoctrination, where we are forced to give our consent without any legitimate counter argument. Worse, by appearing to give our consent we also appear to legitimize the texts written by the State, even when those texts harm us, harm our business, harm our livelihood. Corporate America should be ashamed, for it has turned us into a Police State, without any sense of ethical responsibility for individualism. It has killed, by allowing the object called State to exist in such power, the American Dream.

The so-called individuals are like mice living in the shadow of the cat, feigning the industry of freedom, but secretly hoping the cat eats someone else. We live in times where so-called patriots hide under the pretense of 'good' actions.  They say: We need to obey the law.  We need to show 'them' that we're good people, just law abiding citizens. Good has been redefined as a follower of other people's views on reality. You are now, only good if you listen to the outcome of others. Good is no longer based on the individual's actions.  It is not simply that the act of a man killing another is the immoral act any longer. The individual is not judged for his direct action. Instead, he is measured by the value of the legality, that is, by the will of other people. The act of committing the murder is wrong not so much as an act of violence against another, but as a sin against the restraints demanded of by the State. You are guilty more of your

I saw someone post: Why is the 2nd Amendment the only one that requires a permit? Although I appreciate the sentiment, me things this individual is late to the party. Fact: 1st - Free Speech - nope. The sedition acts that have been passed have made it illegal, with in the confines of particular situations to not be free. Also, in order to have a word with your elected officials and be heard, you have to work with in their terms. Go to their meetings. They set the values on how free speech can be used. Free assembly - Every single event requires a permit, else you are loitering and as one officer I heard say, "Soliciting your opinion without a permit." - Free Religion - the fact the money says in "In God We Trust" already invalidates the idea of free religion because it sets a national standard of the definition of such a creature as god.  We know this is true because all one has to do is change god to allah, and realize that what ever respect you have for the

So once a week I get an email from Firearms Policy Coalition, the NRA-ILA, California Firearms Owners, Gun Owners of California, Gun Owners of America, or any number of other so-called pro-firearms companies asking for money to help fight for the 2nd Amendment. As of this morning, the object of all of those companies request for the last few months has been flatly rejected by the gods of the Supreme Court: http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/supreme-court-rejects-gun-rights-appeal/ So... any money that I gave them to help write their briefs. Any money I gave them to hire paralegals or lawyers or to even get people in Congress to talk with the deities calling themselves our Supreme Court, was a waste. It won't be heard. Or was it a waste? For surely the multitude of individuals that profited from my donations isn't a waste.  It is like that sarcastic scene in The Fifth Element where Zorg shows the priest how destruction is creation. That in order f

One day Tony was out mowing his lawn when his next door neighbor showed up and started to talk. "So, the community is getting together to talk about sharing the load," Tony's neighbor said. "Sharing the load? What do you mean?" "We're looking at passing an ordinance that gets the community to work together. To share the lawn cutting, share the tree trimming. That kind of thing." "Um...that seems weird. When is this so-called community going to meet about this?" "Oh, they already met. Already wrote the new law. Just waiting on the general committee to vote on it. It'll be great! Think of all the extra time I'll have!" "What? I don't even get a say in this?" "You had your say, you elected the committee!" Getting a little upset, Tony thought he'd find out more so he stopped mowing his lawn and went to his other neighbor, Dora, who he had helped get elected t