I love being a wife and mom to the best Husband and kids this woman could ask for, however, I am so much more than that. I take a deep interest in politics in all of it's realms and portals. I still consider myself a student and by no means a teacher so if anyone actually gets anything out of my blogs, I certainly don't expect it but that's awesome. If not, no love lost.
Recently on the news, it is said that there is a whistleblower saying 3 women received unnecessary hysterectomies at an ICE detention center in Georgia which MSNBC made sure to say that it’s run by a private company (LeSalle Corrections). I heard a couple of versions. They were apparently told they were to receive hysterectomies and had no say in it, and 1 woman apparently had cancer so she needed a hysterectomy but after she got out was told by another doctor that she never had it? In any case, whatever the stories are, these women had their natural rights violated and this wouldn’t be the first time throughout history. Brief history of forced sterilization: (Copied and pasted from eugenicsarchive .ca)
“Although Indiana was the first state in the United States to pass a eugenic sterilization law in 1907, two states had introduced such laws earlier. In 1897, Michigan introduced a compulsory sterilization bill that did not pass, and in 1905 Pennsylvania passed a sterilization law that was vetoed by the state governor, and so did not come into effect as law. Over 30 states eventually passed such legislation, with Alberta (1928) and British Columbia (1933) the only Canadian provinces to pass comparable laws.”
(According to disabilityjustice. org) “Buck V Bell upheld a 1924 Virginia statute that allowed state governments to sterilize people it considered genetically unfit. In explaining the Supreme Court’s decision supporting involuntary sterilization, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., noted:
“It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from breeding their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting Fallopian tubes…Three generations of imbeciles are enough.””
So, private company or not, it is absolutely legal to forcibly sterilize humans in the name of all that’s good for the state. No matter how many states have denounced it, passed statutes or updated them that have never actually repealed them. It wouldn’t matter if the last forced sterilization happened in 1981 (or 2020 allegedly), or that since the late 19th century over 70,000 forced sterilizations were carried out legally.
Not that it really matters to anarchists but for any constitutionalists it might matter that these laws go against the 8th and 14th amendments. -The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments. -The Fourteenth Amendment addresses many aspects of citizenship and the rights of citizens. The most commonly used — and frequently litigated — phrase in the amendment is “equal protection of the laws”
This is the system we live in folks. Gross, I know.
So who else has checked out the executive orders from their state? I wrote a post the other day saying the governor’s executive order for this pandemic, isn’t a law and that’s absolutely correct. But here, I’ll post my sources.
As it turns out the one from NY, which is where I live, is chalk full of the word “shall”. Though shall has many meanings, it is also a suggestive term. In legal documents such as an executive order, it’s meant to be suggestive, even by the supreme court.
“Nearly every jurisdiction has held that the word “shall” is confusing because it can also mean “may, will or must.” Legal reference books like the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure no longer use the word “shall.” Even the Supreme Court ruled that when the word “shall” appears in statutes, it means “may.” Bryan Garner, the legal writing scholar and editor of Black’s Law Dictionary wrote that “In most legal instruments, shall violates the presumption of consistency … which is why shall is among the most heavily litigated words in the English language.”
I’ll also give credit to this woman, who did all the research for how businesses can’t close down due to people not wearing a mask. It’s 25 minutes long, in short, no. The executive order goes along the guidelines of existing public health laws which puts it squarely in the jurisdiction of Department of Health. And they can’t fine or shut you down for regulations or laws that don’t exist in legislation yet, but they can find something else and get you for that. If you own a business, I’d listen to this. https://youtu.be/kYcG72rwsek
If anyone doesn’t know, Emma Goldman is the reason why I am proud to call myself an anarchist. I’d already been a few years into my research and found a test from Political Compass. I took it and the the chart showed all these famous people in history, Emma Goldman being on the far left. At the time I considered myself a libertarian and the dot signifying where I belonged was hanging off the line of the chart and in Emma Goldman’s throat. I didn’t even know who she was. And if you don’t then today’s book and video of the day can help with that. One thing I did recently notice, is that she’s popular not just in anarchist circles, but feminist and left liberal groups as well.
