"But let none of you suffer as a murderer, a thief, an evildoer, or as a busybody in other people’s matters."
That's I Peter 4:15, and I nominate it as the new inscription chiseled over the entrance of every bureaucracy, whether national, state, or local, the Congress and local legislatures, the White House, police precincts, military installations, and courthouses. It may not trouble unregenerate bloodsuckers, but hopefully it will give pause to "Christians" who "work" for the State, murdering, thieving, committing evil and meddling in our matters on our dime. And it will remind the hapless serfs forced to enter those buildings of the State's antipathy to all things decent.
Thanks to Joshua Bennett and my other siblings in the Lord here at Patriot's Lament who've invited me to join them. I'm deeply honored. And I'd love to hear from you, the readers who make the audience of Patriot's Lament so special! You can either comment below or email me at libertatem[at]aol.com.
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Becky Akers with Patriot's Lament
Here is Becky when she joined us on our radio program on April 5. There were several times I was speechless.
Becky tells it like it is with no apologies.
Thank you Becky!!
Becky Akers with Patriot's Lament hour 1
Becky Akers with Patriot's Lament hour 2
Becky tells it like it is with no apologies.
Thank you Becky!!
Becky Akers with Patriot's Lament hour 1
Becky Akers with Patriot's Lament hour 2
Spooner sees it so clearly
We need a little Lysander Spooner, I think.
"It is no exaggeration but literal truth, to say that, by the Constitution, 'not as I interpret it, but as it is interpreted by those who pretend to administer it-' the properties, liberties, and the lives of the entire people of the United States are surrendered unreservedly into the hands of men who, it is provided by the constitution itself, shall never be "questioned" as to any disposal they make of them.
Article 1,sec.6 provides that, " for any speech or debate [or vote] in either house shall not be questioned in any other place".
The whole law making power is given to these senators and representatives, [when acting by 2/3rds vote] and this provision protects them from all responsibility for the laws they make.
[On an aside, this is from me, not Spooner, this means these garbage traps can spend the people into trillions of dollars of debt and can not be held accountable for it, according to the constitution. Back to Spooner.]
"Thus the whole power of the government is in their hands, and they are made utterly irresponsible for the use they make of it. What is this but absolute, irresponsible power?
It is no answer to this view of the case to say that these men are under oath to use their power only within created limits, what should they care, for oaths or limits when it is expressly provided, by the constitution itself, that they shall never be questioned or held to any responsibility whatsoever, for violating these oaths, or transgressing their limits."
[From here I am going to paraphrase a little, or rather, jump ahead to a conclusion from Spooner.]
Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the men holding this power must be men chosen by people to hold it. A man is NONE THE LESS THE SLAVE BECAUSE HE IS ALLOWED TO CHOOSE A NEW MASTER ONCE IN A TERM OF YEARS. Neither is a people any less the slaves because they are permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be,absolute and irresponsible.
[This is me again, but here is the point of this whole post.]
The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily implying the other. Neither can exist without the other.
If Congress have that absolute and irresponsible lawmaking power, which the constitution, according to their interpretation of it gives them, it can only be because THEY OWN US AS PROPERTY. If they own us as property, they are OUR masters, and their will is our law. IF they DO NOT own us as property, they are NOT our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us."
What Spooner is saying then, and rightfully so, is that if we are bound by the laws that congress passes, then congress owns us as property. But if congress does not own us as property, and they DO NOT, then we are not bound by their laws. They have no authority over us.
That is the whole point. We have to get out of this mind-controlling thought that we are their subjects, and they have any authority over us. If they do, and they are not responsible for anything they do to us, (and they are not) then they own us and we are no less slaves than any other slave in history.
I am NOT a slave.
"It is no exaggeration but literal truth, to say that, by the Constitution, 'not as I interpret it, but as it is interpreted by those who pretend to administer it-' the properties, liberties, and the lives of the entire people of the United States are surrendered unreservedly into the hands of men who, it is provided by the constitution itself, shall never be "questioned" as to any disposal they make of them.
Article 1,sec.6 provides that, " for any speech or debate [or vote] in either house shall not be questioned in any other place".
The whole law making power is given to these senators and representatives, [when acting by 2/3rds vote] and this provision protects them from all responsibility for the laws they make.
[On an aside, this is from me, not Spooner, this means these garbage traps can spend the people into trillions of dollars of debt and can not be held accountable for it, according to the constitution. Back to Spooner.]
