Blog

Cops, Kidnappers, and Assassins Are Just Doing Their Jobs!

Cops, Kidnappers, and Assassins Are Just Doing Their Jobs!

by | Dec 3, 2022 |

 

Imagine a police officer arresting you for the crime of selling “drugs”.

Later in court, the judge asks you how you plea, to which you respond, “Innocent your Highness! For I am a drug dealer. I was just doing my job. My boss, Pablo Escobar told me to do this. If you guys don’t like us doing this, apply for a job at our drug cartel, work your way through our system, and persuade Mr. Escobar to change his policy.”

This is no different in principle than, “I’m a cop, just doing my job destroying food that homeless people need because politicians or a police chief told me to do so. Don’t like the law? Work through our system to change it on our terms.”

Same goes for “I don’t make the law I just chose to take this job and enforce the edicts.” Or, “I’m not congress, I just invade countries and kill civilians when I’m told to.”

Cops would never accept such a ridiculous excuse from us, let’s stop accepting that immoral pathetic excuse from them.

DHS Bulletin Warns of Dangerous, Anti-Government ‘Extremists’

by | Dec 2, 2022 |

From a DHS Bulletin dated November 30, 2022:  

Perceptions of government overreach continue to drive individuals to attempt to commit violence targeting government officials and law enforcement officers. In August 2022, an individual wearing body armor and armed with a firearm and a nail gun attempted to forcibly enter the Cincinnati, Ohio Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). When uniformed officers responded, the individual fled the scene, resulting in a pursuit and eventual shots fired by responding officers. In the days preceding the attack, the individual called on others to acquire weapons and kill federal law enforcement, claiming he felt he was fighting in a “civil war.”

Some domestic violent extremists have expressed grievances based on perceptions that the government is overstepping its Constitutional authorities or failing to perform its duties. Historically, issues related to immigration and abortion have been cited by prior attackers as inspiration for violence. Potential changes in border security enforcement policy, an increase in noncitizens attempting to enter the U.S., or other immigration-related developments may heighten these calls for violence.

22_1130_S1_NTAS-Bulletin-508

Before briefly commenting, I want to unequivocally assert I am against all forms of violence and firmly believe in the non-aggression principle. 

Reading the full bulletin, what we might learn is that there seems to be a public/private partnership for the purposes of surveillance and coordination to not only violate our First Amendment rights but our Second Amendment rights and our Fourth Amendment rights. 

This government is letting us know that stripping us of our inalienable rights is not government overreach. The government lives and thrives by committing violence. It is the threat of violence that is the government’s main tool to keep people compliant and obedient. 

The government will grant favors to those who cooperate with its repression and suppression of the American people. This is the public/private partnership. Private parties getting deputized to act as agents and proxies for the government and get granted special benefits, privileges and immunities in doing so. 

Apparently doubting anything any government official, whether elected or anointed or appointed or imposed. To question or doubt anything they say is an act of disinformation and you are a disinformation terrorist. And all “good” members of society should make sure that obedience and compliance is enforced. Otherwise our democracy will collapse and implode. The preservation of our democracy seemingly depends upon the government acting as a monopolist in the creation, dissemination and flow of information. 

So I guess this “democracy” kind of works this way: no inalienable rights. Only privileges for good behavior. Good behavior is obedience and compliance. The best citizen is a lobotomized citizen. 

Also, notice their language with respect to border enforcement. I am not bringing this up to debate immigration policy but to point out their choice of words. Changes in border security enforcement policy? Has the change had any impact? Has it improved border security? If not, why has the change been made?  

Oops. My bad. I might be engaging in disinformation for asking these questions. Of course whatever changes made are for the best. I do not want to question that. Otherwise I would be challenging our faith in government institutions, destroying our democracy and engaging in disinformation. 

Our ruling elite, both in and out of government want a nation of compliant, obedient, lobotomized zombies. It is said that they deem the greatest threat to our country as an independent person who thinks and thinks for themselves. The independent, thinking individual usually employs those traits and attributes not to perform acts of violence but to create prosperity and not only for themselves. That is the beauty of true free-market capitalism, the most moral system. You only create prosperity by fulfilling and satiating the wants and needs of others. The better you serve others. The more prosperity you accrue. And all voluntary. All with our consent. All without the absence of force. 

To quote Hayek,  “In government, the scum rises to the top.”

