Reader Question: Libertarians and Signs?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Here’s the latest reader question, along with my reply!

Peter asks: I agree with you on masks. There is a contradiction, however, in your position that I hope you can address. Isn’t it a contradiction for a libertarian to ignore such a sign when that sign is an expression of property rights of the owner? In the same way, I don’t go into a restaurant that requires jackets & ties in a tee shirt and flip-flops. I don’t wear a Face Diaper in my supermarket because I feel the masks are the least bit effective or feel a need to bow to social pressure. It’s because I respect the owner’s property rights. Because the massive over-reaction on this Chinese virus has enlisted so much of the private sector, dilemmas like these abound. And what’s worse than the masks is vaccinations. For example, if one wants to attend many colleges in the Fall, the student needs proof of having been vaccinated. What can you do, not go to school? It sucks.

My reply: These signs are different, for two reasons.

One, they are largely posted under duress; i.e., it is not a freely taken decision of the owner but rather the owner acting out of fear of government. Put another way, the government is using the “private” business to impose its “mandates,” via threats. In other words, it is an assault  on private property – as well as free association.

Two, this is nothing like ordinary rules regarding terms of service. It is about spreading a deliberate, dangerous lie – and about forcing complicity in the lie. The propagation of mass hysteria, no different, fundamentally, than shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

So, there is no dilemma. Certainly not morally.

As regards schools – and other such – that require submission: Don’t. Would you wear a Nazi armband as the price for being allowed to attend gymnasium?

Some things are worth talking a stand on. This is one of them.

.  . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at and I will send you a copy directly!



  1. Eric,

    I’m glad you bring up the ovens.

    How many ovens would Töpf & Söhne had to supply if those Jews chose to say fuck you?

    Fuck getting on the train.

    Fuck wearing the star.

    Fuck walking in the gutter.

    How many Cambodians would have avoided the killing fields?

    I guess those were all unexpected deaths of law abiding citizens.

    Tell me how the gentleman waiting for the reload didn’t choose to just lay there.

    He was under duress and couldn’t run away.

    I’m the guy who says thank you very much. I might be a bit luckier as a moving target.

    Apparently you do hold obedience as the highest moral value.

    • T,

      Yes, I “hold obedience as the highest value.” Obviously. Anyone who reads my work knows that.

      This gets tiring; if you find me – and this site – a nest of Quislings, then please – find somewhere else. I rarely get pushed to the point of having to say that to people. You’ve pushed it, that far.

      You attack anyone who acknowledges realities while defending principles as being complicit with their defilement. This is as offensive as it is counterproductive.

      I’d still like an answer to my prior questions regarding taxes – and whether you pay them. And whether you own property, or live in property upon which taxes are applied – and paid.

      Perhaps you are lucky enough to be able to earn your living – as I do – without permission. That does not make us avatars of virtue nor does it make those who cannot earn their living without permission morally defective. I feel great sympathy for such people, whereas you appear to feel great contempt for them.

      Perhaps you are able to live “free” in a tent in someone else’s woods – and thereby avoid paying any taxes to GovCo. Perhaps you are able to transact all your business in cash, off the books.

      If so, good for you. It does not mean others are contemptible or complicit because they cannot.

      And it does not mean your choice – or theirs – was made “freely.”

      • Eric,



        People who unknowingly contribute to their own demise. Definitely.

        People who rationalize. Most certainly.

        But I feel more duress having to decide what to order off the menu than what you describe as some kind of compelled choice.

        Besides, we both know continuing with the status quo ABSOLUTELY leads to the killing fields.

        No compunction here berating those who deny it.

        It IS in my rational self interest to do so. Lest I get caught up in the coming stampede of reality deniers.

        “That does not make us avatars of virtue nor does it make those who cannot earn their living without permission morally defective.”

        When they continually remove the flight options from fight or flight scenario don’t you take offense to THAT?

        Why are you offended when I point out that saying no is a valid choice?

        This two weeks of diapering has been the longest two weeks of my life.

        And I’m pretty sure that light at the end of the tunnel that many here are so optimistic about is just a gun mounted flashlight.

        • T,

          I never said that saying no is not a valid choice. You’ve said that. I’ve said that we are under duress. There is an important distinction. You impute complicity with those who make any accommodation with reality, glibly dismissing the effect of duress on them.

          Yet I suspect you are just as “guilty” as I am in that respect since I do not believe you live an outlaw life, cash-only, no bank account, no job that doesn’t pay in cash… living “free” in a tent out in someone else’s woods, so as to avoid “complicity” with the evil paying of taxes/rent (and the taxes folded into rent, to cover the landlord’s taxes) and so on.

          I get tired of being accused of regarding “obedience as the highest virtue.” It’s as absurd as it is insulting. I daresay I’ve done more these past 30 years advocating for liberty, the sanctity of the individual and all that follows than you have. Yet I have never impugned your commitment to those ideals.

          This sort of thing also alienates others who are not the enemies of live – and let live, such as RG.

          This annoys me. I strive to make this web site a place where ideas can be discussed without people being stomped on because they aren’t perfectly virtuous, as you seem to expect.

          This is the sort of thing that cults demand – like Rand’s cult, for instance. I respect Rand as a writer; but as a human being she was badly flawed and that undermined her work as a writer.

          I am all for saying no. That does not mean that when one is exercising free choice when one says yes when they are under duress.

    • Eric,

      “ And I’d like to know, specifically: Do you file a tax return? Do you own property? Do you have a business? ”

      You looking to get a reward?

      I’ve said I choose not to pay the loot.

      I’ve said my benevolent overlords have reclaimed their property.

      I don’t avail myself to any services offered by mentally ill people spewing their concerns for the public weal.

      I fully understand the following:

      There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

      Embrace reality.

      Fit, trim, and obedient is no way to go through life.

      Don’t pay for krematoria unless you’re willing to remember what number hook you left your clothes on when marched off to the showers.

      As for me, I’ll just apply a bit more Old Spice. Says right there on the package, “IF YOUR GRANDFATHER HADN’T WORN IT, YOU WOULDN’T EXIST. “

      • T,

        No, I am not “looking to get a reward” – the disgusting implication being I’d turn someone in.

        You’ve still not answered my questions regarding whether you pay taxes/file a tax return, earn your living on (or off) the books, etc.

        I’m not trying to “gotcha” you, by the way. That seems to be your thing. I’m trying – hard – to point out that you are attacking people who support the sovereignty of the individual, the right to live – and to let live. You constantly smear people who have to deal with ugly realities as complicit – and worse – in the undermining of their stated ideals. This is of a piece with the people who disparage libertarian ideals because they haven’t been (and may never be) fully achieved.

        I do “embrace reality.” That is just the point. The reality being we are all forced to deal with less-than-ideal situations. It does not mean we abandon the ideal, much less betray it.

        Spare us, please.

      • ” Well, if you’d just answer the question.”

        “Why don’t you just answer the question?”

        “Be honest.”

        “No big deal.”

        “Yeah answer it.”

        “Answer the question, Tuanorea.”

        “Talk to us.”
        “C’mon, answer the question.”
        “Come on.”
        “Answer it.”

        “C’mon, it’s easy. It’s only one question.”

    • Tuan,
      Some choice them Joos had: Get shot immediately, or comply and live maybe a little longer…or who knows? Easy for us to imagine what we’d do- but in reality, it likely wouldn’t take but one or two near us getting his head blown off before we’d change our minds.

      We’re not far from that now, here…’s just being carried out on a more individual basis right now….but how long before there are lines being marched?

    • LOL. That is a beautiful video. The President of Armenia truly went after her regarding Assange and she clearly faltered. I love it when Western media falls on their face.

  2. Hi Peter,

    Here is another way to think about the issue. Libertarians are not morally barred from civil disobedience, this is obvious when aimed directly at the State. It should be equally obvious that we are not morally barred from civil disobedience, directed at “private” businesses, when they are acting as agents of the State.


    • “When a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.”

      –Thomas Jefferson, 3rd US President

  3. “Isn’t it a contradiction for a libertarian to ignore such a sign when that sign is an expression of property rights of the owner?”

    “I don’t wear a Face Diaper in my supermarket because I feel the masks are the least bit effective or feel a need to bow to social pressure. It’s because I respect the owner’s property rights.”

    Peter, is there a point where you would not respect the owner’s property rights? If the store and their two competitors said you had to wear a swastika to shop there, would you respect the owner’s property rights? What if the CDC, WHO, Fauci, or Bill say you need to insert an obstructing object into your anus in order to stop the spread, and the corporations all make this a condition for entry or transaction. Are those property rights that should be respected? Or is there a line, somewhere, where the property rights of the land owner do not take precedence over the property (body) rights of the body owner?

    The ol’ eviction or “trespass” from the hot air balloon. Not a problem if there are other hot air balloons to jump to. But when all the hot air balloon owners want to trespass you for not agreeing to be raped in some form for being on their hot air balloon, I don’t really care about their property rights. Especially when they contribute to the destruction of other hot air balloons I would go to as alternatives.

    Maybe they’ll say they’re acting in self defense, as one would do when someone is trespassing on the personal property they live on. Well, the difference is one is an actual threat. Which is objective reality? Someone trespassing on my property is intending to do me harm in some way. Someone entering a building without a rag over their face is merely not showing visual support/assimilation for the property owner’s newfound religion. A religion they wouldn’t have if they had more than two competitors and were subject to real market forces.

      • Hi Eric and Brandon,

        I find the “BUT…PRIVATE” argument, common among libertarians, to be increasingly frustrating. It should be obvious that when “private” businesses act as State agents, that we are bound to respect their “property rights” to the same extent that we are bound to respect the “property rights” of the State, i.e not at all.

        Libertarians who reflexively repeat this idiotic mantra lend “philosophical” support to the means by which tyranny is, and will continue to be, imposed on everyone. Government is outsourcing censorship and control to the “private” sector, and libertarians who argue “well, they’re private so I guess it’s OK”, are empowering that tyranny.

        For a museum quality specimen of this reflexive idiocy, suffer through this:

        A passage from the article, “For a few years, this was most common when it came to social media platforms suspending or banning accounts they liked (or the left didn’t like) or companies firing employees following an internet outrage campaign. Those opposed would frequently invoke First Amendment rights, even though no government was involved while ignoring the (other times revered) right of private businesses to set terms of engagement for their services.

        Now, with the COVID-19 pandemic, we’re seeing this constitutional amnesia come to things like people’s voluntary decisions to wear personal protective equipment or retail businesses requiring shoppers to wear masks inside. Some people are trying to paint putting rules in place out of concern for the health of others—like businesses requiring that people wear masks on their premises—as somehow tantamount to tyranny.