In the realm of Anarchism many have come up with several ideas for living in a stateless existence. There are several flavors or schools of thought for if there was just one, that would defeat the whole purpose of the freedom we fight for. It appears as shown throughout history that most anarchists disagree with one another, all of which at the core winds up leading to property. Not just any type of property but private property. Specifically and more currently, you can see these types of arguments are taken place with Anarchist Capitalists (Ancaps) and Anarchist Communists (Ancoms) right here in social media. They disagree on what seems like everything and that’s ok. It’s not necessary to agree on everything or anything at all. It’s almost like one side is insistent on rehearsed one liners that they know is going to trigger the other, while the other gets so emotional that one gets annoyed and thus neither side actually had a productive argument. This, of course, is the trademark of newer Ancaps and Ancoms. So let’s make it clear. (This is pretty elementary, but just for shits and giggles) What is Private Property? Places that you own and use and create your means of production to be sold off, such as factories, businesses and can even be apartment buildings or houses for rent.
What is Personal Property? Something you own and intend to use for yourself, such as your house that you live in, toothbrush, sun glasses, couch, TV…etc.
Contrary to popular belief, neither group is against personal property. Just as an example, Ancaps may argue that Ancoms want their toothbrushes because the only way to have 1 is through use of private property, suggesting Ancoms must be against personal property. Ancoms might argue that Ancaps want control over everything by means of extortion and therefore will steal your toothbrush and resell it for profit so Ancaps must be against personal property too. Actually… NO ONE WANTS YOUR NASTY TOOTHBRUSH! 藍 (statists might though, just saying).
Typically these discussions get out of hand and seem to stray from the reason why we call ourselves anarchists in the first place, and that is the state is our enemy. Understandably The State has been the very reason why different groups are created. Because where there is corruption and injustice many will stand up against it. Every action The State has taken to create such injustices through means of doctrine, coercion and violence, and yet the “free people” will blame each other. Capitalism isn’t the same as the corporatism we’ve always had and communism isn’t the dictatorship of the proletariat that it’s history has always repeated.
Anarchists are not violent nor coercive. With that said, if you call yourself an Anarchist or Anarcho hyphen anything but suggest otherwise, you’re not worthy of the name and what it stands for. It doesn’t matter what flavor or school of thought you are, you can debate which is right or wrong all day. In the end, in a stateless and voluntary society you’re free to choose. If all is voluntary as it should be, then who will coerce anyone to into institutions and doctrines? If everyone is free minded who will be forced to do anything they don’t want to do? Everyone should be able to have what they want and need without hindrance of one another. Voluntary is a key word and every school of thought can compliment each other really well if done in such a fashion. Or else you’re just looking at the rebuilding of State structure. Violence is for statists so let’s keep it that way. That’s what sets us apart from them after all.
“Liberty is not a box into which people are forced. Liberty is a space in which people may live. It does not tell you how they will live. It says eternally that only we can.” – Karl Hess
I made a comment on a post and it inspired me to make a post.
MARRIAGE Why is marriage slavery? Multiple reasons really.
the whole history of marriage was to force 2 people together for money exchange between families especially in the times of monarchy in Europe. All marriages had to be approved by the king. In its history men have always claimed the women as if they were their property, especially when it came to uniting 2 families for the sake of wealth. And that’s not to mention the business of buying people as slaves to work on their land. It’s no better, as both examples are means to use human beings as property/capital that belongs to another and not themselves. Hence, slavery.
In middle eastern and Indian cultures middle aged men are entitled to marry little girls against their will. Again, because 2 families are uniting for the sake of wealth. Young girls are forced to drop out of school (if they go to school) to marry and obey their husbands who will make endless promises before the details are worked out between the 2 families. And those promises are broken once the marriage ceremony is over. The women in those cultures, then, are often treated as second class citizens and to be subservient to their husbands for the rest of their lives.