"Thus the whole power of the government is in their hands, and they are made utterly irresponsible for the use they make of it. What is this but absolute, irresponsible power?
It is no answer to this view of the case to say that these men are under oath to use their power only within created limits, what should they care, for oaths or limits when it is expressly provided, by the constitution itself, that they shall never be questioned or held to any responsibility whatsoever, for violating these oaths, or transgressing their limits."
[From here I am going to paraphrase a little, or rather, jump ahead to a conclusion from Spooner.]
Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the men holding this power must be men chosen by people to hold it. A man is NONE THE LESS THE SLAVE BECAUSE HE IS ALLOWED TO CHOOSE A NEW MASTER ONCE IN A TERM OF YEARS. Neither is a people any less the slaves because they are permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be,absolute and irresponsible.
[This is me again, but here is the point of this whole post.]
The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily implying the other. Neither can exist without the other.
If Congress have that absolute and irresponsible lawmaking power, which the constitution, according to their interpretation of it gives them, it can only be because THEY OWN US AS PROPERTY. If they own us as property, they are OUR masters, and their will is our law. IF they DO NOT own us as property, they are NOT our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us."
What Spooner is saying then, and rightfully so, is that if we are bound by the laws that congress passes, then congress owns us as property. But if congress does not own us as property, and they DO NOT, then we are not bound by their laws. They have no authority over us.
That is the whole point. We have to get out of this mind-controlling thought that we are their subjects, and they have any authority over us. If they do, and they are not responsible for anything they do to us, (and they are not) then they own us and we are no less slaves than any other slave in history.
I am NOT a slave.
Friday, April 4, 2014
Becky Akers
Becky Akers will be joining us again tomorrow at 9 am Alaskan time on the Patriot's Lament radio show. Don't miss it, it's going to be good!!
Becky Akers on LRC
Becky Akers on LRC
Good Citizen
A friend of mine emailed me an article titled "Home Schoolers make good citizens".
The first thing that ran through my mind was, "If home schoolers make good citizens, those parents are doing it wrong."
Is being a good citizen even something we should strive to achieve? Should we teach our kids to be one? Or should we be and teach our children to be "good people"?
What is a good citizen?
One of the definitions of "citizen" in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary is: " a native or naturalized person who owes allegiance to a government and is entitled to protection from it".
You can be a good citizen and not follow the non-aggression principle. In fact, a good citizen supports his government in aggressing against his own neighbor, and teaches his children this is good.
You can be a good citizen, and support the immoral wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, and actually, we are told you are a bad citizen if you don't support every war or invasion the government decides it wants.
A good citizen will submit to a cop beating him and not show even the least bit of resistance. A good citizen knows that it is his duty to take the beating and, if he really doesn't think he earned this form of protection, the good citizen can plead his case against the beating before a court, if he survives the beating.
A good citizen turns a blind eye to another good citizen getting beaten by a cop, knowing that the good citizen must have done something to earn this act of protection.
To be a good citizen one must give every penny the government says he owes in taxation, and he must be happy about it, and about where the money is spent. The good citizen doesn't "cheat" the government on his tax returns, knowing the government needs that money in order to pay for cops to beat him and his neighbor, and to fight the wars it wants.
A good citizen votes in every election he can, and accepts the choices the government gives him to vote for and on.
A good citizen pledges allegiance to his government and doesn't question anything it does, period.
No thanks.
A good person, on the other hand, knows it is wrong to initiate violence against his neighbor, whether his neighbor lives next door to him or in another country, and whether he does it himself or has his government do it for him.
A good person not only is against wars of aggression, but he speaks out against them, and teaches his children to live in peace.
A good person knows he has the right to defend himself, and that a badge and a costume does not give anyone the right to violate him, or his neighbor.
A good person does not happily pay the extortion money the government demands from him, and uses every loophole and opportunity he can to keep his property for himself.
A good person does not pledge himself to a government, but pledges to live in peace with his fellow man, and follows the golden rule.
To you Christians, the Bible says you are not even citizens of this world (Philippians 3:19), so why do you think it honorable to be good earthly citizens?
My wife and I homeschool our 8 children (this year they are using the Ron Paul curriculum), and I will not teach them to be good citizens; rather, I will continue to teach them to be good people.
We have to decide for ourselves if we would rather be a good citizen, or a good person. I don't want to be a good citizen, in fact, I want to be a bad citizen.