        So, “no government was involved”. This from someone who has written extensively on government pressure to extort social media companies to censor content the government doesn’t like, lest “we” be forced to. The blindness here is staggering. Likewise, she implies that it’s absurd to consider the “voluntary” mask requirements as “tantamount to tyranny”.

        You see, it’s crazy to believe that governments, which now claim a right to regulate and control every aspect of your life (where you can eat, who you can visit, where you can travel, whether you can visit a dying relative, whether you can go to church, have a wedding, the list is endless), is “tantamount to tyranny”. “Private” businesses, acting as agents of the State, are not exercising legitimate private property rights; libertarians who insist that we have a moral duty to honor them anyway, are either morons or part of the problem.


        • “Libertarians who reflexively repeat this idiotic mantra lend “philosophical” support to the means by which tyranny is, and will continue to be, imposed on everyone.”

          Those who want to bow to the illicit nature of any situation will always find an excuse to do so.

    • Hi Ya’s Brandon, Eric, Jeremy, et al,

      Although I strenuously refuse to participate in any of the Kabuki, and utterly despise it all, I do feel that a lot of Libertarians rationalize the negating of business owners rights to enforce their wishes with regards to how their property is used- even to the point where some start invoking such statist concepts as “public accommodations”, and then conversely stating that because the business owner(s) are adhering to a government decree that that somehow invalidates the property owner’s choice to abide by said decree.

      The public accommodation issue should not be an issue for us at all, since we reject that tenet of statism, as it is contrary to property rights, and is no more valid than is the decreeing of the various sacraments of sickness Kabuki itself.

      The government-mandate argument I find equally spurious. Who are we to decide whether a property owner chooses to reject/fight said decrees or not? Maybe some business owners genuinely believe in and or choose to obey the mandates. Maybe others simply are unwilling or unable to face the consequences of not obeying them. What about the businesses- whether Walmart or the local one-man shop who choose to play Kabuki even when/where it is not mandated?

      My position is: While I will do what I can to avoid the Kabuki when dealing with those who maintain it, ultimately, if asked to leave I will gladly do so. What more can one do anyway? I’d rather spend my money where it is not enforced, anyway.

      The real issue I have is not with how this applies to private property- but rather how it applies to “public property”- i.e. government offices and facilities, and such, where we have a RIGHT to be/participate without coercion or exclusion.

      I stopped patronizing the veterinarian I have been using for almost 20 years because of their adherence to the Kabuki. Other vets I have investigated, while at least some don’t engage in the Kabuki, DO require animal vaccinations… they are off the table as well. I’m left with one vet, should the need arise, whom I went to once, who doesn’t give any trouble as far as Kabuki or Vacc.s- but so far, he seems to be of questionable quality.

      Do I have a right to demand that those other vets accept my patronage under my terms? Can I put a gun to their head? (I’d like to! :D)- Why would we think it any different with Mr. Peeble’s Pet Shop or Muh Dick’s Sporting Goods? Let’s face it, even in a Libertarian world, there would be plenty of non-Libertarians who would still choose to abide by these same idiotic practices, and our only “right” would be to not patronize them. Freedom is not free nor necessarily convenient- it comes at a cost- and that cost is borne by those of us who value the product.

      • Hey Nunz,

        Your argument empowers the “outsourcing of tyranny”. In case you haven’t noticed, GovCo is colluding with/pressuring business to implement tyrannical control which they (GovCo) are currently loathe to impose directly. Criticizing this, even through civil disobedience, is not a violation of libertarian principles, nor a call for State intervention (which I have never done). Of course, I do not have a right to demand, use a gun, force, etc… that any business accept my patronage. But, I do have a right to challenge their collusion with the State and put the burden on them to use force to stop me.

        Your position on property rights is “Statist”, as you argue that “legal” title to property, no matter how it is actually acquired, is sufficient for any business to assert absolute property rights. You have repeatedly rejected arguments that assert that “provenance” matters. Every libertarian worth his salt understands that property, acquired through theft and force, is illegitimate. Yet you dismiss that observation when the “private” business acquires property through the theft and force of GovCo.


        • Hi Jeremy!
          Ah, we keep going around in circles on this point. How does one tell which businesses acquired their property “legitimately”, and what of the ones which did? I’m sure many Injuns would say that many of us do not have legitimate right/title to our property, either- and while in many cases they would have a valid argument, does that lessen our right to control our property the way we see fit? I would say that they are two separate issues, and that we are merely stuck with the world we inherited and which we did not choose.
          If Joe steals a watch from Bob and then says that he had a right to, since Bob paid for that watch with money he obtained through welfare or cheating his employer, does that justify Joe’s stealing of the watch?
          Rather than my argument being statist and anti-property rights, I rather think that the argument to contrary is very similar to the ones used by leftists to justify control, “regulation” and the collectivist “share the wealth” BS. in which they deny absolute property rights and ownership because “we have all contributed“(or more likely ‘been forced to contribute’ ).

          • Hey Nunz,

            Some questions for ya.

            Does the fact that it’s often difficult to determine legitimate property rights (in a libertarian sense) mean that every legally recognized claim is valid?

            Is eminent domain theft?

            Do Walmart and other businesses solicit and take advantage of eminent domain to acquire property?

            If so, how can they claim legitimate title (in a libertarian sense) to that property?

            If “Joe” steals a watch, do I have the right to “steal” it and give it back to the legitimate owner?

            To what extent can a “private” business act as an agent of the State before they lose the blanket property rights you assign to them?

            Property rights are far more complex than you present them to be. The only absolute property right is self ownership, all other claims to property are conditional on legitimate acquisition. Sure, it’s messy, but the “but,…private” argument empowers tyranny and the violation of property rights far more than it protects them.


            P.S. I have never advocated “regulation” and the collectivist “share the wealth” BS.

            • Hey Jeremy!
              **”Does the fact that it’s often difficult to determine legitimate property rights (in a libertarian sense) mean that every legally recognized claim is valid?”**

              Of course not.

              **”Is eminent domain theft?”**

              Of course it is.

              **”Do Walmart and other businesses solicit and take advantage of eminent domain to acquire property?”**


              **”If so, how can they claim legitimate title (in a libertarian sense) to that property?”**

              Well, unfortunately we don’t live in a libertarian world. Neither are all businesses or even all Walmarts built on such properties- such as the two Walmarts closest to me, which were built on formerly undeveloped land which they simply purchased. I really don’t see these two issues being tied to each other. IF they are, then aren’t we also guilty for patronizing such businesses?

              If we choose to patronize a business, we are inherently declaring that we accept their claim to ownership or ight-of-use, just as we would conversely reject buying some items from a junkie who walks up to us on the street, because we know his ‘merchandise’ is stolen.

              **”If “Joe” steals a watch, do I have the right to “steal” it and give it back to the legitimate owner?”**

              Yes, if you know who it was stolen from and do give it back- but by that standard, we shouldn’t even be patronizing “illegitimate” businesses; Patronizing them while asserting our right over the ones they claim, does nothing to rectify any possible injustices, but our patronage in-fact enriches the miscreant.

              **”To what extent can a “private” business act as an agent of the State before they lose the blanket property rights you assign to them?”**

              Pretty much to any extent that they choose- just as they could implement any policy they might choose to conform for whatever reason even in a Libertarian world.

              **”Property rights are far more complex than you present them to be. “**

              In our present world, yes- really because we have no real property rights. But respecting property rights should be one of our top priorities- just as we respect someone’s right to ‘discriminate’ even though the state tramples on such a right.

              **”The only absolute property right is self ownership, all other claims to property are conditional on legitimate acquisition.”**

              This is true!

              **”but the “but,…private” argument empowers tyranny and the violation of property rights far more than it protects them.”**

              I disagree. It seems like “it empowers tyranny” when it’s something we disagree with, but somehow we use the same arguments to protect such rights when it seems helpful.

              **”P.S. I have never advocated “regulation” and the collectivist “share the wealth” BS.

              Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that you nor anyone else here advocates such things- I was just citing such as an example of how leftists do that, as they often use such arguments.

              • Hey Nunz,

                ”To what extent can a “private” business act as an agent of the State before they lose the blanket property rights you assign to them?”

                “Pretty much to any extent that they choose…”

                The State is outsourcing tyranny to the “private” sector, this should be obvious to anyone paying attention. The State is using “private” businesses to bypass formal legal restrictions on its’ “authority”. Your position implies that it is never appropriate to engage in civil disobedience aimed at a “private” company, no matter how they acquired their property or what they do on behalf of the State.

                We must live in a world of principled libertarians who would never consider ignoring mask mandates AND staying in the store, because that would violate the “rights” of a “private” business acting on behalf of the State. Pretty soon we’ll have vaccine passports, not issued by the State (that would be formally illegal), but imposed by “private” businesses acting on behalf of the State.

                Here’s the thing Nunz, the only check on the Fascist (used correctly) noose encircling us is wide scale civil disobedience directed at “private” companies colluding with the State. If they don’t see a threat to their profits, they will side with the State. Simply boycotting them is an empty gesture, especially (as seems increasingly likely) most choices will be eliminated.

                I’m not advocating violence or theft, but if people can’t resist the actual enforcers of tyranny (increasingly the “private” sector), we’re screwed.


                • Hey Ya Jeremy!

                  **”The State is outsourcing tyranny to the “private” sector, this should be obvious to anyone paying attention. The State is using “private” businesses to bypass formal legal restrictions on its’ “authority”.”**


                  “** Your position implies that it is never appropriate to engage in civil disobedience aimed at a “private” company, no matter how they acquired their property or what they do on behalf of the State. “**

                  Yes. Our option is to boycott, since we have no inherent right to the use of someone else’s property, irregardless of how they acquired it or whose will they may be using their property to further.

                  It is akin to owning a house in an HOA: If your neighbor reports you to the HOA for putting a menorah in your window, you would get nowhere by battling that neighbor, as he is doing what he is allowed to do (Complain if he sees a silly rule being broken) as is his right to. To accomplish anything, you need to fight the HOA- or just sell your house to be out from under it’s tyranny. As far as the neighbor goes, you and others who agree with you can boycott (ostracize)him, but anything more than that would be pointless. That he may be enforcing the will of the HOA however unjust it is, by tattling on you, is really his option (Whether he does it voluntarily, or just doesn’t resist what is imposed on him)- and to coerce him to do the opposite is just as much coercion as is the HOA or his wife compelling to do what he is doing.

                  **”Pretty soon we’ll have vaccine passports, not issued by the State (that would be formally illegal), but imposed by “private” businesses acting on behalf of the State.”**

                  I see no difference with regard to who imposes such a thing- unless it is in regard to a place we actually have a right to be- like a DMV office or park, etc.