For people here in America, it was no different in our earliest history from the time we invaded to present times. The State itself is a slave master. Just look up DC organic act of 1871. Here, the citizens are the property of the State. (As in you’re the capital). Politicians back then found another way to legally bind everyone to their will and property which is no better than marriage or traditional slavery. And just because culture and society seems to change to seem fair, at its underlying core, is the same old system of corruption. Today, just because it seems like both parties agree by choice, the social norm gives the illusion that you have to get married. They paint a pretty picture for marketing purposes, doesn’t take away from the fact that you’re not allowed to get married unless you have a license and it must be recognized in the eyes of the State or it is “invalid”. And let’s not pretend that people these days get married for love, it’s because they want the inheritance or these the State claims all, or unless there’s a written will, then the State claims a percentage. And after you spend all that money on a worthless junk of a ring, and engagement party, and bridal shower, AND wedding… you’re then forced to pay higher insurance and taxes. Lastly we all see the justice of men, nonfathers and fathers alike in a bad divorce. Right they don’t get any women take all most of the time. And try mentioning a prenup before marriage! (Lol) The State makes a lot of money on those cases of divorce. And just look at Utah with multiple wives, not all the women are willing to enter that marriage. And don’t get me started on how the justice system treats spousal abuse. More often than not it works out for the abuser. My point is you can be in love all you want no one should ever make you swear your allegiance to prove it. And if you’re going to do it, make sure you’re doing it for you when you’re ready and not because of pressure. If you want to, it should be able to be done in a private manner to no business of the State.
One of the main influences on this, to show how long this idea as existed, is Emma Goldman. She has had every influence on me and in fact every reason why I am proud to call myself an Anarchist. None other has so eloquently been able to express and convey this thought more, than in her essay “Marriage and Love”. I will leave this video here.
I’ve been with my man, for almost 8 years, we have 2 beautiful kids together. We have no need to get married, regardless of family pressure for the draconian traditions of “if you have kids you must get married” and if you don’t it’s “blasphemy”. John and I are interdependent of one another, we’re loyal, have respect and trust each other and probably have one of the most honest and truthful relationships I’ve ever been in. We worked hard for that and didn’t need a marriage for it, nor do we plan on ever getting married. If you choose to get married that’s your choice. Love has seldom to do with it.
Disclaimer: Any references I link in this blog isn’t an endorsement nor a sponsorship as I do not get paid to reference anyone. These blogs are for personal use and any information I write or link I share is specifically for educational purposes. Thank you and enjoy.
Ok so this blog took a long hot minute!!! A few months to be exact! So, just to recap, in my last blog I made it pretty clear that the 2 (being anti-establishment and a parent) are not synonymous with one another as parental authority ends when your children are old enough to be on their own. Whereas, the government doesn’t let go from birth to death. They do as they see fit to gain more power, without consequences, to make sure you obey and comply. That’s more than being an authority, that’s tyranny…. anyway, new blog.
I want to be very clear that I believe in Parental and caregiver responsibilities. It is my perspective that parents are caregivers as well as caregivers can be next of kin or adoptive (non-biological) and are to be given the same parental responsibilities and title of parent in this blog. We have natural responsibilities to take care of and provide for our children. Protection, food, shelter, education, life lessons, medical decisions. To have fun and make sure you do right by your children by every means to help them grow to be strong-minded, compassionate, intelligent, independent and even interdependent. To say it takes a village in these decisions is an unfair, cruel and controlling situation as the idea is to undermine the responsibilities out of the hands of the parent(s). Unless of course, we consent or volunteer to accept/give help which is different than letting the village or any government entity deciding what’s best for your family all together. You don’t want anyone undermining your parental authority to make these decisions for you and your children, from pregnancy to birth and to the age of being self-governed, so why do we let the system trick us? We have rights… don’t we?
So, what are your Parental rights? Well, it is important to know that parental rights differ by state. According to the law, parental rights go hand in hand with parental responsibilities. Your rights can refer to several things such as physical custody, legal custody (2 different things), rights to make medical decisions, right to enter contract, right to pass property and right to visitation. Each state has their own interpretation of what this all means and how ever strict or limited they should set the standards. I didn’t want to post this website as it advocated for parental rights to be protected at state level, however I feel it might be helpful to inform you on where you stand, if you wanted to know click Parental Rights By State. Each State has power to decide how limited your rights are as a parent.
Taking a closer look, in my research, I stumbled on this 2014 article written by Jeffery Shulman published an article titled Does The Constitution Protect A Fundamental Right to Parent? This piece is informative in where you stand in this country as a parent more than the state you live in, but on a federal level. I feel I should express that I’m not a constitutionalist (if you haven’t gotten that gist already), but I decided to include this portion for anyone who is and I would implore you to read closely and try to reconsider. Here are some key takeaways:
The right to parent free of state interference is NOT backed by the constitution
Custodial authority is not a natural right but derivative of the State
Parental rights are considered (not protected) under the federal constitution as fundamental by the 1st, 5th, 9th and 14th amendments and aren’t absolute nor are they enumerated.
No supreme court has ever held parental rights as constitutional or fundamental.