Let us be good people. That should be our goal. That is what we should strive to be.
The first thing that ran through my mind was, "If home schoolers make good citizens, those parents are doing it wrong."
Is being a good citizen even something we should strive to achieve? Should we teach our kids to be one? Or should we be and teach our children to be "good people"?
What is a good citizen?
One of the definitions of "citizen" in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary is: " a native or naturalized person who owes allegiance to a government and is entitled to protection from it".
You can be a good citizen and not follow the non-aggression principle. In fact, a good citizen supports his government in aggressing against his own neighbor, and teaches his children this is good.
You can be a good citizen, and support the immoral wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, and actually, we are told you are a bad citizen if you don't support every war or invasion the government decides it wants.
A good citizen will submit to a cop beating him and not show even the least bit of resistance. A good citizen knows that it is his duty to take the beating and, if he really doesn't think he earned this form of protection, the good citizen can plead his case against the beating before a court, if he survives the beating.
A good citizen turns a blind eye to another good citizen getting beaten by a cop, knowing that the good citizen must have done something to earn this act of protection.
To be a good citizen one must give every penny the government says he owes in taxation, and he must be happy about it, and about where the money is spent. The good citizen doesn't "cheat" the government on his tax returns, knowing the government needs that money in order to pay for cops to beat him and his neighbor, and to fight the wars it wants.
A good citizen votes in every election he can, and accepts the choices the government gives him to vote for and on.
A good citizen pledges allegiance to his government and doesn't question anything it does, period.
No thanks.
A good person, on the other hand, knows it is wrong to initiate violence against his neighbor, whether his neighbor lives next door to him or in another country, and whether he does it himself or has his government do it for him.
A good person not only is against wars of aggression, but he speaks out against them, and teaches his children to live in peace.
A good person knows he has the right to defend himself, and that a badge and a costume does not give anyone the right to violate him, or his neighbor.
A good person does not happily pay the extortion money the government demands from him, and uses every loophole and opportunity he can to keep his property for himself.
A good person does not pledge himself to a government, but pledges to live in peace with his fellow man, and follows the golden rule.
To you Christians, the Bible says you are not even citizens of this world (Philippians 3:19), so why do you think it honorable to be good earthly citizens?
My wife and I homeschool our 8 children (this year they are using the Ron Paul curriculum), and I will not teach them to be good citizens; rather, I will continue to teach them to be good people.
We have to decide for ourselves if we would rather be a good citizen, or a good person. I don't want to be a good citizen, in fact, I want to be a bad citizen.
Let us be good people. That should be our goal. That is what we should strive to be.
Friday, March 14, 2014
Richard Maybury to join Patriot's Lament Radio Saturday, March 15th
Tune in to KFAR 660 am at 9am Alaska time (10 am Pacific) to hear Richard Maybury.
You won't want to miss him! You can also listen on the web at 660 KFAR and click the listen live button.
You won't want to miss him! You can also listen on the web at 660 KFAR and click the listen live button.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Internment camps? Not here, really?
Justice Anthony Scalia said some pretty interesting things this past week, something we have been ridiculed here at Patriot's Lament for even suggesting, when we helped to expose the detention articles in the NDAA 2 years ago.
Well, seems that we weren't wrong so much, unfortunately.
When a supreme court justice is willing to say it in public, a person ought to take notice, especially when he says the things that he did.
Scalia on internment camps in the U.S.S.A
Well, seems that we weren't wrong so much, unfortunately.
When a supreme court justice is willing to say it in public, a person ought to take notice, especially when he says the things that he did.
Scalia on internment camps in the U.S.S.A
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
As important as liberty is, freedom from the power of sin is more important.
As we remember the birth of Christ and celebrate the coming of the New Year, I pray that we may all experience, appreciate and demonstrate the liberty we have in Christ Jesus from the slavery of sin, and the New Life He purchased for us.
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Joe Sobran's Wisdom
There can be no greater triumph for the parasite than for the host to think of it and itself as a single unit. It’s as if a man were to refer to himself and a blood-bloated leech under his skin as “we.” -- Joe Sobran
Your Friend, The State
After the twentieth century, in which the world’s governments killed hundreds of millions of their own subjects, everyone ought to talk about the state the way Jews talk about Hitler.
Jesus' Government
After the twentieth century, in which the world’s governments killed hundreds of millions of their own subjects, everyone ought to talk about the state the way Jews talk about Hitler.