Stand with Humanity

Stand with Humanity

by | Nov 27, 2022 |

 

Stand with the Libertarian Institute

The Empire has us on the brink of nuclear Armageddon. The central bank has us flirting with economic-social collapse. Americans are increasingly paranoid of one another and simultaneously invested in wielding the state against one another.

The voices of the establishment are legion. The voices of dissent are few. Among the voices of dissent is your Libertarian Institute. You can amplify our message. Please donate to the Libertarian Institute today!

We’ve been doing the work to bring you news, journalism, education and activism from a libertarian perspective. And we intend to keep doing the work. We will continue speaking out for peace, prosperity and sanity. We will not be silenced.

Institute Director Scott Horton has been leading the way. His podcast, “The Scott Horton Show,” is closing in on 6,000 episodes. This summer the Institute published his latest book, Hotter Than the Sun: Time To Abolish Nuclear Weapons. Next year it will publish his book Provoked: America’s Role In The Russia-Ukraine War, co-authored by Darryl Cooper.

Scott has assembled a great team of scholars, writers and podcasters. Executive Editor Sheldon Richman, who along with Scott and the late Will Grigg founded the Institute, brings his gravitas and insight to operations and articles. Managing Editor Keith Knight just published The Voluntarist Handbook through the Institute and hosts the “Don’t Tread on Anyone” podcast.

News Editor Kyle Anzalone, Research Fellow Will Porter and Assistant Editor Connor Freeman co-host the “Conflicts of Interest” podcast. Editor Hunter DeRensis corrals the Institute’s stable of writers to keep them typing up the best articles possible. The Institute’s resident Bad-ass, Semi-haulin’ podcaster Tommy Salmons hosts “Year Zero.”

Senior Fellow Laurie Calhoun has been blazing a path of unparalleled scholarly inquiry. The Institute will soon be publishing a book of her great articles on the Covid regime, titled, Questioning the COVID Company Line: Critical Thinking in Hysterical Times.

New “Junior Fellow,” the notorious Public Policy Hooligan Jim Bovard, recently joined the Institute, and of course is already proving why his hard-hitting investigative opinion journalism has long reigned in the pages of America’s biggest newspapers.

The Institute’s Justin Raimondo Fellow, Patrick Macfarlane, has brought his legal expertise to bear on exposing establishment narratives on his great podcast Vital Dissent.

And there are many great regular writers who have been speaking truth in a wasteland of War State talking points. Among them are Kym Robinson, Bas Spliet, William Van Wagenen, Peter Van Buren and Col. Douglas MacGregor.

You can amplify our message. Please donate to the Libertarian Institute today!

Message to Jacobin Magazine: Economic Suppression is Far Worse Than Voter Suppression

Message to Jacobin Magazine: Economic Suppression is Far Worse Than Voter Suppression

by | Nov 27, 2022 |

 

Imagine two criminals:

Criminal 1: Forcibly stopped a woman from having a 1 in 10 million vote to determine the governor of New York

Criminal 2: Forcibly stopped a woman from getting the job of her dreams via occupational licensing regulations even though a willing employer wanted to hire her

You are the judge in both trials, which criminal should get a longer sentence?

Criminal 1’s actions may be offensive, but have no effect on the outcome of the woman’s life since a one in 10 million vote will make no difference. Even if by some miracle she happened to be the deciding vote, politicians are liars and whoever she elected would likely keep all of their bad promises and follow through with none of the good ones.

Criminal 2 however, has forcibly stopped her from directly experiencing the life she wants to live. Eight hours a day, five days a week, she is worse off because a Democratic Imperialist is criminalizing a capitalist act between consenting adults. She now is also deprived of getting on the job experience, and getting her foot in the door to an industry she is passionate about.

The Democratic Imperialist cheers for four years of college where people works for four years and thousands of hours for $0.00 an hour, but the second they want to be productive and learn real skills, the Democratic Imperialist vilifies you and threatens to separate you from your family by putting you in jail for not obeying arbitrary commands of “economic regulation”.

Economic regulations forcibly kept people like Elvis Summers and Jay Austin from giving homeless people houses.

Economic regulations forcibly kept people from feeding the homeless in Phoenix. Some people who bought food and wanted to give hungry people food to eat, but believers in economic regulation forcibly stopped such an exchange from being made.