The trust model was built on a Lockean Principles, that the child is the one with fundamental rights to appropriate parental care. Which is true, however, take careful consideration that Locke believed in Representative Government not a tyrannical one.
Another Lockean Principle that is part of the trust model as well, is that the child is to be destined to become a member of liberal constitutional order, while parental duty in a liberal society was assumed to have no rights to do as they see fit based solely on private determination.
From the seemingly modest outcomes of the supreme court and due process cases such as Meyer vs Nebraska and Pierce vs The Society of Sisters, as the State was able to acquire power and has used these examples to gain more, we would do well to be careful what we advocate for constitutionally as they required that ONLY the state not restrict the rights of the parents even though it is backed by the constitution to do so.
Not a takeaway from the article, but here’s another reference, in case you wanted more info on your Constitutional Rights To Parent and supreme court and due process cases that helped amp the power of the state.
There was something else I
stumbled on. How would you feel about a treaty being put together to take away
your natural responsibilities as parents, as if to say they know what’s better
for your child, than you do? For instance the U.N proposed a Convention of Rights of the Child what
does this entail?
My take on this? You can’t beat how they make it sound. Those benefits could be amazing as it appeals to the “better care taking of your children”. In this situation, you don’t have a say in how they go about it, your taxes pay for it, and if you disapproved of it, it wouldn’t matter. It’s mandatory whether you like it or not. It is a direct interference with parental responsibility which is exactly in accordance with parental rights and again, the state decides what those standards are. As Dr. Potter said, that may be the U.N but America ratified this treaty and is absolutely backed by Article 6 of the constitution. Towards the end of the video he advocated for fighting for your rights through the use of the State and I just want to make it clear just how dangerous that is. The more you ask from them they’ll take twice as much from you, if that isn’t evident already.
The popular question when transitioning into the anti-establishment spectrum will often be “but what about child abuse in a libertarian or anarchist society? Wthout the State who will hold bad parents responsible?” Well let’s talk about it. Child abuse is a whole other subject, I do not discredit it but I will say that I do not feel this emotional topic should have (or ever had) any premise to government “protection”. Child abuse is a very serious matter, it is tragic and often government involvement makes things worse, especially for parents who never actually did anything wrong. Their interpretation of abuse is too broad, therefore being able to use any reason under any law to make any decisions to interfere and separate families with use of the programs CPS and DCF, as well as many others like it. No matter how many children you think they’ve helped, they’ve hurt a considerable amount more. Why? Because funding, like with all government programs are done in such a way that if they get an X amount of dollars for their agency for 1 year, then they must use the whole thing, or they don’t get the same amount or increase for the following year. Their sole agenda is generating more revenue through, manipulation, force, falsifying documents to get kids into foster homes, and keeping families in court while facilitating systematic programs for obedience to their masters. And they will do anything to get you, the parent, out of the picture. They will stonewall you from trying until you feel hopeless and helpless. One of the many programs they have is “therapy” for your children. Getting kids into therapy where they may be “required” to take medication and/or stay in facilities that are more like prisons than health facility. This also generates bonuses for the agencies as well. The more children they can take, the more programs they can use. And the more programs they can impose, the more money they will receive. The child is the one that gets hurt in all of this, and the parents suffer. The State itself is directly responsible for creating the problems that are illegal. This insures that all State laws are there to protect the State’s corruption, more than to protect the children who are being abused. What kind of problems?
Single parent families. The welfare system has a greedy hand in creating them as single parent families are more prone to abuse and enables the state to take your kids away.
The Public education system makes a vulnerable situation for kids being bullied and careless of the well being of the child. Often the school takes no responsibility and will involve the State to absolve themselves of any wrong doing. And you’ll be automatically put on the hook as teachers and staff are State workers and less likely to be held accountable.
Tax hikes. As your take home decreases both parents (if it’s a 2 parent home) have to work often leaving the children in the hands of abusive babysitters. Again, according to the State, the fault is yours more so than the babysitters’.
The government themselves has shown a primary example of how violently they handle situations. In recent events it’s police and even ICE. Don’t get me started on the military industrial complex and it’s wars. We as a race have a tendency to mimic and live what we learn, the State wants parents to be a perfect example for their children, so why aren’t they?
Every government program is a set up that has never actually been better to help anyone with anything besides collect the money and leaving us as a statistic on the poverty line. Which coincidentally can be cause to take your children away for being too poor.
