Sooner or later most people realize that governments and the people who inhabit them are full of shit. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:
There is something good about government. It is that – inevitably – it exposes itself.
Or rather, they do.
The first inevitable revelation is that government isn’t an organism or an entity. It certainly doesn’t possess superior wisdom. It is the apparatus of organized, self-legalized power over people, controlled by a relative handful of people. Usually second and third-rate people. These people are no wiser than we are, just more powerful – by dint of controlling the apparatus of this thing called “government.”
In order to get – and hold – this power, these people must persuade a sufficiency of the people that the power being exercised over them is legitimate. This can be accomplished via any of several means and usually most if not all of them together. The people are told they have consented to be governed – and that they are represented. That because they are allowed to vote, they have a choice.
Above all of that, however, they must believe that “government” is fundamentally good in that it serves their interests. As opposed to the interests of those who govern them. And here we come to the fatal inevitability – because it is impossible for “government” to maintain the preposterous fiction that it serves anything other than the interests of those who are “government.”
The worst kind of people.
Not the ones who mind their own business but the ones who very much want to mind yours. Not the ones who want to persuade you but the ones who want to force you. The people who think other people ought to do as they say.
And if they don’t . . .
But they are even worse than that because they are people who pretend they are not like that. They present a facade of respectability. As the serial killer Ted Bundy did. They are public servants. They give themselves honorifics and (usually) dress like the rest of us, wearing business attire – as if their business bore any relationship to legitimate business.
This is the comment I posted on Eric’s article about the outlawing of incandescent lightbulbs. I thought you might be interested in protecting your eyes, given that you obviously spend many hours in front of a blue light emitting screen.
It isn’t just about the price. LED lights cause retinal damage and macular degeneration.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25863264/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1011134420304279
I purchase full spectrum lightbulbs from the following company. Pricey but these bulbs last years and are well worth it.
https://healthlighting.com/
Gwyneth
Thank you.
“In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to be taken as proof of consent, even for the time being. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having even been asked, a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments.
He sees, too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two.
In self-defense, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, to save his own life in battle, a man takes the lives of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of his own choosing.
Neither in contests with the ballot – which is a mere substitute for a bullet – because, as his only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, in an exigency into which he had been forced by others, and in which no other means of self-defense offered, he, as a matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him.” – Lysander Spooner
—————————————————————————
When singularly, or as part of a group, you make it your business to mind the business of others, you set into motion a “business” you should want no part of – neither as “entrepreneur” or “employee.”
For potentially, the most terrifying force of death comes from the hands of your fellow men who wished only to be left alone. They will have tried, in the face of compulsion and torment, to mind their own business, while providing for themselves and those they love.
They resist every impulse to fight back, knowing the violent and permanent change in their lives that must come with it. They know the moment they surrender to the building rage, the lives as they have lived them, are over.
The moment the men who wanted to be left alone are forced to fight back, they understand it to be a form of suicide. They are, literally, killing off who they used to be.
Which is why, when forced to take up violence, these men who wanted only to be left alone, fight with unholy vengeance against those who murdered their former lives. They fight with raw hate, and a drive that cannot be fathomed by those who are merely play-acting at politics, compulsion, and “the business of others.”
Should those who choose to mind the business of others not recant, true TERROR will arrive at their door, and they will cry, scream, and beg for mercy, but it will fall upon the then-deaf ears of those who simply wanted to be left alone.
Left alone to mind their own business, while upholding all other’s responsibility to do the same.
Vote accordingly
Dave