This is Democratic Imperialism. It doesn’t matter if your neighbor forcibly stops you from doing something peaceful, if a vote is first take, or if someone 12,000 miles away forcibly stops you. It’s imperialism nonetheless.

Democratic Imperialists not only deprive millions of poor people of job opportunities, but also advocate their purchasing power be severely limited with regulations. You want to buy a product or service with the money you earned? Too bad, Democratic Imperialists haven’t given it their stamp of approval.

Needing a drivers license to vote in a scam election? PURE EVIL AND HURTS THE POOR AND IS RACIST AND SEXIST AND XENOPHOBIC AND CLASSIST.

Needing 30 licenses and 16 years of indoctrination to make a voluntary exchange? Very good and helps everyone!

Democratic Socialists cannot consistently claim to support the poor while also supporting they be jailed for participating in capitalist acts between consenting adults. 

The “Greedy Private Property” Deception

The “Greedy Private Property” Deception

by | Nov 26, 2022 |

 

A “property right” entitles one party to exclude another from interacting with a scarce part of the universe – i.e. to have a property right in my car entitles me to exclude others from driving it to Dallas when I wish to drive it to Phoenix. There is no principled difference between excluding someone from a car, a computer, a house, or if you start selling things out of the house and it’s now a “business” involving a web of voluntary contracts.

The (democratic) socialist sees this and assumes:

  1. Exclusion exists
  2. Excluding X from Y means X will have less “liberty”
  3. Private property is thus greedy
  4. This is a unique aspect of the free market system

 

Remember January 6th, 2021?

We explicitly saw the government forcibly excluding people from the Capitol building, an officer even murdered an unarmed woman, Ashli Babbitt. I’m sure that trial will begin any day now.

Try walking into a government school and taking computers, printers, textbooks, projectors, and the wallet of the professor.

Imagine walking into a government police station and taking the property including the bullets, cars, guns, documents, badges, etc. Would you be met with exclusion or a kind round of applause?

The government excludes us from massive amounts of “state property” all the time and yet the socialist claims exclusion is unique to the voluntary sector. They print or steal trillions every single year and the socialist still claims ‘if only they taxed MORE everyone would have yada yada yada’.

In a nutshell: Socialist institutions forcibly exclude people from property yet the socialist pretends only capitalists do this to tarnish them as greedy people who value property over human life. 

Imagine Scottsdale, AZ in the year 22 AD v. Scottsdale, AZ in the year 2022. There is much more private property in 2022, so this must mean we all are worse off with fewer choices according to socialist logic.

To the contrary, more private property has increased the productive capacity of the people and the land making virtually everyone better off with more choices and opportunities in 2022 than they would have had in 22 AD.

I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.

– Thomas Sowell

Capitalism invokes more cooperation than competition—think of the number of mutually beneficial transactions you’ve had today compared to the number of competitions you’ve been in today.

– Chris Freiman

Jacobin Magazine once asked “How did private property start?” – the answer is when the first person resisted enslavement.

 

Want to support the Libertarian Institute? Make a tax deductible donation today.

Freedom = Social Cooperation = Prosperity

Freedom = Social Cooperation = Prosperity

by | Nov 24, 2022 | ,

…Sam Walton, the founder of Walmart, became one of the wealthiest men in the world by figuring out how to cut the price of just about everything to the benefit of everyone, but especially of lower-income consumers. That’s one of the other virtues of the free market: it rewards people who can figure out how to supply products and services that might have originally only been affordable to the wealthy so cheaply that just about anyone can afford and enjoy them. Henry Ford became wealthy by producing cheaper and cheaper (and better and better quality) automobiles; John D. Rockefeller became wealthy by selling refined kerosene and other oil industry products cheaper and cheaper for decades; Cornelius Vanderbilt got his start in business by managing a steamship business on the Hudson River in which the ride was free (!), making money by selling food and drinks on board; and on and on.

 

For their efforts such men have been denigrated by the enemies of economic freedom (including various politicians, government bureaucrats, socialist ideologues in academe, journalism, and elsewhere) as “robber barons.” Of course, they did not “rob” anyone.