Poverty, abuse and negligence are often passed down and increase in numbers over time. To get yourself out of it takes a toll on the mind and body. So we can say that they are directly responsible for our peace of mind. Or piece of mind, how ever you look at it. And their forms of rehabilitation aren’t meant to make you better.
Government agencies also have reunification programs, which seems harmless but not in cases where children are allowed to go back to truly abusive homes where they later wind up in a body bag. It is heard of to little and happens too often.
If you were ever a victim in the system either as a child due to parental abuse, or as an adult due to spousal abuse, the State is required to make a case to keep an eye on your kids. No matter how much you comply with the State, if you decide to have children as an adult or even long after your abusive spouse is out of the picture, you still have to jump through more hoops. All because they fear you may become abusive as your parents or spouse. They never let go. So you the victim are now guilty until proven innocent.
This video by Carlos Morales, a former CPS Investigator, has hit the nail on the head and for the whole playlist click here. He has recently retired from LegallyKidnapped.net but the information is still up.
That quote from Adolph Hitler was shocking to say the least. Not the fact that it came from him, nothing evil that man said or did surprises me, but the fact that the sentiment has become more true today than when it was written. The guise of helping children through the State is advocated heavily through those who are supposed to represent us, and that we the people fall for it. To say that we need a system that would force good parents obey and comply to their corruption without consent, is to say that we are indeed guilty until proven innocent. An indoctrinated society by an Authoritarian regime, not educated. You wouldn’t entrust your children to a regular criminal so why an official criminal? Consider this, when have the laws ever stopped anyone who wanted to commit an act of coercion (physical altercations, murder, abuse, theft…)? And yet, those who make, protect and serve, and represent the laws are some of the biggest offenders with a high acquittal rate. They have no one to check them except themselves which is how corruption can continue with an extreme oversight, and ZERO accountability. Who do they answer to when we the people keep advocating for rights for them to abuse? Who do they answer to when they legally violate our rights? The problem is people still think they answer to us. But how is it that we stick it to them? By voting? That’s crap. The children are the ones that matter, that statement isn’t wrong. The children need to be protected above all but government isn’t the answer. We are a thoughtful society but often put our thoughts into the wrong solutions. The fact that child abuse would still exist without the State still needs to be talked about.
An Important Contemplation
Creating a society without the State would be the goal here. After all, this doesn’t mean no rules, just no rulers. To do this I feel that getting rid of the system that pursues in it’s corruption who add more problems on top of the founding problem, will eliminate the majority of causes that promote abuse in the first place and bring a moral and more educated society together. All of the other unnecessary problems that the State was creating won’t be there. Which leaves the one and only problem from square one that we should’ve had the focus on all along. After all not all parents are abusers and they shouldn’t be punished for the wrong deeds of others. One concept that hardly anyone ever considers is that, children are self-owned. While temporarily entrusted with their parents, we do NOT own them, and we are required to respect that as individuals as also argued by the N.A.P (Non-Aggression Principle). It is our responsibility as parents to teach them and to see to it that we’ve taught them well enough to be own their own, in the world outside of our homes, that doesn’t change. Abuse (verbal, emotional, and physical) and negligence is contradictory to the liberty movement as it will scar an individuals independency (thoughts and actions), disables their capacity for openness, compassion and love, their ability to work with others, and coping mechanisms necessary to move forward in life. And the younger the individual is exposed to this evil, the worse off they will be. Education is the primary goal for a peaceful society as having a better knowledge of your surroundings leads to better solutions to problems. The goal being, voluntary solutions as opposed to coercion. Thus, abuse and negligence have no place in a Stateless society. One can only hope that as time goes on, the stigma of negligence and abuse will be long forgotten. It’s hard to hear, but there is never going to be a perfect happy utopia where things like this never happen, but we can always do better. And we will do much better than we do in the system we live in today. Today, it is much easier to condemn than to think. I would like to think in a Stateless society, as many ideas will float about without the hinderance of authority, it will be much better to think than to condemn, lest we fall back into the system of fear.
Ending Statement: Well I’m tapped. There are so many more ideas out there. This is just a start. I’m still learning as I am ever the student and seldom the teacher. Anything I can do to further free thought or provoke different minds, I will do it. I feel my argument is pretty strong, maybe amateur at best. As a parent I speak from concern. As an anarchist, I speak in the language of freedom. If you do not understand these concepts or you have something you would like to share, feel free to comment. I do like ending blogs with quotes so I’ll post this here.