                  A vaccine passport, or mask mandate, imposed by the state through private businesses, or a Costco membership- makes little difference to me- I won’t comply, and I will boycott. The fact that businesses are not free to make their own decisions is proof of whom our civil disobedience should be directed at- but at least by boycotting businesses which do comply, we could get them to put pressure which would actually be heard, on the source of tyranny- theoretically- if we lived in a world where enough people cared- which unfortunately we don’t- so really, it makes little difference- boycotting or civil disobedience by us few loose nuts will accomplish absolutely nothing- and all we can do is to not comply and to boycott- not on the premise that it will effect change…but just to maintain our own liberties- just as is the case with flying. (Although I’d fully support civil disobedience regarding flying, as airports are true public accommodations- being owned often entirely by a mix of local , state and feral…err…federal gov’t and even staffed by their agents).

                  **”Here’s the thing Nunz, the only check on the Fascist (used correctly) noose encircling us is wide scale civil disobedience directed at “private” companies colluding with the State. If they don’t see a threat to their profits, they will side with the State. Simply boycotting them is an empty gesture, especially (as seems increasingly likely) most choices will be eliminated. “**

                  Agreed! Only, everything- not just boycotting- is an empty threat when practiced by such a small number of people so as to be negligible that if they suicided us all, no one would take notice.

                  Much like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia- WE are not going to effect change- and really, our boycotting and disobedience, as I stated above, are only for the practicalities of maintaining our own liberties and not letting them force us to comply- the same as it is with flying.

                  So I guess this is kind of a pointless argument, other than for sheer principle- but, as Brandon so wisely posited in his facetious satirical post, the intellectual arguments used to justify a negating of a property/business-owner’s rights are virtually identical to those advocated by the Occupy Movement and others of that ilk to justify their getting of what they want.

                  • Hey Nunz,

                    I don’t think that you’re presenting a principled argument, it’s a confused and Statist argument. It is Statist because you allow the State the sole discretion to determine what is a legitimate private company. In short, any company legally recognized by the State, is “private” in y0ur mind and is entitled to complete acceptance of its’ so-called “property rights”.

                    You have also claimed that we lack the ability or right to judge the legitimacy of any particular claim to title, so, by inference, we must simply defer to whatever the State recognizes (do you really not see a problem with this?) It is actually quite simple, Nunz, to make distinctions between, say Wackenhut and Monsanto and my bike shop. Wackenhut exists to enforce the will of the State, full stop. It is a State actor, full stop. It is not a “private” company in any meaningful libertarian sense. Monsanto is a crony capitalist corporation that solicits, and receives, special extralegal protection that it uses to violate the actual property rights of other farmers (Monsanto is legally allowed to trespass onto other farms and then sue the other farms for monetary compensation).

                    Your argument is not principled, it defers to the State sole authority in determining the legitimacy of a title claim, such legitimacy being necessary to claim property rights. It is also a suicide pact, as we libertarians are, in your opinion, barred from ever engaging in civil disobedience against “private” businesses acting on behalf of the State. So all the State has to do is form partnerships with “private” companies to impose tyranny and the best we can do is hope to get by.

                    You see Nunz, Wackenhut is not meaningfully private, in a libertarian sense. It is a State actor, period. Monsanto, in so far as it uses the power of the State to violate actual property rights of others, cannot claim that its’ “property rights” are inviolate.

                    Nunz, everything you say is valid only if a particular business has legitimate property title. You, unbelievably, grant to the State, the sole ability to make this determination. You may disagree with this, but it is a necessary consequence of many of your claims.


                    • Oh, come on now, Jeremy. You are tasking this to the point of absurdity just to maintain your position.

                      It is quite the opposite of what you say: I am NOT delegating to the state the responsibility of determining whose property is owned legitimately, but quite the contrary, I assume that possession.occupancy without any obvious evidence to the contrary as being a sufficient casual indicator of one’s right to that property for the purposes of deferring my rights/accepting thsat they have a superior right on that property.

                      It is no different than going to someone’s house and then claiming that you can do whatever you want there because you suspect that the homeowner committed some kind of financial fraud to obtain the house, or that his ancestor or former owner buil;t it on land formerly owned by Injuns, etc.

                      Even if you could prove such to be the case…it STILL does not give you a superior right while on that property. I’ve mentioned this several times, but unless I’ve missed it, you’ve failed to address it.

                      And (“…”) you’ve also not addressed the matter of what if Walmart or Mr. Peebles or anyone else decides to enforce some condition of conduct as a requirement to use their premises, even where/when there is no government decree.

                      Do they have a right to determine the conditions of use of their property? Do they have a right to abide by a government decree if they choose to? What if they are forced to? And what difference do any of these conditions make, considering it is not our property, but theirs?

                      And even if you feel it is not their property, how does that give you any standing to use that property?

                      I rather think it is YOU who are appealing to a statist argument in this, as you seem to be operating under a premise similar to that of “public accommodation” beiong a thing.

                  • Hey Nunz,

                    It’s not me that’s taking this to the point of absurdity. Of course what you write, at length, over and over again, is true IF the property title is legitimate. But, how you apply this obvious truth is incoherent and Statist. You accept that legitimate title/acquisition is essential to property rights, then claim that it doesn’t matter how the property is acquired, WTF? You deny us any means of making distinctions or assessing legitimate ownership, which has the effect, whatever your intention, of deferring to the State.

                    You claim that it doesn’t matter what the “private” business does on behalf of the State, their “property rights” are still absolute and inviolable. Congratulations Nunzio, you’ve created a perfect “libertarian” argument in defense of Fascism! You admit that GovCo is outsourcing tyranny to the “private” sector, but insist that our only recourse is a meaningless boycott. Your position renders us defenseless against the predations of a Fascist (used correctly) State. It does matter if a “private” business is acting as a State agent, but you’re correct that it doesn’t matter why the business is doing so; I may be slightly more sympathetic to a business doing so under duress, but what matters is that they are acting as State agents. When doing so, they are an arm of the State, not a “private” business in a libertarian sense.

                    So Nunz, is Academi (formerly Blackwater) or Wackenhut “private” businesses in a libertarian sense? If so, all that GovCo needs to do to eradicate liberty is to steal our money and give it to “private” companies who do the dirty work.

                    Your position on property rights is simplistic and empowering of the State (though I know that is not your intention). I can find nothing in your argument that is incompatible with Fascism, after all, businesses in a Fascist State are “private”, no? If not, why?

                    Finally, you have repeatedly mischaracterized my, and others, argument, claiming that it is a plea for “public accommodation”. I have never argued that I have the right to violate the property rights of a business to get what I want, I have challenged your particular notion of “private”.

                    You are correct about another thing, this argument is tedious, neither of us are saying anything new.


                    • Mornin’ Jeremy,

                      This discussion has been continued over on the Used Face Condoms comment section:

                      I’m afraid that I do not understand your criticism of what I said re legitimate title. Do you mean to tell me that yoiu examine the deed and trace back the lineage of every business you deal with, or everyone whose home you enter, or examine the purchase invoice and ownership history of everything you purchase? And that if it such is found to be not legitimate, that you then feel a right to exercise a non-restorative measure of control over the property in question?

                      Blackwater? Uh…no- They are being paid to enforce the edicts of government upon those who are not their patrons- They are government contractors.

                      **”Finally, you have repeatedly mischaracterized my, and others, argument, claiming that it is a plea for “public accommodation”. I have never argued that I have the right to violate the property rights of a business to get what I want,**”

                      So then what are we arguing about?

                      **” I have challenged your particular notion of “private”.”**

                      And I have refuted your assertions regarding that- which refutations I don’t believe you have addressed.

                      If a business owned by an individual(s) or stockholders is not private, then you are saying that it is an entity of government?

                      Please continue this in the other thread, linked above- where my most recent comments have addressed these very issues.


      • Hi Nunz,

        I think the essence of our disagreement hinges on a single point: The individual business/property owner certainly has a right to freely establish whatever policies he likes – even to the extent of vile policies, such as No Blacks (or Undiapered) Allowed within. And we have the right to not do business – and take it elsewhere. This is the free market – and free choice. Mutual respect, etc.

        But as I tried to explain, that is not the situation we’re dealing with. Business owners – all of them – are under duress, serving (willing or not) as the tool of government and also participating in mass – organized – hysteria. Both statements seem self-evident to me. Equally self-evident, as I see it, is that the same contempt for government “rights” applies to government using force to get private businesses to deny rights.

        We owe that neither respect nor – much less – obedience.

        • Hi Ya Eric!
          I understand your position, but as I asked earlier; what of the ones who do it not because they are under duress, but because they willingly choose to or agree with such practices? And even if done under duress, how does that invalidate their choice to cooperate and give us some superior right to use their premises as a means of rebellion if are opposed to such rebellion?
          I am fully onboard with civil disobedience, but our actions (other than boycotting) should be against the ones issuing the decrees/implementing the duress rather than on their victims, no?
          If someone gives you a lift and they demand that you wear a seatbelt so that they don’t get pulled over and or issued a ticket, their action is initiated due to them being under duress…but does that give you the right to refuse to leave their car and demand that they transport you if you don’t wear the seatbelt? -Or is your right merely to say “:No thanks” and exit the vehicle? They may be driving on “public roads” in an EV which was subsidized (and therefore “not acquired honestly” as per the Jeremy-style argument)…..but ultimately, it is still largely their car and they have a far greater right to it than a guest, right?
          I certainly don’t mean to be an apologist for Kabuki players….but the principle of the matter is very important, being one of the greatest points of Libertarianism- and should not be dismissed just because we don’t like the fact that so many around us are accepting of the BS.

          • Hey Nunz,

            “I am fully onboard with civil disobedience”.

            Seemingly not, as you claim that if a group of unmasked people refused to leave Walmart when asked to, that would constitute a violation of property rights, not civil disobedience.

            Another question, why is it legitimate to engage in civil disobedience directed at the State, but not to entities acting as agents of the State?


            • Hi Again, Jeremy!

              Re 1st question: Because a)Many bidnesses, such as Walmart or my vet or some little shop insist on masking of their own volition- even pre or post mandate. And even if they choose to abide by the mandate, who are WE to dictate that they incurr the penalties for not doing so? That is not civil disobedience.

              Many abide by the dictates simply because the majority of the tools who shop there want to “feel protected” and just as we would agree that a store should have the right to decree whether to allow smoking or not, so should they have the right to choose which type ofr customer they feel is in their best interest to lure.

              Re #2: Are they acting as an ‘agent of the state’ if they’re doing so under duress and threat of punishment? A pig is an agent of the state because he is paid and deputized to enforce the states edicts and enforce penalties- but a store is either choosing to demand adherence to a certain policy by those who desire to use it’s facilities, or are themselves threatened with punishment for not doing so.

