Lines and Questions ... and my Answer

Not really sure why, but I've been browsing news sites a bit, reading commentaries on the Kelo decision. So far, the award for "lots of words slung together that say nothing" goes to The taking of private property in the Helena Independent Record. Get this, from the closing paragraph:

But there is a strong consensus in this country that "a man's home is his castle" — that no matter how humble, personal property must be respected except in extraordinary circumstances.

Yes, this country was built on such "strong consensus" ...

The "consensus" appears to be rousing more individuals to at least considering taking action of some sort against the state's agents of death. Yet another line in the sand for many individuals has been crossed; hence I'm seeing -- and receiving -- many queries of "What do we do?", "Is it time?", "Where do we start?", etc. Here's a slightly modified response I sent to one such query.

I can't answer those questions for anyone but myself ... and my answers didn't come in response to this decision, but started percolating in response to a different one a while back. So, my answer may disappoint others, but it's the best I can do:

I am a free individual.

My life and my property are not available for the state to steal at its whim.

I refuse to cower, waiting and wondering if the state's agents will ever attempt to act upon that whim.

Agents of various institutions may think they can control what I do, whom I see, the money I earn, how I treat my body, how I educate my children, the source of my orgasms, or any other of the myriad activities that are part and parcel of normal human action, but they are wrong.

What might look like cooperation with them is not. I am free; I choose what I want to do, how I want to do it, and where and when. If it involves others, or their property, I obtain their consent.

The state, as an organized, all-powerful entity, is a chimera. It relies on the consent of individuals -- to enforce its whims and to comply with the enforcers.

I am free; I do not consent to be ruled, by the USSA government or any other gang of thieves.

I have come to see that actively resisting the state is quite like playing tug of war -- as much as we freedom activists tug, the thugs tug back. It wears us out more quickly than it does the state's agents.

So, I'm dropping that rope. Let them pull all they want -- I'm no longer there to be worn out. I'm out living my life, enjoying myself and being free.

The state's thugs may try to obtain my consent. If they try too hard, they won't like the result. If they do the same with friends and family, they'll find this angry snake helping those individuals as well.

If you really want to know what "the result" will be, see the graphic on my guns section index page.

I'd like to expand on this just a bit, for clarity's sake ... My view is that a freedom activist's best strategy isn't to bring a fight to the state's agents -- that generally plays out on the state's field, with their ball and bat, etc., and we all know how well such rigged games go. If they come to you in some way (e.g., attempted eminent domain theft, trying to steal your unpapered firearms, etc.), then of course meeting them head-on (in whatever way you think best) is entirely appropriate.

Otherwise, roundly ignoring the state's diktats and not complying with their power games is the way to go. Remember, they count on individuals' docile compliance. Without it, their illusion of control crumbles. Yes, some individuals will be discovered, and will be made examples of, but that's simply to keep the rest of the fearful cattle cowed. The state's thugs cannot control us all. The more of us there are ignoring them, the less control they have, and the harder it is to control any of us.

There are lots of ways to exercise this non-compliance. I leave it to the interested reader to consider and choose his or her own specific exercises. You are, after all, just as free as I am. And the way to enjoy that freedom is to use it.