Jesus' Government
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Relax, the local crime spree may just be the Feds trying to corrupt your neighborhood teens and mentally challenged with sex and drugs...
And an interesting article on the police.
Some sizable portion of the cops don't start out as sociopaths, in my opinion. The incentive structure, the nature of the laws being enforced, the groupthink/feeling of authority (think of the Stanford Prison Experiment) etc. turns them that way. Some small percentage maintain (or regain) their humanity.
If you really want "law and order" you'd best not look to something shaped like a state to provide it.
And an interesting article on the police.
Some sizable portion of the cops don't start out as sociopaths, in my opinion. The incentive structure, the nature of the laws being enforced, the groupthink/feeling of authority (think of the Stanford Prison Experiment) etc. turns them that way. Some small percentage maintain (or regain) their humanity.
If you really want "law and order" you'd best not look to something shaped like a state to provide it.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Friends?
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams.
This one is something that reminds me of a friend who once told me about a test he does for people he meets, and based on their answer, he decides whether or not he will even give them the time of day, much less befriend them. He calls it the "Raw milk test." He asks if you think the State has the right to jail people who disobey the law and buy/sell raw cows' milk. Based on the answer given, he decides whether his time would be worth spending with you. Yes, if you say the state does have this right, he sees no worth in your friendship.
This brings up a broader point, one where we decide our time preferences. How much time do you want to spend with a Statist, really, someone who for whatever reason wouldn't blink an eye if the State threw you in a cage. Someone who says, "He must have done something wrong, after all, it's the law." I think we have to remove ourselves as much as possible from the Statists who just WON'T get it, no matter how much time you have wasted on them. Freedom and Liberty aren't for everyone;, some actually like being slaves, all the while, of course, telling you that they are somehow free (thanks, no less, to the State).
I think it's time to take Samuel Adams' words to heart, and to tell these Statists--and you know who they are in your life--to move on.
What really do we need from them anyway? They aren't edifying our lives, so why even associate with them?
Let them live in their chains.
We should have a little more self respect than that. If you have no qualms over the State caging me or my family or anyone over an arbitrary law some mortal man made up from his little mind, I want nothing to do with you.
You sound more like an enemy than a friend.
May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
Don't expect me to smile and be your friend while you chain me.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Saturday, 12/7, David McElroy
David McElroy, creator of the video "We're the Government, and You're Not" will join us on Patriot's Lament radio Saturday at 9AM.
David has been a political operative working in the system before coming to the conclusion that there is no "there" there. Hear him talk about this and his efforts since to advance liberty.
You can visit his blog at David McElroy.
I particularly recommend these two to your attention:
You can't fight the state by becoming the state
To become a runaway slave first you have to free your own thoughts
What do we DO???
This really is the perennial question.
Consider this piece by Wendy McElroy.
I'm going to cherry pick a few points out of her very good article to expand upon, leaving out her supporting arguments. You can (and should) read her article if you don't see what I quote here as immediately obvious.
The key thing underpinning the evil things the state does is the moral double standard which is necessary for it to exist. Anything which leaves that double standard in place is counter productive.
Let me say that again: Anything which leaves that double standard in place is COUNTER PRODUCTIVE.
Limited government people, Constitutional Conservatives, etc. all leave the moral double standard in place. Yes, they want to reduce the predations of the state to a less onerous level. Yes, they want to increase the sphere of private action somewhat, but the core error is still there. The germ from which we went from 1789 to today is still there. As Dr. Robert Higgs wrote recently the only difference between a limited government and a tyranny is time. Limited government people and constitutional conservatives are on the right path if they started out as neo-cons or neo-liberals, but if they stop there and get bogged down in "making a difference in government" then they're part of the problem, not part of the solution because they justify and rationalize the central mistake of the state, the moral double standard in the two main things -- stealing and killing. It can only steal and kill for a couple reasons, reasons that they like, but it still gets the exemption. Having that exemption it then becomes a battle of numbers and emotions as to when it gets to exercise that exemption.
So, what is to be done? The state exists in the minds of people. This is what must be attacked. It's key error and evil is the moral double standard. This is the root. Playing at the branches with a pocket knife may be fun, but often times by doing so you're fertilizing the tree.
If you think about the root instead of the branches you'll see that there are many avenues of action open to you. If you get involved in politics, are you doing so to "fix" the state or to undermine its legitimacy? If the first, then I think that you're part of the problem. If the second, I think you're part of the solution. But, it is a very dangerous path as the number of people able to resist the lure of political power is very small indeed.