          • Nunz, is it really the morally correct/superior position that a property owner can impose any conditions upon a guest/potential customer? Or a slave?

            You say you have issue with how the property rights issue applies to public property, government. Government is a monopoly who you are obligated by duress to do business with. If you don’t pay, you go to jail or die. I’m guessing that’s why you have issue with it, but not with property owners you are not forced to do business with?

            The corporations in a given key industry are few. When they all have the same policy, mask/vax/rape or no transaction, they are a monopoly in that there are no alternatives (notice this problem doesn’t occur as often where there is ample competition, such as [in my experience] automotive service/repair, barber shops, etc). How is a monopoly of say, three corps in a given area really different from government? As opposed to going to jail or dying from a gun you die of starvation instead (or submit)? Because you aren’t forced to do business with them? What if the electric and/or water companies decide to turn your power and/or water off, stop doing business with you, because you don’t get the mask/vax or any other form of rape they deem necessary to stop the spread or climate change or whatever? Doesn’t matter that they are public utilities (statist concept?), just as public accommodation doesn’t matter (for us, for our position only). Our choices are to take their service with the conditions they set forth, regardless of what they are, or not patronize. Are they really morally in the right here? As opposed to me, who just wants to not be raped as a condition of paying them for the service they offer that I admit I need to live?

            I would die without those things. They are the ones imposing duress on me. Do this, and this, and this, unless you don’t want your utilities/food. Hey, private company. If you make some starving peasant dance around to entertain you in exchange for throwing them a piece of bread when you’re satisfied, is that morally better than the peasant just wanting to pay for the bread without the added obligations/humiliations?

            I don’t know. I admit, I need the system to live. I can’t do everything myself. That’s my fault. But it is difficult to be principled when you are starving, freezing, or without water – which is invariably where this is going to go. I don’t care about never going to a restaurant or movie theater ever again. I am thinking about the future, where they’re going to take this. So I am done defending the property rights of corporate America, the people who will be enforcing the beast system, the new world order, hell, whatever you want to call it, sooner or later. In 2019 I think I would have been a proponent of their property rights, 2020 showed me that I do so to my own detriment. And it looks like the worst could be yet to come. The property rights of the system are going to kill me, unless I can figure out how to produce everything I need for myself. Or we get an actual free market in all parts of the system I need to live. Hah. Nunz, take my libertarian card and burn it along with my hopes and dreams.

            To address the seatbelt thing. I’ll give you some mediocre differences, but not a strong rebuke (yet another evening burned responding to you :]):

            1: A seat belt actually benefits me. A mask does not. Doesn’t mean either should be forced on anybody.
            2: I can afford to own my own transportation. I cannot afford to own my own economic system.

            • Excellent, Brandon!

              I’d add – or amplify – that there is increasingly little, if any, functionally meaningful difference between corporations and government and even between ordinary businesses, which have become agents of the government – assuming they “cooperate.” Almost all do, to one degree or another. The “private property” argument is weak for that reason. Because government anything has no rights. It only has force, which it used to undermine and destroy them.

              Everything is “one” now – consolidated, corporate. Imagine if it were not. Imagine if each town, county, state were a decentralized entity in which private property was respected. In which your place – your residence or your business – was acknowledged as entirely yours, under no duress, requiring no permissions/fees to sort-of “own.”

              In that case, such things as Face Diapers would present no property rights issues. But that is not what we have. As you’ve written.

              • Hey Eric & Brandon!

                Brandon, I’ll respond to you specifically, later as time permits.

                Eric, I may have missed it, but I don’t recall seeing a response to my formerly proffered seatbelt analogy, but seeing as it addresses the point you made, above, perfectly, I’ll reiterate:

                Someone invites you to be a passenger in their car and you accept the ride. Once in the car, they ask you to ‘fasten your seatbelt because they are not willing to risk getting pulled over and or getting a ticket or otherwise interacting with the state’s hired thugs. You refuse, and so they say that you are not welcome to ride with them.

                They are clearly only requiring you to wear the seatbelt because they are under duress to enforce Uncle’s decree. Do you refuse to leave their vehicle, claiming that their right to determine the conditions of use of their property (the car) and service (driving) is not valid, since they are acting as a ‘government agent’ and that since they are under duress to do so, their conditions of use are less valid, and that you have a right to resist and protest their demands by staying in their car?

                Would it make any difference if their car was leased, or was an EV which was partially subsidized through extorted tax money?

                Do you [to take it further a’ la Jeremy’s ‘rightful title’ reasoning), do you have the right to demand they show you the car’s title and authorize you obtain a title history and to investigate how they paid for the car so that you can determine if they have a legitimate right to the title of that property?

                Hey, you know we’re all functionally on the same side here as pertaining to not masking(etc.) and our disdain for the sickness Kabuki- and I refuse to ever wear a mask- but we should all be able to agree on the basics here of property rights- even if we don’t agree with what some choose to do with their property for whatever reason- whether of their own volition, or because they are under duress, which they don’t care to resist for whatever reason. And we should acknowledge that we don’t have some imagined right to the use of someone’s property against their wishes; once we start claiming that we do, for whatever reasons, we are starting to mimic the leftist’s arguments.

                • Nunzio,

                  I just don’t ever get back in the car.

                  Do you wear a seatbelt? I gave up that practice when it became a primary offense.

                  I have numerous former friends who have demanded I comply.

                  I’ve even had passengers demand that I put on the seatbelt as the driver because they didn’t want to get pulled over. I like to call them pedestrians.

                  I don’t understand why you pretend people have rights. They don’t.

                  Everyone traveling down the road is at the mercy of the cop who didn’t get a blow job this morning.

                  • Exactly, Tuan- To get out of the car is the way we maintain our right without infringing upon the right of the car owner.

                    I do wear a seatbelt- but I did even before it was a dictate.

                • Hi Nunz,

                  We disagree, obviously.

                  A car owner is not under duress to force adult passengers to wear seat belts; they may be cited, of course – but that doesn’t put him in the role of enforcer. Unless he wishes to enforce it. And to say that an adult passenger is forced to ride – and thus, to “buckle up” – is untrue.

                  But the issue in the context of Face Diapers is also qualitatively different in that it is not merely some annoying rule but an evil – something being used to foment mass hysteria and condition mass obedience. This alone liberates us from any obligation to respect such a “right,” which does not exist.

                  Secondarily, as I’ve tried to explain, this is also a coordinated effort of government – which “locked down” all but the big corporate chain stores – and the corporations, which are creatures of the government, who got together and decided that Face Diapers Are Required at their stores, which meant practically all the still-open stores. Neither government nor corporations have rights; certainly not the right to propagate mass hysteria. And because of their combined might, to force compliance by eliminating alternatives.

                  To sum, this is not about private property rights. It is about an assault on them by the government and corporations.

                  As the Kaiser supposedly once said: Ich scheisse uber alles daruber!

                  PS: One could argue, I suppose – and not unintelligibly – that since there is no truly private property in this country since the government is involved in all of it, we’re all under duress and thus the absolute respect for property rights that would nominally be due in a free country is neither practicable nor morally obligatory.

                  • “A car owner is not under duress to force adult passengers to wear seat belts; they may be cited, of course – but that doesn’t put him in the role of enforcer. ”

                    They are here. The driver gets the fine if anyone in the car is unbuckled.

                    • Thanks, Anon- That is premise I thought was understood- but I guess it may not YET be universal…but is in many places.


                      Just perused a few state’s codes…seems all the ones I looked at are worded something to the effect “No person shall operate a motor vehicle unless the driver and all passengers and belted” -Which mens if you operate the vehicle and a passenger is not belted…you get the ticky- of course, ’cause a passenger might not even have a driver’s license…and if he isn’t driving, it would be hard to cite him for a “traffic violation”.

                  • Hey Eric!

                    *&”A car owner is not under duress to force adult passengers to wear seat belts; they may be cited, of course – but that doesn’t put him in the role of enforcer. Unless he wishes to enforce it. “**

                    Ahh, sorry buddy, but I don’t see how you can say that a car owner is not under duress by being threatened with physical impediment, fines and even violence, while a business being threatened with fines, suspension of business, etc. is.

                    They both are. But what I don’t understand about your point is why it even matters? If you are under duress, that somehow gives reduces your property rights, while simultaneously giving me a say in those rights?

                    If anything, it should be the other way around, and more slack should be given to someone under duress than to someone who is maintaining a position we don’t agree with of his own volition./ But really, I can’t see why it makes any difference either way. And if they are under duress, then they are not government agents, but slaves. But again, if it is not OUR property, the reason why the owner of that property is doing what he is doing is not our business.

                    **”PS: One could argue, I suppose – and not unintelligibly – that since there is no truly private property in this country since the government is involved in all of it, we’re all under duress and thus the absolute respect for property rights that would nominally be due in a free country is neither practicable nor morally obligatory.”**

                    Yes, that is along the lines of the common leftist arguments- but of course, while we may not be able to guarantee true right to our own propery….we of all people should uphold, respect and practice the utmost respect for the bounds of property in every way as far as we can in our own lives and conduct…and not side with those who destroy it (i.e. the government and the leftists) just because we don’t like how someone is exercising that right.
                    Now I know you may say “But it is the government which is trampling property rights by their mandates, so by battling the thusly affected property owners, we are in essence fighting the government”- But that is not true. In reality, by doing so, we are JOINING the gov’t’s trampling of the property owner’s rights by just trying to force him to do the opposite of what the gov’t forces him to do, or what he does of his own volition.
                    Why are we even arguing? Have you ever refused to leave a business when asked to do so for not complying with any dictate?
                    Yeah, I will try to evade their efforts, as I agree that there is a little more leeway with a huge corporation or even chain than with a mom & pop or homeowner….but ultimately, I would just leave, because I don’t see myself as having any right to be there in the first place, regardless of that businesses’ relationship to the government….until and if it is actually a representative of the government, or receives a significant part of it’s revenue from the government.

              • **”Excellent, Brandon! “**

                Hahaha! I finally just got around to reading Brandon’s post. Eric, I think he has successfully trolled you again! LOL! ( |Don’t feel bad, I’m actually contemplating responding seriously to it, as I’m not entirely sure myself! \ ]

                If Brandon weren’t a Libertardian, he could have a career as government disinformation specialist or CIA agent!

                • Nunz,

                  “ government disinformation specialist or CIA agent!”

                  You can bet your ass one has been assigned to this website.

                  Probably just the proprietor though. 😳

                  • “government disinformation specialist or CIA agent”

                    I have been looking for the application forms and can’t find them anywhere. Seems like a cushy gig.

                    • Try the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

                      Or whatever the US Information Agency morphed into.

        • Eric,

          “Business owners – all of them – are under duress,”

          That sir, is complete and utter bullshit.