“‘Why do you not say how things will be operated under Anarchism?’ is a question I have had to meet thousands of times. Because I believe that Anarchism can not consistently impose an iron-clad or method on the future. The things every generation has to fight, and which is can least overcome are burdens of the past, which holds us all in a net. Anarchism, at least as I understand it, leaves posterity free to develop its own particular systems, in harmony with its needs. Our most vivid imagination can not foresee the potentialities of a race set free from external restraints.” – Emma Goldman in Anarchism and Other Essays, Preface
Disclaimer: Any references I link in this blog isn’t an endorsement nor a sponsorship as I do not get paid to reference anyone. These blogs are for personal use and any information I write is specifically for educational purposes. Thank you and enjoy.
So you are an Anarchist and a parent, how do you think that these 2 could conflict with one another? And how often are you mad about the infringement by the State on your parental rights? These are 2 different topics in the same realm that I have been contemplating for some time. Whether you know a lot about it or are reading this to find out, hell, you don’t even have to be an Anarchist but I’m sure you can relate in some way or another. In this blog I’ll be talking about the 1 topic which is discussing the differences between Government tyranny to parental authority for the dummies who need explanation and think they’re being clever in challenging your perspective. This isn’t a new topic, I probably won’t say anything that hasn’t been said already, however, being an Anarchist and a parent I was especially inspired to give a peace of mind and piece of my mind.
Well, just off the top off my head without research I know that I don’t own my kids as property (owning any human as property is wrong, period), my husband and I are natural caregivers to our children and a temporary authority as means to teach. We have the responsibility to teach them everything in life. Everything from morality, compassion, to be academically and socially smart, independent, interdependent and anything you feel they’ll need to live a life outside of the nest. Eventually we have to let go of their hand and watch them grow up without our help, unless they ask. They are still my children no matter what age, but at some point we no longer have the authority over how they live their lives.
Stepping outside of my own style of parenting I had to look into the many types of parenting styles. What I found primarily, is that there are 4 different styles. Neglectful, Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian. Neglectful parents hardly need defining but in short it’s not teaching, nor fulfilling the needs of the children, or needs of children to parent relationships. It’s certainly not any way to parent. Permissive on the other hand, is like being your child’s friend rather than a parent. Permissive parents often allow their kids to make their own decisions and may give advice when needed. However, a permissive parent would likely give them whatever they want whenever they want it, in hopes that their kids appreciate the accommodation. Children of Permissive parents often grow up with many issues such as little self-control and self-regulation, and feeling that there’s something to be desired without knowing what’s ahead or how to handle it. Authoritative parenting is very different. Authoritative parents allow their kids to be independent while restricting them on their actions by age appropriateness. Authoritative parents aren’t controlling and overbearing but do set guidelines as they want their child to explore and learn as much as they can including the consequences of their actions. The kids would then, be able to make decisions based on their own reasoning as opposed to making decisions without experience and/or being told what their reasoning should be. This parenting style is said to be the most recommended as it promotes the best form of liberty and independence. Authoritarian parenting is, in my opinion, s the same as neglectful with a difference of actual military style of order. Obedience to your parents without explanation, being told as opposed to reasoning. Usually associated with phrases such as “because I said so” “do as I say not as I do” “obey or else” “my roof my rules you don’t like it get out”… there is no choice there is no independence. Authoritarian parents often have the mentality of “I do not want my kids to repeat my mistakes” and wind up hurting them with forceful restrictions and lack of explanation. There may not be a lot of heart to heart open discussions in this parenting style nor in Neglectful. We can rule this one out as it is the closest to government tyranny as it gets.