Consider this piece by Wendy McElroy.
I'm going to cherry pick a few points out of her very good article to expand upon, leaving out her supporting arguments. You can (and should) read her article if you don't see what I quote here as immediately obvious.
The great political lie is that individuals need the state. It is a lie on at least two levels.
The first layer of the great lie: It states the opposite of what is true; the state needs individuals. And the state is desperate for you to believe it is indispensable to your life.
The second layer of the great lie is its foundation. Namely, there is no "state" as opposed to individuals. Both the state and society consist of nothing more than their individual members and the sum total of their interactions.
Individuals who form the state through their membership attach a specific meaning to gathering and coordinating with each other. The meaning or purpose is to exercise the perceived privilege to rule over individuals who are non-members. To do so, it is necessary to convince non-members of the state's legitimacy.
Mystification sanctifies the actions taken by individuals in the name of the state. That is, a double standard of morality is introduced – one for individuals who are members of the state and another for non-members. The double standard contradicts a longstanding principle of liberty; namely, that a violation of violates [I think she meant to write "rights"] committed by an individual remains a violation of rights when performed by a group of individuals.
Rape is no less rape because a gang is involved or because they shout "do for England!"In her concluding paragraph Wendy writes:
The state exists as an engine of privilege only because the vast majority of people believe that the individuals who comprise it can properly operate on a double standard. If state agents, from the president to post office workers, were viewed as individuals who are bound to the same rules of decency as the rest of us, then the state as we know it would crumble as the illusion it is.After you read this you say, "So what does this have to do with determining what we do?"
The key thing underpinning the evil things the state does is the moral double standard which is necessary for it to exist. Anything which leaves that double standard in place is counter productive.
Let me say that again: Anything which leaves that double standard in place is COUNTER PRODUCTIVE.
Limited government people, Constitutional Conservatives, etc. all leave the moral double standard in place. Yes, they want to reduce the predations of the state to a less onerous level. Yes, they want to increase the sphere of private action somewhat, but the core error is still there. The germ from which we went from 1789 to today is still there. As Dr. Robert Higgs wrote recently the only difference between a limited government and a tyranny is time. Limited government people and constitutional conservatives are on the right path if they started out as neo-cons or neo-liberals, but if they stop there and get bogged down in "making a difference in government" then they're part of the problem, not part of the solution because they justify and rationalize the central mistake of the state, the moral double standard in the two main things -- stealing and killing. It can only steal and kill for a couple reasons, reasons that they like, but it still gets the exemption. Having that exemption it then becomes a battle of numbers and emotions as to when it gets to exercise that exemption.
So, what is to be done? The state exists in the minds of people. This is what must be attacked. It's key error and evil is the moral double standard. This is the root. Playing at the branches with a pocket knife may be fun, but often times by doing so you're fertilizing the tree.
If you think about the root instead of the branches you'll see that there are many avenues of action open to you. If you get involved in politics, are you doing so to "fix" the state or to undermine its legitimacy? If the first, then I think that you're part of the problem. If the second, I think you're part of the solution. But, it is a very dangerous path as the number of people able to resist the lure of political power is very small indeed.
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Special Guest Today -- Scott Horton, expert on Foreign Policy
Scott Horton, debater and vanquisher of many of the establishment's foreign policy experts, in person, on the topics having to do with wars, will be joining Patriot's Lament today, at 9.a.m. Alaska time.
Go to kfar660.com and click the "listen live" tab.
Scott is more than an encyclopedia of knowledge on this stuff.
Hour one.
Hour two.
Go to kfar660.com and click the "listen live" tab.
Scott is more than an encyclopedia of knowledge on this stuff.
Hour one.
Hour two.
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Upcoming Guests
We've just lined up two guests for the radio show which I'm excited to share with you. The dates for the interviews are being worked out.
David McElroy
Many years ago David made the famous video, "We're the Government, and You're Not."
He also wrote an insightful article about change through politics, "Why not join the LP? You can't fight the state by becoming the state." The key insight I took from this article was his discussion of the Founding fathers, about half way through the article. If the title doesn't grab you because you think that is an obvious conclusion, the article is still worthwhile. I'd seen David's video before, but I first found out about him through his interview on Bad Quaker, which led me to find him.