          Those business owners got in bed with Govco VOLUNTARILY!

          • Hi T,

            Technically, yes – you’re right. But I submit it’s more nuanced than that. How does one do business these days – legally – without getting in bed with government “voluntarily”? My buddy – we go way back – owns a roofing company. His views about the right and proper “role” of government are the same as mine, yet he has no real choice – assuming he wishes to stay in business – but to “get in bed” with government.

            The only people who can – for now – not get in bed with government are people like me, who are “sole proprietors” and “outlaws,” which is a damned hard way to live.

            • Eric,

              “My buddy – we go way back – owns a roofing company.”

              I have a former friend who owns a roofing company.

              We did roofs for a decade or two before the state unveiled its license scheme.

              He jumped on the idea and was one of the first to get the license. Thought it was a great way to eliminate competition.

              And it was. Many of his competitors still work for him. Of course he won’t give them a contract without proof of insurance.

              He also loves him some corporate shield. He has even taken his accountant to prison to get the paperwork all set up for when his subcontractors get released.

              Just because it’s easier to go along to get along doesn’t give one the ability or legitimacy to claim duress.

              You know it’s bullshit, I know it’s bullshit, and your roofer buddy knows it’s bullshit.

              When that roofer friend of yours gets his holy jab because his license to work is contingent upon it, will you still maintain he did it under duress?

              A nuanced duress perhaps?

              • They are under duress- but many don’t seem to mind being under that duress, as they voice no objections, nor make any effort to fight that duress. The ones who do fight it, sooner or later get shut down or otherwise in grave trouble- more so than some crook who does things “legally”.

                I know what that’s like: Back in the late 80’s and early 90’s I used to be a handyman in NY. Even though they already had licenses and all of that back then, it was still pretty easy to stay under the radar- I was always busy, as I’d do quality work for very reasonable prices and would always show up on time. I never had to advertise, as I’d do a job for some elderly person, and they’d recommend me to all of their friends and relatives.

                Today, I’d up in jail in short order for being “an unlicensed contractor”- as the tyranny has grown exponentially, and the local gov’t even does undercover stings.

                But what of the guy who for whatever reason wants to comply? Maybe he believes in government and just gushes about the wonders of licenses and permits and paying taxes…or maybe he doesn’t like it, but it’s the only way he can support his fambly without working for a corp or gov’t agency, where he’d face even more tyranny?
                I don’t want to hire that guy…..but I don’t think I should necessarily act as an adversary to him, either- My beef is with those who impose the tyranny- and the licensed handyman may in-fact be their victim- or trying not to be.

                The prick who joins the Chamber Of Commerce, and supports candidates and bills which propose ever more regulation, and who rats-out his competitor for not complying…HE is my enemy as much as the government.

                • Nunzio,

                  “They are under duress- but”

                  Fuck you and your but.

                  When they fill out the forms and pay the money it ain’t duress. It’s a partnership.

                  You might be able to make the case that it’s Stockholm Syndrome, but duress? Fuck you.

                  No gun is put to the head of the person who gives up the money for Govco granted privileges.

                  You remember this?


                  • Tu,

                    Yo momma!

                    Hey, as much as I despise those who gladly comply, the thang is, even in a Libertarian world those same people would have the ability to voluntarily comply with such schemes- and just as is the case now, we have the right to not do bidness with them.

                    Those who comply because they are under duress, scared of the consequences the tyrants will impose on them for non-compliance, etc. are less despicable, as they, like we, are victims.

                    Living under tyranny, we ALL cave to some degree- i.e. driver’s licenses; not posting ads for jobs or rental property that say “No niggers, children or queers”, etc.

                    Let us not forget who the true enemy is- Uncle. When Uncle puts someone under duress, it is like the school bully telling a nerd “Go and trip that girl or I’ll beat the crap out of you”. The bully is the real problem- and instead of exacting revenge on the bully, if we enact revenge on the nerd, we are contributing to his problem/defenselessness, and doing nothing to address the true source of the problem who is victimizing both the nerd and the girl.

                    It’s different if the nerd is willingly complicit and decides to do the bully’s bidding voluntarily, or because he thinks it will impress the bully or someone else…much like Walmart enacting their own mask mandate before it was forced upon them. But even in that situation, our remedy is to withdraw ourselves from their property so as not to be under their jurisdiction, lest WE become the coercers/bullies.

                    • Nunzio,

                      “Yo momma!”

                      My momma been dead for decades. But since it is Mother’s Day, give your mom a big hug and kiss from me!

                      No tongue though. I know how you people are. That’s just weird.

                      And give her my condolences that ye were her spawn.

                    • Nunz,

                      “as they, like we, are victims.”

                      THEY are willing partners.

                      We are the factotum.

                      THEY are not victims. THEY got the permit.

                      I never needed no stinking permit.

                      Did you?

                    • Hi T,

                      I got into the line of work I’m in partially because “I don’t need no stinkin’ permit” – but this isn’t an option for people who want to open a storefront or even run a roofing business, like my friend. Their choice is to either get the stinkin’ permit – or not be in business. To say they get the stinkin’ permit willingly is true in a purely technical sense but it is also not as simple as that, either.

                    • Nunz,

                      Would you like a cigarette old man?

                      Why you can not sign ze papers?

                      They are merely a statement that you not under duress.

                    • Ante meridiem Eric,

                      “To say they get the stinkin’ permit willingly is true in a purely technical sense but it is also not as simple as that, either.”

                      So you’re saying they stop at “Guns To Your Head R Us” on the way to officialdom HQ to get the permission?

                    • Hi T,

                      You know as well as I that any business other than cash-for-service (good luck with that) and with a physical storefront that does not seek/get permission will be put out of business in short order. That is the “gun” – the duress – all businesses operate under. It is the same “gun” that causes you to file a 1040 – and pay “your” taxes. Everyone knows the “gun” is there – even if you can’t see it. Yet. You will see it, if you don’t file/pay “your” taxes. Or get the required permissions.

                      It’s an ugly reality of life in this country. To say it doesn’t exist is to deny reality.

                      Certainly, people can choose not to be in business. As I choose not to fly ( because I won’t accept being fondled as a condition of being allowed to fly).

                      But the duress is there. It practically everywhere.

                      Thus, we are all its victims.

                    • Eric,

                      Just a few days ago you wrote, “ It is well – and very good – to practice normalcy on an individual basis, as by refusing to play along with the abnormal “practices” of the mentally ill. By refusing to accommodate or grant the slightest legitimacy to the strange and dangerous beliefs of the mentally ill, no matter their feelings. A sound parent does not permit himself to be emotionally blackmailed by a child erupting in hysterics to get its way. Once the child sees that its hysterics aren’t working, the show usually abates and – in time – the child begins to become an adult.”

                      But if a mentally ill adult, who calls himself government, erupts in hysterics about the common weal, then the blackmail should be paid?

                      Is that what normal people do Eric?

                      Because that would lead me to believe it was normal to diaper up, take the jabs, and then proceed on down to the permit palace.

                      When you grant the mentally ill government guy legitimacy you necessarily open the door for him to erupt in further hysteria about the common weal. He then demands even more loot.

                    • Hi T,

                      Did I ever say the duress was legitimate?

                      I stated it exists. I think this undeniable. Whether it is avoidable is another question.

                      It is still possible to live – realistically – without being Diapered or Jabbed. For the present. That may of course change.

                      It is not possible – realistically – to be (to remain) in business without getting permission.

                      Thus, the choice – for the person who wishes to be in business – is either to not be in business or to get permission.

                      How many times must I elaborate this obvious point?

                      You seem to suggest that it is possible to be in business without getting permission – and (as I read it) sneer with contempt at the people who accede to the duress and get the permission. I’d love to know how you open a store, restaurant or cafe – and keep it open – without permission?

                      Perhaps you will tell us.

                      Do you “legitimize” the duress you are under when you pay “your” taxes? Do you avail yourself of all legal deductions? If so, does that make you “complicit” – an enabler of tyranny?

                      And I assume you do “choose” to pay “your” taxes? If you do not, then you’re living as an “outlaw” – off the books, without identifiable income, bank accounts or real property in your name. That’s wonderful – if you’ve been able to manage that.

                      As a practical matter, it’s not something most of us can do – unless we’re willing to live in a tent in the woods, without any tangible assets the government can lay hands on. Yay, freedom!

                      This is the sort of “choice” offered us.

                      Which is to say, no choice.

                      To say we have one is to shift the blame onto the victim – by denying the fact of duress and then pretending the victim was free to choose and chose to give in to the threats made by his oppressor and thereby became “complicit.”

                      You know, like the inmates at Auschwitz who avoided the ovens by playing music for the camp guards.

                    • Eric,

                      “Did I ever say the duress was legitimate?

                      I stated it exists.”

                      You said you were a victim. You also grant the legitimacy. You pay the blackmail and claim that you are the rightful owner. You fear paper, that is the source of your consternation. No guns involved.

                      When my benevolent overlords came to reclaim their house they were very civil and kept their guns in their holsters.

                      I simply bid them adieu and moved on having tired of their never ending demands.

                      I chose to not give up the loot.

                      Every form of commerce I have engaged in has been outlawed in some way, shape, fashion or form.

                      I’ve consistently refused to hand over the loot and moved on. I made that decision. No duress involved.

                      I’m a product of my decisions Eric. I make no claims of being a victim to words on paper.

                      I’ve never debated how much of my earnings belong to them. If they can claim a penny, then they can claim it all. And eventually they will claim 100%.

                      I find it humorous how so many people are tripping over themselves to buy the permissions and pay the blackmail. I choose not to.

                      And with regards to retail business, the revenuers/“owners” collecting the sales taxes, they all get a cut of the loot by enforcing diktat.

                      They are worthy of your patronage until they enforce something else, the diaper diktat?

                      They are somehow under duress AND getting paid to collect the loot?

                      I’ve never felt any duress when I’m getting paid. I’ve actually been very happy.

                      It’s a choice Eric, made freely.

                      And that choice is an either/or.

                      You can say fuck you or you can say mother may I.

                      When you decide to pay for Govco’s permission and go into business with the man, I’m not seeing anything obvious about that.

                      Other than you freely decided not to say fuck you and move on with your life.

                      You can continue to feed the beast. You can claim duress when the time comes and you CHOOSE to get a journalist’s license.

                      But the reality is you are free to decide.

                    • T,

                      Yes, I am the victim; all of us are, in one way or another. Your notion that businesses are “free to decide” is fatuous because duress is applied, universally – to storefront businesses – obviating the concept of free choice.

                      I’ve articulated this several times, perhaps not finely enough to get the point across.

                      Certainly, you are “free” to say – fuck you! Just as the guy about to be shot is free to say the same to his executioners. To say that is a free choice is sophistic; it is nonsense.