In addition to my answer, the government owns everyone from fetus to elderly to the box you’re buried in. You are their property. Don’t believe me? Do we not have birth and death certificates and social security numbers? They make taxes mandatory so that you can’t even get a job without signing a W2. Work and eat, or don’t work and starve. You work, you build yourself up and yet, they can seize your property, fruits of your labor, use money to create dependency programs, go to war, gain power and take our freedoms using fear and pride. From the homeless man to the small business owner. If you’re not part of the chronyist political, monopoly big business and media elites then you’re just a peon in their game, a slave if you will. They have power of what I call the 4 M’s. Monopoly, Money, Media, and Mentality. They’ll use the Media to plea to your weaknesses and fears, use identity politics and fear mongering to give you “incentive” to vote for something you really know nothing about. In turn you give up small bits of your rights and consent to give them more revenue (Money) for them to do as they see fit. While the State seeks to become the largest and sole business (Monopoly), which eventually will make all private businesses illegal, eliminating competition which will rise the cost of living. They use the abhorrent behavior of mankind to have control over law abiding citizens and how we think (Mentality). The funny thing is the law abiding citizens are often happy to do it because (insert misinformed justification here and a sprinkle of relative morality there) and you have citizens that are sheep in wolves clothing (yeah I said that right) who will eat each other alive. And that’s not something any authority should do, in fact, that’s down right leviathan. And how dare anyone call the masses out for being brainwashed, because if they knew just how wrong they were, the pain and guilt would be unbearable. So I wouldn’t compare how I feel about such tyranny to parental authority, they are only exclusive to the sense in how we’re not free to parent without the State as it is unconstitutional. I have 1 M as a guideline to self governance. Morality, in which our system and government lacks.
The next blog might take me a bit longer to get out as I’ll be doing some crazy research into just that. Parental rights and how we are all children of the State by law. That is a vast topic and I’m probably biting off more than I can chew.
To end this blog I chose to quote a paragraph from Benjamin R Tucker in his chapter of State Socialism Vs Anarchism: How far they agree and wherein they differ, written in 1886 and boy you can tell. Modernize as you wish. “Even in so delicate a matter as that of the relations of the sexes the Anarchists do not shrink from the application of their principle. They acknowledge and defend the right of any man and woman, or any men and women, to love each other for as long or as short a time as they can, will, or may. To them legal marriage and legal divorce are equal absurdities. They look forward to a time when every individual, whether man or woman, shall be self-supporting, and when each shall have an independent home of his or her own, whether it be a separate house or rooms in a house with others; when the love relations between these independent individuals shall be as varied as are individual inclinations and attractions; and when the children born of these relations shall belong exclusively to the mothers until old enough to belong to themselves.”
Nobody really. I created this account months ago and it’s about time I started using it. I believe an Introduction is in order. My name is Vanessa, no my last name isn’t actually Nyx but I use it as a pseudonym. The name comes from Greek Mythology, as Nyx is the Goddess of Night and by clicking the link you can learn more about her and why I chose to use that name, she is pretty cool. and her story is sort of a personal favorite. Don’t worry my husband doesn’t mind 😉
I really want to just jump into why I’m here but that would be rushing it so here’s a little about me. I am a Wiccan, I love all kinds of music but mostly I am a metalhead. I play guitar, I paint, I write, I love live shows, I’m an introvert but do surprisingly well in large groups. I have an interest in politics which is what I’m mostly going to write about. I am a stay at home Mom to 2 young children. My son is 4 and my daughter is 2. I’m married to my soulmate. He’s a conservative and I am an Anarchist/libertarian so you can imagine after the 2016 election he made 2 rules for me: 1. Thou shalt not dis my Trumpy 2. The only NAP he wants to hear about is one where he’s laying down and closing his eyes. I obviously didn’t marry him for his political intellect (or lack of) but other than that, he’s perfect. The funny thing is I voted for him too but you know what they say about indoctrination: it takes a leap of faith. I laugh at just about anything and everything and I’m pretty blunt, direct and honest so I may not realize sometimes that what I say, often needs to be explained. I don’t know what you know so if you ever have any questions, just ask. I don’t care about PC, if I offend you, just know that those aren’t my intentions.
WHY AM I HERE?