 

Unlike government, they could not force anyone to buy their products; they had to persuade people to buy them by making them cheaper and better. Only government can rob you of your hard-earned money by threatening imprisonment for refusal to pay what it demands of you for services or products that you may have no need for whatsoever, and whose existence you may even deeply resent. It’s called tax evasion, a crime that is punished under federal and state law by fines, imprisonment, or both…

 

That is why the most menial local government tax-collecting bureaucrat can have more power over your life than the wealthiest businessperson in the world. Businesspeople must persuade people to purchase more of their products or services; unelected government bureaucrats can order you to shut down your business, take your kids out of school, or quit your job, and get the police to enforce the orders (as all Americans learned during the pandemic of 2020–2022).

 

– Dr. Thomas J. DiLorenzo, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Economics

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Scott Adams Tweeted Something So Imbecilic It Ruined My Thanksgiving

Scott Adams Tweeted Something So Imbecilic It Ruined My Thanksgiving

by | Nov 24, 2022 |

I wasn’t expecting to see a compelling argument for letting the state raise kids instead of parents, but here it is.

– Scott Adams

The situation is as follows:

  1. Person X committed murder
  2. Person X was raised by a Parent Y who is an explicit bigot and advocate of violence
  3. Therefore, Adams says, we have a compelling argument for “letting” the state raise kids

 

The question is: Can the shortcomings of Person X and Parent Y also be applied to the state?

 

1. Have members of governments ever committed murder? Let’s not be bigoted and only stick to the US government, let us get a global and historical account of this institution to better understand its nature. There was a wold war, twice, between governments which murdered tens of millions of people and thrived of bigoted propaganda. There was a Cold war where proxy wars were fought in Vietnam, Korea, and Afghanistan which left millions dead and dismembered. The Holodomor was a government program which murdered millions. Mao and the Communist Chinese Party murdered millions. The Japanese government from 1933-1945 murdered millions of people in China. There were civil wars in America and England which killed hundreds of thousands. Pol Pot’s government murdered as many as 2 million people. The current U.S. government has murdered innocent people with drones in Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Libya. Ukraine murdered civilians in Donbas and Russia is murdering civilians in Ukraine. It’s clear that on point 1, Scott has no leg to stand on. His main criteria, namely that murder is bad, applies many times over to the state, the very organization he thinks can solve this issue.

 

2. Adams also ignores that this situation occurred in America where the state has a legal monopoly on compulsory schooling. Not all education of course, but only the state can legally force you to fund and attend their schools. So after most people have spent 12 (wasted) years of their lives in these places we get a stupid population* which is bigoted. Adams apparently looks at this situation and believes more state involvement is necessary, even though they are the source of the problem today. Politicians, college professors, and teachers are the primary bigots in society using their institutional power to divide people by accidents of birth. Black v. White, men v. women, rich v. poor, Russia v. America, etc. Of course the corporate press is a major player in bigotry as well, but for the sake of argument, every short coming Adams applies to the citizens applies many times over to the state therefore the state raising kids is the worst possible solution.

 

3. The contradiction almost everyone holds: Monopolies are bad because they give few people too much power and with no competition we all get higher prices and lower quality of goods and services. Also, the state should monopolize compulsory schooling, taxation, law and order, regulation, welfare, the money supply, and tons of other things. No matter how bad things are, giving some people a monopoly is far worse than doing nothing. I put “letting” in quotes because that is often code for “some people supporting government coercing people by law with the threat of jailing them”.

 

Consider the argument with different variables:

Humans are often imperfect, ignorant, bigoted, and dishonest. Therefore, everyone should be forced to fund and attend Catholic Church schools.

Is it possible that Adams seeing one example of a person being evil was enough to make him justify this position? Such evil has always existed and will likely exist in any society with more than a few thousand people. The ignorant are always one example away from justifying tyranny. COVID! Terrorism! Poverty! Ignorance! Violence! Stock market decline! This is mind control. They hear about a problem, and without thinking at all they justify state intervention. Adams knows all the historical events I mentioned above and still can’t think clearly on the issue.

I wonder if such stupidity has anything to do with the state controlling how the vast majority of people are raised from ages 5-18?

I invite Mr. Adams to withdraw and retract his double standard for the state and embrace the peaceful and consistent philosophy of libertarianism.

 

*Its not that people are stupid per se, it’s that they don’t have the humility to only speak on topics which they have carefully researched and pondered. The vast majority of intellectual achievements that occur do so in spite of state schooling not because of it. 

Podcasts

scotthortonshow logosq

coi banner sq2@0.5x

liberty weekly thumbnail

Don't Tread on Anyone Logo

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

313x0w (1)

Pin It on Pinterest