                      And I’d like to know, specifically: Do you file a tax return? Do you own property? Do you have a business? Maybe – as I have already written – you are in a position to live on cash and can live somewhere where no taxes are applied to where you live, in order to be allowed to live there. Unless it is a tent in the woods – not your woods – I’d like to know who you managed it.

                      As regards a journalism license – you make my point. I am not under duress (yet). Ergo, my choice to practice my trade is freely made. The day may come when I am forced to make the same loathsome choice that business owners currently have to make. But that is not the case right now, so there is no equivalence to be drawn.

                  • Hi T,

                    I assume you pay “your” taxes? Income – and on your home? Have you ever paid them? Do you/did you do so willingly? I pay them. Unwillingly.

                    The point being that everyone pays them – except those who do not earn taxable income (damned hard) and those who earn no income to be taxed.

                    Precisely because a gun will be put to your head if you don’t give it up.

                    Maybe you have figured out a way to not pay these taxes while also being able to earn a living and have a roof over your head and take care of your family, if you have one. If you have, great – and kudos.

                    For most, it is not possible without living as an “outlaw” and “off the books.” As I stated earlier, this is, indeed a choice. But it is facile to say it is one made without duress.

      • “The real issue I have is not with how this applies to private property- but rather how it applies to “public property”- i.e. government offices and facilities, and such, where we have a RIGHT to be/participate without coercion or exclusion.”

        Agreed. We should have unfettered access to buildings and facilities that WE are forced to pay for.

        WRT businesses, I ignore the sign in order to test whether the owner is enforcing it. (Merely asking if a diaper is going to be required is pointless.) If the owner/employees are going to enforce by trying to force me to diaper, I say, “No thanks, I’ll shop elsewhere.” I don’t insist on a right to spend my money there. But I will not give them a dime after (if) this all goes away.

        Having said that, I have had no real problems at the big box places. Only a couple of small businesses have been mask nazis. They will never see me again.

        • Agreed. My experience as well. Big boxes don’t enforce. Local small businesses most militant so no go for me and I will remember. The very worst offender in my area, though, is the gov’t ABC (liquor) store. Literally no entry sans diaper. Even Eric dealt with this in VA and wore a bike helmet if I recall. DeSantis in FL banned all kabuki by gov’t decree at all levels in the state but businesses can still require it because private property. Seems like the proper approach to me but some of the arguments on here regarding property rights sound straight out of the lyrics to “Signs” originally performed by the 5 Man Electrical Band in the 60s and covered by Tesla (!?) in my day in the 90s. Ideas decidedly self evident to the lyric writer but also decidedly anti-property rights.

          • The problem I have with the property rights argument is that it didn’t seem to apply when businesses did NOT want a diaper mandate. They weren’t allowed to decide for themselves. Now that the gov’t has backed off in some areas, suddenly businesses have the “right” to dictate.

            Either way, as for me I will try to see if the sign is going to be enforced by actual people. If not, I am not going to cower before a piece of cardboard.

            • Agreed regarding what transpired. My point, though, was specific to the current approach taken in FL. It seems to me to strike the right balance in this insane world. That being said, we need to always be promoting property rights and the right to free association.

        • Same here, Anon & Hatsy.

          A local bank, my old vet, and my somewhat-libertarian eye doctor have been absolutely militant with the Kabuki and so they no longer get my business. Most small stores and the box stores have been no problem. Even the local hospital has not been a problem.

          There is virtually ZERO enforcement here- so what these businesses are doing is purely on them- and they can go suck a big one! They can exercise their property rights….but they can’t have me as a customer.

      • Sorry, Nunz, but I am going to have to agree with you. 😁 You make a perfectly valid and sound point.

        The businesses that state they are under duress to comply to the mask mandate is bull shit. No one is forcing these businesses to put a “Mask Required” sign on their door or to enforce it. The ones that have it approve of the Kabuki and I see no reason why any of us would want to patronize such places.

        • Hi RG,
          I don’t agree that no one is forcing these businesses to put a “Mask Required” sign on their door. Public health authorities have often required these signs. Furthermore, these businesses all have business licenses that can be revoked if they defy the regulations of the governor, mayor, or public health authorities. Many businesses have in fact been shut down for refusing to enforce these regulations. There is also the issue of legal liability, which is a continual threat to any business. If someone in the store gets sick with covid, just try to prove to a jury that the business that didn’t enforce mask regulations was not responsible! So all businesses in areas with these regulations are in fact under duress.
          Nunz does have a good point that some or even most of these businesses may actually support these regulations and enforce them voluntarily, even if they were not under duress. So, for any given business, there is no way to know if the business is truly supporting the regulations and would enforce them even if not under duress, or if they are doing it because of the threat. But there is no doubt that at least some of the businesses are enforcing the mask regulations only because of the threat. Where I live, in the SF bay area, every single store and restaurant posts these signs requiring a mask to enter. Not one exception. Do you really think that, if it were not for the enforcement threat from government, all businesses everywhere would comply without even a single exception?

          • Hi Martin,

            Do I believe businesses would comply to the mask mandates if government did not institute it? Yes, absolutely. Why do I say that? April/May 2020 state government began enforcing mask wearing. Businesses did not begin installing signs until late July 2020 with Walmart being one of the first. After that large and medium sized corporations fell in line. Small businesses didn’t wish to be left behind so they complied as well. The airline industry did not establish a mask mandate because government told them to, because government didn’t tell them to. What mask mandate did Trump put into effect? None, so why were businesses ready to kneel? Liability. Not government mandates. Do any us really believe that the government has any say over Walmart or Amazon? Amazon and Walmart run government, not the other way around.

            Right now I am sunning myself on a beach in FL, actually I am looking for ghost crabs, but tomorrow I will be sunning myself. Florida has no state mandate. Jacksonville has no city mandate. This leaves only the businesses to make the decisions. Pretty much every store front has a mask required sign. Who is enforcing it? No one except the very businesses themselves.

            • Hi RG,

              You’ve kept track of the timing of these mask mandates better than I; I didn’t know that the gap between the government mandates and the business mandates was that long. Perhaps it wasn’t in California where I live. There’s often a timing gap between when a government regulation is implemented and it is passed on to businesses.

              Anyway, I don’t agree that this is indicative that the businesses are all complying without duress. First of all, I would guess that in my and other areas, businesses have been mandated to enforce masking requirements. Refusal to comply with this can and has resulted in businesses being closed down. If there are thousands of businesses that all make the same decision without exception, it cannot be because they all support it. That’s analogous to an election in which one candidate gets 100% of the votes.

              Regarding the airlines, these are 100% under the control of the federal government. The feds control all security aspects of the airlines. I’m pretty sure that they are also mandating the masks on airplanes. The relationship between megacorps like Walmart, Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc. with the government is not so simple. They do not run the government. They have great influence over the government but are also ultimately controlled by the government. They are intertwined in a pathological relationship that characterizes the fascist economy that we have become.

              I hope you enjoy your time in Florida!

              • Walmart went nationwide with their masking decree back when such mandates existed only in a few states. Remember when they first announced it? “No exceptions”. LOL- That lasted about 2 days….

              • Hi Martin,

                Last week the CDC stated that those that have been vaccinated could remove their masks outside. This should have been an air siren throughout this country with every American (vaxxed and unvaxxed) ripping off their face diapers to breathe in fresh air and bask in sunshine. I haven’t noticed a difference. People are playing putt putt, walking across the shopping center, and bicycling still donning a mask. My aunt, who is double vaxxed, wears a face mask in the presence of my father (who is unvaxxed) for fear of HER getting sick. She has had the shot, why does she believe she will get sick?!?

                If we were to lift every government mask mandate tomorrow do we believe life would go back to normal? Could we expect every business or individual to throw off the shackles and pretend it is 2019? I don’t believe this will end. Four months ago I thought differently. When the President of the USA (supposedly jabbed) walks in 80 degree heat in a face diaper with no one within 10 feet of him we have a messaging problem.

                Up next the passports. This country is divided and our side is not winning. A recent survey stated that 53% of Americans would like to implement a passport system. The USA Today recently wrote an article on how the unvaccinated should be ostracized. This is not government implementing these procedures, but our own peers.

                • Hi RG,
                  53%! That’s pathetic. Americans have been brainwashed and terrorized over the last year. It is government that is responsible for the brainwashing. Government at all levels has been running continuous adds on all the major media in a non-stop psyop campaign. Government controls all of the major mainstream media. Only sites like this still offer a modicum of free speech.

                • RG!

                  You are back… excellent! This is a great way to start the day!

                  In re the rest: Yup; the disease has metastasized – the cancer is everywhere and it is growing. I think, eventually, it will come down to us – or them. Because they will not leave us alone, even though we’re willing to extend that courtesy to them.

                  I’ve decided to be as militant about my liberty – and my person – as they are militant about their Fears (and their sick insistence that others be controlled, to ease their Freas).

                  Fish heads for ’em, served chilly!

                • Mornin’ RG!

                  You are spot-on with your observations, above.

                  It is to the point where the masses, propagandized by Uncle’s mouth-piece -the media- are a more formidable enemy than the actual government.

                  Maybe that’s what they meant by “government of the people, by the people and for the people”……

                  It’s essentially a replay of Nazi Germany and many other tyrannies, which never could have succeeded if merely perpetrated overtly by a small group of rulers (As that would illuminate a visible enemy and make them obvious to all citizens who could thus squash such a bunch just due to their sheer numbers).

                  But trick the peons into doing what the rulers want them to do, and make them think that they are doing it of their own volition and in their own best interests…..and a small group of psychos can just sit back and watch their victims do their very bidding.

                  As Mark Twain observed: “It is easier to trick people than it is to convince them that they’ve been tricked”.

                  And though I’m no fan of Carl Sagan, what he said is eminently true:

                  ““One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” “.

              • Martin,

                “Regarding the airlines, these are 100% under the control of the federal government.”

                Actually 100% of aviation is under federal control. Not just passenger service. Our Friends Against Aviation see to that.

                And it is effective. The hasn’t been a crash since yesterday.

                • Morning, T!

                  “Actually 100% of aviation is under federal control. Not just passenger service. Our Friends Against Aviation see to that.”

                  And that’s why so many shy away from aviation, me among them. Just as I shy away from opening up a business; having to deal with the government – with the kinds of people who constitute the government – is a prospect unendurable to me.

                  • Eric,

                    “a prospect unendurable to me.”

                    How many people have unregistered cars? No insurance, or license?

                    Perhaps you?

                    There is a little untalked about secret in aviation. The exists a corresponding number of those folks in the flying community.

                    This has been going on since before the FAA. My dad had a plane for decades. Never had a license. Refused to get one. Said he learned what he needed to know in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam.