I love to blog and even was quite the blogger back in the Myspace days, when I was a naïve SJW crybaby who went based on pure emotion and no facts. I have always had an interest in politics, though as a kid I may have mistaken opinions for facts. I started to take an interest when I was about 13 when Bill Clinton was caught in the Monica Lewinski scandal and I remember thinking, that, why is it anyone’s business what he did? Surely just because he was the president of the United States that didn’t mean that he wasn’t human, right? Even though I knew nothing of Bill Clinton or his wife, nothing about politics and especially nothing about sex for that matter let alone sexual misconduct. That was the start of my free thinking but not if my Republican and Democrat family members could help it, as their response to me was “it matters because he’s the president”. My family members talked about the news all the time, but I always heard the 2 extremes of Left and Right, there was never anything else in between. I knew as much about the 2 parties as I did any, and that was nothing, zip, zilch, nada. But instead of educating myself properly I listened to everyone else. It wasn’t until the shutdown in 2013 over Universal Healthcare that I started to realize that I actually knew nothing and started to bring my questions to light. Like, WTF was Universal Healthcare anyway? Why was it the governments job to find healthcare for the people? Well if you’re reading this I don’t need to explain how that went down. You’re either one of the millions of Americans that got “free” healthcare or one of the millions that had to cancel your health insurance because the monthly payments, copays and deductibles nearly tripled and you couldn’t afford it, only to be screwed by the IRS if you didn’t have it and to wind up owing the government. Guess which one I was? Yep I was the one being screwed, and I made less than $37,000 a year at the time with 2 jobs. But we can all agree that at least big pharma, insurance companies and especially the government were sitting pretty in their ivory towers. While I have nothing against the rich or anyone wanting to get rich, only the greedy and power hungry chronyists that power pack inflation into this economy. I’m still trying to figure out how Universal Healthcare was supposed to be a good idea. And still waiting for my money back that they stole, I mean after it had been declared unconstitutional, I would think I should be reimbursed, but I’ll wake up now. I have a better chance at controlling the weather.
In any case, rather than making my head hurt I decided to get researching my other questions that I had like how the government worked, learn about it’s history, learn economics… couldn’t afford to go back to school so I found other means such as the Library, newspapers, Webinars, YouTube (that’s where I had my lamas class lol) Needless to say I’m pretty self taught with the help of available content by very established educators. On YouTube it was a bit hard to find what I was looking for because of it’s algorithm, but eventually found The Political Compass (they only have 3 videos but their website is spectacular), Crash Course, Tom Woods, Adam Merced, An0maly, Ron Paul’s Liberty Report, Steven Crowder (what he’s funny!), Jordan Peterson (love his lectures) a dozen or more other college lectures, and historical documentaries. But not before getting tangled up in what I call Smut media, which is a bunch of bullshit artists from the Left and Right spouting their opinions, no facts, just name calling and nit picking on one another. I have to admit that’s like watching The Young And The Restless. Addicting and hilarious but that shit gets old after a while with no new means of getting over the metaphorical hump that is America’s growing issues( I don’t mind having a good laugh but I’d rather be educated than brainwashed). So, I also started looking to get into good books at night, as that is another passion of mine, is reading. I normally read mysteries, adventures, fantasies, and even romance novels(hey! don’t knock it till you try it), but a couple of years ago I wanted to change it up. I started to read books by Robert Greene, Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig Von Mises, Friedrich A Hayek, Emma Goldman, Peter Kropotkin, Benjamin Tucker, Thomas Sowell, Milton and David Friedman… You want to talk about politically diverse, that’s as insane as it gets. And I never stop. If I want to learn about a particular faction in the political realm I won’t hesitate to find a definitive Author, pick a book and read it and if I enjoy it I pick out another book by them. If anyone is familiar with the Authors and to which of the factions they belong, then you already know that these are books about the Libertarian/Anarchist spectrum. But of course you’d think I would read book in the Authoritarian spectrum but since I was influenced with it growing up, I feel I need no introduction to learn how to be a good little voluntary slave nor do I feel smarter having listened or believed any of it.
So Any chance I get I’ll post about mostly politics, maybe even topics that pertain to being a parent. Currently my research has taken me to parenting and Libertarianism to see how it all ties together. Honestly that can be another article if I even try to explain what I mean that’ll be at least 10 paragraphs long. Well, I am about to sit through a documentary called No Gods No Masters, it’s on YouTube, and apparently it has 3 parts. Looks interesting. Not to be terribly cliché but I’ll end this with a quote from an interesting book I read last week. The quote is on the first page after the cover of a book written by Benjamin R Tucker called Instead Of A Book: By A Man Too Busy To Write One: A Fragmentary Exposition of Philosophical Anarchism. I read the quote before I even started reading the book and immediately I was intrigued . So without further ado…
“In abolishing rent and interest, the last vestiges of old-time slavery, the revolution abolishes at one stroke of the sword of the executioner, the seal of the magistrate, the club of the policeman, the gauge of the exciseman, the erasing-knife of the department clerk, all those insignia of Politics, which young Liberty grinds beneath her heel. “