William Anderson
I first "met" Bill Anderson through a lecture he gave at the Ludwig Von Mises Institute about the press as a fundamentally progressive institution which mostly advances the interests of the state. Since then he's written extensively about the injustice system in America and Paul Krugman's many problems as an economist.
His archive is available at LewRockwell.com, but if you're unsure where to begin, let me suggest this article about the Court system or this one.
David McElroy
Many years ago David made the famous video, "We're the Government, and You're Not."
He also wrote an insightful article about change through politics, "Why not join the LP? You can't fight the state by becoming the state." The key insight I took from this article was his discussion of the Founding fathers, about half way through the article. If the title doesn't grab you because you think that is an obvious conclusion, the article is still worthwhile. I'd seen David's video before, but I first found out about him through his interview on Bad Quaker, which led me to find him.
William Anderson
I first "met" Bill Anderson through a lecture he gave at the Ludwig Von Mises Institute about the press as a fundamentally progressive institution which mostly advances the interests of the state. Since then he's written extensively about the injustice system in America and Paul Krugman's many problems as an economist.
His archive is available at LewRockwell.com, but if you're unsure where to begin, let me suggest this article about the Court system or this one.
Saturday, November 23, 2013
Prepare now, not when you wished you had
Last week, Fairbanks got hit by a good snow storm, big deal. Then it rained. So what? Then the wind came up with 50 mph gusts, blowing down hundreds of trees which were bearing the weight of heavy wet snow.
The power went out all over the valley, thousands of homes without power.
We lost our power sometime during the night, big deal right?
I have a generator.
Problem was it was still sitting at my shop, not hooked up to our house. I didn't worry too much about it, our woods stoves kept the house warm enough, propane cook stoves gave us hot meals, but when we were told it would be several days before power came back, and by the third day tired of melting snow on the stoves for flushing toilets, I decided to drag the genset out of the snow.
I didn't know enough about this genset to do anything with it the first day, besides get it started in 10 degree weather.
A friend got it wired in on the 4th day, and we had power, running water and flushing toilets!
Cool huh?
The power company had us back on line a few hours later.
Still, I was and am disappointed in my procrastination. Why had I waited for this to happen to set up my generator? My battery pack for the house is still sitting in my shop, not hooked up to anything. I don't have any fuel stored up at the house like I keep telling myself I would do.
What if it was the normal -40 during this time? A lot of folks would have been in a hurt box, and I was ill prepared to help anyone.
I guess the point I am trying to make is, don't wait until necessity forces you to take action.
On day one of the outage here, I heard stories of generators being cleared off the shelves, as well as water, batteries, flashlights and candles.
Fred Meyer threw away their fresh food after 8 hours, so the supermarket wasn't going to help much as far as fresh food.
So stock up a little food, it can't hurt. Even if you just grab 2 extra cans of food on every shopping trip.
Maybe have some extra fresh water on hand? Batteries? A few candles? Don't think you can go grab it after the emergency happens, because it isn't going to work that way.
I have found some neat water pumps for those who have their own wells, it fits down your well and you can actually pump water into your home system to charge it up.
You can't expect to grab some extra propane or fuel after the fact if the local station doesn't have power to pump it.
Plus, I think it is good to have extra beyond what you need so you can help those who are in worse shape than you are.
In a real crisis, say a financial meltdown, you certainly shouldn't think you will just blow your neighbor away because he knocks on your door to ask for some food for his kids.
I think times are close, when things are going to get very bad, very very bad. Power may be the least of one's worries. So do yourself, your family, and your neighbors a favor, store up a little now.
Encourage your families and friends to do the same.
Ask them what they would do if they don't have the State to run to for help.
I don't see why small communities can't make it through what's coming.
But it's up to you to make it happen.
Be an asset to your family and friends and neighbors, not a hindrance, or worse, a burden.
I especially think it is important for Anarchists (or Voluntaryists), to be ready. What better example can you show, when it hits the fan, than to say, " I know a better way than to run to the State," and by being the example yourself.
If you are just as needy and caught off guard as your local Statist, who is going to listen to you?
The message of Liberty is more than words and philosophy; it requires action, diligence, and self discipline.
The power went out all over the valley, thousands of homes without power.
We lost our power sometime during the night, big deal right?
I have a generator.
Problem was it was still sitting at my shop, not hooked up to our house. I didn't worry too much about it, our woods stoves kept the house warm enough, propane cook stoves gave us hot meals, but when we were told it would be several days before power came back, and by the third day tired of melting snow on the stoves for flushing toilets, I decided to drag the genset out of the snow.