                    He was even ballsy enough to park it on the military side of O’Hare when he went to Vietnam.

                    People assume when they see a plane flying around everything is legal. Even the ATC. No cops in the air.

                    Besides, ES LA LEY!

                    • T, good one. When I was young, too young to drive, I just drove anyway like everyone else my age. I never got stopped till the day when I got my license at 14.

                      The DPS asked me(the old stickers were just paper and didn’t stick long and would just ball up from water and heat and fall off and blow out the vent windown. They asked me when was the last time I’d registered that pickup. I truthfully replied “Oh, I don’t know, you’d have to ask my dad”.
                      To be honest, I don’t remember getting a sticker on it. Back then the license plates were “forever” or until you beat one to death hooking up trailers, often having them split and non-readable anyway.

                    • 8

                      “I just drove anyway like everyone else my age.”

                      You’d be surprised at how many people your age just fly anyway.

                      I only know of one person who was ever even approached.

                      The feds and the Michigan State Police were looking for a door that fell off a Northwest flight. They found the door on his property.

                      Of course they knocked on his door to inquire if he had seen anything and asked about the plane in the barn.

                      He just told them he hasn’t flown in years and the plane was a project for his grandson.

                      That was the end of that story.

                • Hi Tuan,
                  Now that I’m getting close to retirement, I’ve actually thought that it might be fun to learn to fly a glider. I hope that the government hasn’t yet seized control of that.

                  • “I hope that the government hasn’t yet seized control of that.”

                    Does it have numbers painted on it?


                    They have.

                  • “If it has numbers…”

                    Took the words right out of my face-hole, Tuan!

                    The last segment of freedom I heard of (And it very well may have changed by now) pertaining to the sky, was ultralights…..

                    • As you know Nunz, until the chains are resting lightly upon you, you can maintain a semblance of freedom.

                      Eric and his 707 or favorite Nazi planes might garner some interest or jealousy of the federales, the smaller one probably won’t.

                    • Tu-tu,

                      I know as much about planes as DJT knows about tact and class, but it seems to me, as long as one can avoid airports, they could probably “get away” with more freedom in the air than one can on the road.
                      I have a friend who used to have a seaplane… Long as ya have a way to fuel it, that would probably offer some inty-restin possibilities.

            • Hi RG!

              On of the reasons Diapers Mandatory cropped up almost everywhere, almost at once, is because the national retailer’s association got together and so decided. The pressure this brought to bear was – remains – enormous. It is also why I loathe these national retailers – these corporations. They have become a kind of de facto government, with similar power but without any meaningful restraint. And they dominate the economy. Probably half the people in this country – I may be under-estimating – work for a corporation and so are dependent on corporations for their economic life.

              Meanwhile, the small/independently owned businesses faced being declared “non essential” by the government and closed. Desperate to re-open, they did the Yessa Massa routine and followed all the “guidelines.”

              • I am not going to disagree with you when it comes to the trouncing of our rights from large corporations. I share no love for them. But, that leaves us to the question who controls the economy. The state or the National Retail Association? My money is on big business. Watch closely on the vax passports. Pay attention who is pushing them. Big business will be the first to implement.

                The only thing any of us have control of is where we spend our money. Stay away from the large corporations. We need to put our ducks in a row and begin building relationships with small businesses and individuals who see through this crap.

                There will be day in the not so distant future where scanning your phone will the only way to gain entry into a store. I refuse to provide these conglomerates any assistance to establish such a system.

                • I agree, RG –

                  Corporations have become the government, in a very real (meaningful) way. And government uses corporations to impose what it technically isn’t permitted to impose. It’s win-win, for government and corporations.

                  As you say, the wise course is to decentralize; to associate and do business with the like-minded and shun/avoid the not.

                  • eric, It’s been flung in our faces that big corporations make law and intend to control the country. If you doubted it, the last election should dispel that doubt.

                    Antifa would be right on the money if they weren’t idiots and actually want fascism. They destroy private businesses as if they were making law. They can’t tell a knot in a board from the hole in their collective ass.

                    The fact they don’t work but are supported really makes them an enemy to those who work their asses off just trying to survive.

                    I said long ago I’d like to have a big rig with an old style “oil field front end”. They had nothing but steel for the front end, no fancy hoods or anything else and lots of heavy wall pipe to knock stuff over or get pulled out or pull out. I figure 60 mph and a few hundred antifa shitheads blocking the freeway would turn into a mess suited for front-end loaders and dump trucks. A couple big PA horns playing “Born to be Wild” would just be icing on the cake. –

                • RG,

                  “I am not going to disagree with you when it comes to the trouncing of our rights from large corporations. I share no love for them.”

                  Small corporations sometimes grow to become large corporations.

                  Why do you love them so?

                  Do I detect a bit of intellectual dishonesty?

          • Martin,

            Those folk who seek out permission to earn a living can no way in hell claim they are under duress.

            Were they marched at gun point to city hall to get the permit?

            Fuck them. When they later realize they made a poor decision and their livelihood rests on the whim of some government official, they receive the consequences of their action.

            Besides, they can go to RG and arrange for free shit because they aren’t responsible for the decisions they have made.

            If you plug in a meat grinder, place your Johnson inside, and hit the switch, you will get the intended results.

            Later on, when the girls call you stubby, you can blame it on that fucking RK guy. After all it wasn’t your fault. RK wired the building.

            But I’m going to guess RK won’t be too concerned with being the fall guy. He’ll probably be servicing those girls that are now “out of your reach.”

        • Heh, yeah, RG- depends where ya are. In places like NY they fine and jail restaurant owners for not complying with the BS- but whether they are under such duress, or not (and they are not here where I live) should make no difference- I ain’t complying, no matter who orders it.

          If we lived among a population who had any regard for their liberty and self-respect, enough people would be boycotting places that enforce the Kabuki…and would have long ago abandoned the airports where obese TSA agents fester, that there would be such an outcry from stores and airlines that this BS would be repealed in a day.

          Ha! Glad that we agree!

          • Nunzio,

            “If we lived among a population who had any regard for their liberty and self-respect”

            And if wishes were horseshit, and horseshit were cookies, we’d never go hungry again.

  4. I thynk oui are in a Kilroy was here situation.

    Bigger than Great Wall of Walton Drugstores, Amazon & Ali Akbar Baba dotcom to name just two.

    Hear is the lichenly ark of covenants sole lutions being fever-esquely pre-ordered…

    or better still shame elders to hurry and die quicker so we can all wither this cry suss

      • Resquiatting in stücke online here since I don’t even remember. Merci beaux coup amigo.

        Your doppelschlamper most recently living in a 20 person hostal room in Playa Del Carmen named Selina

        Mexican President: Censorship in U.S. Is a New ‘Holy Inquisition’ To ‘Create a World Government’

        January 8, 2021
        Mexican President Andrés ML Obrador used his daily morning press briefing on Jan. 8 to warn the world that the censorship taking place in the U.S. is a danger for the world, a new “Holy Inquisition” designed to “create a world government with the power to control social networks, a world media power.” The exchange occurred in response to a question from journalist Daniel Marmolejo.

        A three-minute video excerpt of the exchange, subtitled in English, was played on today’s LaRouche Manhattan Project Meeting, hosted by The LaRouche Organization (TLO). That video can be found on the TLO YouTube channel and is transcribed below…

        Daniel Marmolejo: “With the desire to not only be on social networks and in the struggle, but also—since the social networks have owners and we’ve just seen how they create blackouts, and that there is also ‘info-demia,’ and that alternative communicators are also monitored and censored…

        President López Obrador: “What you have just correctly identified as a blackout, what they just did a few days ago in the U.S., is a bad sign, it’s a bad omen: that private companies decide to silence, to censor. That is an attack on freedom. So, let’s not be creating a world government with the power to control social networks, a world media power. And also a censorship court, like the Holy Inquisition, but in order to shape public opinion, that is really serious. Of course we have to be thinking about options, alternatives, because yes: I think that what happened a few days ago is a turning point regarding social networks. Then I read the letter of the owner of Facebook, and I thought it was really high-handed, very arrogant, speaking about their rules. And what ever happened to freedom and the right to information? And the role of the legally and legitimately constituted authorities?…

        “We should continue creating alternative media, so that it will always be allowed to inform the people, to guarantee the right to information. So that is how I answer your question.”

  5. eric, as soon as this bs runs its course, we’ll be pulling out collective hair out(well, I won’t have to do much pulling)over climate change, you know that really dangerous CO2. Rising seas, no oxygen to breath and all that falderal. It’s exactly the same lie as masks but it can hang on nearly forever…..if you want to ignore science.

    Almost every bit of both subjects are ways to rob the masses and give the rich much more power rapidly leading to the perfect 1984 totalitarianism probably Soylent Green style or maybe many variations.

    Before you get too involved in the subject, just remember it’s all going to be displaced by something else you can’t see. Of course, with CO2 anyone can buy a meter and check it till the proverbial cows come home and it’s going to stay the same. I used to wear a meter quite a bit in the patch but it served an acute purpose, measuring the lethal gas levels that might pop up at anytime, esp. around a well being drilled.

    I’m going to post this video everyone would be well-served to to watch and afterward, you might want to treat yourself to a good laugh by watching Idiocracy again.

      • T, looks that way. 2,000 years ago religions like the Catholic Church forbid people to look at the heavens and to speak of it. Galileo was jailed at one time for his studying of celestial bodies. Now there are some people saying we shouldn’t try to find out what all the UFO’s really are. It’s obvious they’re not all the same and the US and other govts. have known this since the craft went down with one being still alive in New Mexico. It’s not the only one where they’ve found aliens of different sorts. I don’t have time nor inclination to be scared of them. About 20 years ago the people who lived around Stephenville Texas , there was a period of time for at least a couple weeks everyone was taking pics and videos of UFO’s, seemingly all of the same looking type. There was no hushing it up they were so replete. Of course the govt. never let on they knew anything about them but it was folly to deny them. Many things end up in Area 51 where they try to reverse engineer the machines.

        Yep, it’s time to take everyone’s mind off covid and all the other bs and let the rumors fly as hard as they can. They’ll try to create as many cults and as much fear as possible. Pilots have been seeing them since their planes were good enough to have telescopic sights and cockpits where you could look around and enough power to reach heights such as they did back in WW11. Oh boy, something else to take our minds off being robbed.

        • 8,

          Just started listening to a podcast that came out this morning.

          Heavens Gate – (Eric must be in on the conspiracy)

          The UFOs that were promised to follow are now starting to arrive.

          I’m looking forward to serving our new alien overlords.