I didn't know enough about this genset to do anything with it the first day, besides get it started in 10 degree weather.
A friend got it wired in on the 4th day, and we had power, running water and flushing toilets!
Cool huh?
The power company had us back on line a few hours later.
Still, I was and am disappointed in my procrastination. Why had I waited for this to happen to set up my generator? My battery pack for the house is still sitting in my shop, not hooked up to anything. I don't have any fuel stored up at the house like I keep telling myself I would do.
What if it was the normal -40 during this time? A lot of folks would have been in a hurt box, and I was ill prepared to help anyone.
I guess the point I am trying to make is, don't wait until necessity forces you to take action.
On day one of the outage here, I heard stories of generators being cleared off the shelves, as well as water, batteries, flashlights and candles.
Fred Meyer threw away their fresh food after 8 hours, so the supermarket wasn't going to help much as far as fresh food.
So stock up a little food, it can't hurt. Even if you just grab 2 extra cans of food on every shopping trip.
Maybe have some extra fresh water on hand? Batteries? A few candles? Don't think you can go grab it after the emergency happens, because it isn't going to work that way.
I have found some neat water pumps for those who have their own wells, it fits down your well and you can actually pump water into your home system to charge it up.
You can't expect to grab some extra propane or fuel after the fact if the local station doesn't have power to pump it.
Plus, I think it is good to have extra beyond what you need so you can help those who are in worse shape than you are.
In a real crisis, say a financial meltdown, you certainly shouldn't think you will just blow your neighbor away because he knocks on your door to ask for some food for his kids.
I think times are close, when things are going to get very bad, very very bad. Power may be the least of one's worries. So do yourself, your family, and your neighbors a favor, store up a little now.
Encourage your families and friends to do the same.
Ask them what they would do if they don't have the State to run to for help.
I don't see why small communities can't make it through what's coming.
But it's up to you to make it happen.
Be an asset to your family and friends and neighbors, not a hindrance, or worse, a burden.
I especially think it is important for Anarchists (or Voluntaryists), to be ready. What better example can you show, when it hits the fan, than to say, " I know a better way than to run to the State," and by being the example yourself.
If you are just as needy and caught off guard as your local Statist, who is going to listen to you?
The message of Liberty is more than words and philosophy; it requires action, diligence, and self discipline.
Friday, November 15, 2013
Ben Stone
Ben Stone, the "Bad Quaker" will be joining us tomorrow at 9 a.m. AK time on the Patriot's Lament.
This promises to be a lot of fun, and I am sure we are going to learn a lot.
Listen live here.
Please join us!
This promises to be a lot of fun, and I am sure we are going to learn a lot.
Listen live here.
Please join us!
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Judges 9:7-15... for you Statist so called Christians
7 When it was told to Jotham, he went and stood on top of Mount Gerizim and cried aloud and said to them, “Listen to me, you leaders of Shechem, that God may listen to you. 8 The trees once went out to anoint a king over them, and they said to the olive tree, ‘Reign over us.’ 9 But
the olive tree said to them, ‘Shall I leave my abundance, by which gods
and men are honored, and go hold sway over the trees?’ 10 And the trees said to the fig tree, ‘You come and reign over us.’ 11 But the fig tree said to them, ‘Shall I leave my sweetness and my good fruit and go hold sway over the trees?’ 12 And the trees said to the vine, ‘You come and reign over us.’ 13 But the vine said to them, ‘Shall I leave my wine that cheers God and men and go hold sway over the trees?’ 14 Then all the trees said to the bramble, ‘You come and reign over us.’ 15 And the bramble said to the trees, ‘If in good faith you are anointing me king over you, then come and take refuge in my shade, but if not, let fire come out of the bramble and devour the cedars of Lebanon.’
Funny, the brambles are the only ones who would accept the call to rule. Also, the brambles are obviously inferior to the Cedars.
So Cedar, who should reign over you?
Funny, the brambles are the only ones who would accept the call to rule. Also, the brambles are obviously inferior to the Cedars.
So Cedar, who should reign over you?
I don't worship objects
If you have not seen this story yet, I think you will enjoy it.
If only more Americans felt the same. Lew Rockwell, "I don't worship objects"
If only more Americans felt the same. Lew Rockwell, "I don't worship objects"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)