        • Hi 8,
          I’ve always been really skeptical about this belief that an extraterrestrial spacecraft crashed in Roswell or anywhere else on earth. Does it make any sense that an extraterrestrial species that developed the technology for interstellar travel would be so incompetent or careless that their spacecraft would crash? We’re hypothesizing here about a species that is light years ahead of us in technological development. So they are able to travel hundreds or thousands of light years across the stars to get here but can’t even navigate their ship to avoid crashing?

          • I agree with ya Martin.
            The Roswell thing was the beginning of one of next things that will come down the pike- It is a Psy-op to make people believe in UFOs by fomenting the idea that the government is trying to “cover-up their existence”.

            Hence ‘our’ Space Weather Agency and Space Force. Getting people to believe that (The whole world) are ‘under attack by aliens’ will be the final piece of the puzzle they will use to usher in the ‘New World Order’. The new and improved 9/11. And just like all of the other psy-ops….it’s been propagated in endless movies to get people used to the idea, and to program them as to how to react.

            • Hi Nunz,
              The more I’ve learned about astronomy, the more I’ve come to believe in the “rare earth” hypothesis. In other words, that our planet and solar system are a freak of nature, that planets that are suitable for the development of advanced life are extremely rare, that there are probably only a small handful of planets in the entire Milky Way galaxy that could ever develop advanced life.
              Our sun is exactly the right type of star. It is very stable and rotates very slowly. Earth is at exactly the right distance from the sun so that it has temperatures which support liquid water. Earth has exactly the right amount of water, neither too little or too much. Earth has a molten iron core that produces a magnetic field that protects the planet against high energy cosmic rays and the solar wind that would otherwise be damaging to life. And earth has a large satellite, our moon, that stabilizes the earth’s axial tilt, maintaining stable climates across the planets. It is believed that the very existence of our moon was a cosmic coincidence, caused by a protoplanet colliding with earth at just the right angle to create what became the moon. If an asteroid hadn’t collided with earth to destroy the dinosaurs about 65 million years ago, humans would probably never have come to be. All of these things had to happen for us to be here today. We are a giant, lucky cosmic freak of nature. We should rejoice in our good fortune in being here!

              • Hi Martin!

                I’ve been reading a book about this subject; one of its points – which I find persuasive – is a kind of tautology. The life that exists on Earth is exactly the type of life that can exist on Earth. Other worlds may have different types of life, a function of the chemistry and so on of those worlds. This is one reason why I am suspicious of “aliens” that are said to look much like us, on a smaller scale. Unless, of course, these aliens are our progenitors (Prometheus Hypothesis) which is certainly at least a plausible possibility.

                Mars, incidentally, seems to once upon a time have been blue, wet and much like Earth is now. Oceans, which require atmospheric pressure comparable to Earth’s, today. Of course, something (bad) happened to end all of that. But – apparently – if you went back in time far enough, there were two Earths orbiting our sun!

                • Hi Eric,
                  Actually, three Earths. I’ve read that Venus may have had an ocean at one time, perhaps several billion years ago. The sun has gotten hotter over the years, so going back in time, Venus may have had moderate surface temperatures that made it possible to have surface oceans. Unfortunately for Venus, as the sun got hotter, Venus experienced a runaway greenhouse effect that evaporated its water into space, turning it into the hellatious planet that it is today.

              • Hi Martin!
                Yes, whether one looks at the extant evidence as a naturalist, or, like myself, as a Creationist, we end up at the same destination- just with some differences as to how we got to that destination.

                When I was young I often pondered the idea which Eric mentioned- the possibility that there could be other forms of life elsewhere which could function in other environments- just as is the case on Earth- where there are creatures that can live underwater and or in extreme cold or heat- but it became obvious to me that while the earth teems with various forms of life, there is zero evidence of any life anywhere else in the wide expanses which men have devoted so much technology and money to studying.

                Even here on earth, it is becoming undeniably clear to any who make genuine honest inquiry, that life did not just spontaneously create itself. Just the complexity of even “simple” one-cell organisms and the vastness of what is now know of DNA has caused many true scientists to accept the likelihood of ‘intelligent design’.

                • Nunz, given the vast size of the universe we have not even begun to scratch the surface in searching for life elsewhere. There have been earth-like planets found orbiting other stars but we lack the technology to determine whether or not they contain living organisms.

                  Given the design of things like the prostate I’d say that what we’re looking at on earth is not-so-intelligent design. Possibly the leftovers of some cosmic high school science project that received the equivalent of a “C” grade. Perhaps some day we’ll run across what of one of the “A” students came up with.

                • Hi Nunz,

                  I almost never bet – unless I feel extremely confident I’ll win. So, here’s a bet: I say that evidence of at least microbial life will be found in Martian rocks; I’d also be willing to bet that there is life – right now – in the ocean… under the ice of Europa.

                  • “I say that evidence of at least microbial life will be found in Martian rocks”

                    It looks la lot like it was already back in 1976. They just tossed the results and came up with a rationalization for why it was not.

                    “settled science” (bullshit opinionism) has been with us for a very long time before the ‘Rona.


                    “As a result, none of the following missions over the next few decades carried any life detection experiments like Viking did”

                  • BTW, all assuming they are sampling on Mars and not just the middle of Greenland or Antarctica. There is some doubt.

                    If you were faking it, would you make any definitive claims? No, you would remain vague and cast doubt.

                    Also, once you have an answer, the checks that let you keep searching for it stop coming.

                    • Exactly, Anon!

                      It’s all based on presumption, conjecture, fakery, theories built upon other theories built upon other theories, and, most importantly, since space exploration and virtually all related fields and technologies are the sole province of government monopoly (The same people who maintain that some third-world numpties who had a few lessons in a Cessna brought down 3 building and the Pentagon on 9-11) anything they say should be taken with a huge grain of salt and as much confidence as the “official inflation” numbers.

                      They wheel-out the life/water/etc on Mars “discoveries” every few years…

                      Life in space! Brought to you by the makers of 911, COVID psychosis and Saddam’s WMDs!

                  • There are extremophile microorganisms that live in super cold and super hot (oceanic volcanic vents) climates on earth. But it takes more than water. You need organic/carbon sources to sustain a cell – oils/phospholipids, amino acids/proteins, sugars/carbohydrates, etc., as well as atmospheric and temperature conditions conducive for life-sustaining chemical reactions. And perhaps chlorophyll to make the little martian men green.

            • Morning, Nunz!

              My girlfriend thinks this is coming, too. The “UFO” scam. Remember when Ronald Reagan hinted at it, at the UN – IIRC – back in the day?

              • Oooo, no, Eric- I must’ve missed that Reagan thing! (I didn’t pay as much attention back then). But yeah, I’d say the whole things goes back a long ways….before they even started propagating “space” and “UFGOs” to the public in TV shows in the 50’s.

                Sounds like you got a “keeper” there!

          • Hi Martin,

            Here’s another scenario – more plausible, to me – regarding Roswell:

            The craft was of homegrown origin. Homegrown in Germany. The first “foo fighters” were sighted over occupied Europe; the Germans were not only working on but had developed and flown some very unconventional aircraft, including the Horten 229. An example survives. It is in the custody of the Smithsonian.

            There were serious plans for a batwing’d Horten intercontinental Amerikabomber. Beyond that are bits and pieces of info regarding disc-shaped craft using unconventional – unknown – forms of propulsion, possibly a gravity drive of some kind. The best book – in terms of being a serious book – on the subject is Nick Cook’s Hunt for the Zero Point.

            • Hi Eric,

              That sounds like a much more plausible theory.

              I’ve never heard of a gravity drive. As far as unknown forms of propulsion, if there have been any attempts at this, they have so far not borne any fruit. We are still using old fashioned chemical rockets.

              If you’ve ever watched Star Trek Deep Space 9, you will know what is the real explanation for Roswell. A Ferengi space ship from the 24th century traveled through time and crashed on Earth in Roswell in 1947. That’s what really happened!

              • Hi Martin,


                On the gravity drive: It’s more a gravity-negation/gravity wave drive. This would account for the unusual flying characteristics described, among other things. I recommend the Zero Point book. The Germans were working on “unconventional” physics and may have come up with something. It may have been co-opted by the U.S., too. There is a character – an SS general – by the name of Hans Kammler. He was put in charge of all “V” weapons and thus was a major figure in the Third Reich’s hierarchy. Yet he is practically unknown except among those who are interested enough in what may have been behind the curtain to try and have a look!

    • I’m confused. I thought CO (carbon monoxide) was the lethal gas that can be monitored. CO2 is used by plant in photosynthesis, with the exhaust from that process being that life-giving molecule, O2. We don’t hear about CO being an atmospheric problem.

      Granted, I’m not a chemist, just someone with common sense.

      • “I thought”

        Well you thought wrong!

        CO gives you that rosy glow of goodness.

        CO2 is an evil despicable thing that must be banished from the earth.

          • Anon, I was reading a medical research paper years ago about CO2 and oxygen. I don’t know if you’ve noticed but athletes now nose breathe. You won’t see anyone mouth breathing. The reason they would extend themselves to the bitter end to try to win and then stop and mouth breathe gasping for breath and die was because that messed up the amount of CO2 in their system causing immediate heart failure. All across sports now you won’t see mouth breathing. I stopped mouth breathing myself even when I wasn’t pushing myself to the limit. I used to do such as swing a 20 lb sledge sideways as long as I could to get a dual wheel off and axle on a tractor. I quit that and eventually found that a dose of Kano Kroil put on the situation and wait overnight would make things that had been stuck for decades turn loose.

            I came up on a friend and his dad and they were both wet from doing just what I described. They’d used every penetrating oil they could find and I stepped in and started being the 3rd person to bang that thing. I finally went to my truck and put Kano Kroil on it and told them to do something else the rest of the day(it was late already)and I’d help them in the morning. By the time I got there the thing was off and they were working on another. The only thing they said was “where did you get that stuff”(I need to order more)? Then I started seeing people everywhere using it. I’d never heard of it till I walked into the local farm supply and was looking for penetrating oil. The owner told me to try “this”. “This” turned out to be a gallon of Kano Kroil, very expensive now but it wasn’t back then. And they make all types of it. It will get into a millionth of an inch and stuff that’s been stuck for decades, like the lift bars on my tractor will come off.

            I was once a certified oxygen technician and I found out oxygen was the most addicting substance you could use. When people have to be put on oxygen for a long period of time, they have to have CO2 added back into the mix as they are tapered off. I was really surprised to find that out.

        • T, without CO2 there would be no life on earth. Even though it’s only .04% of the atmosphere, just a tiny rise will help the plants world-wide.
          I was just watching a video about it from the experts who have studied it over 50 years and studied the effect of it getting to be more of the atmosphere. Since the mini-ice age the earth has warmed(it needed to badly)and as it has the amount of vegetation has increased to a huge degree. Places that used to be desert are now covered in plants. The earth is greener than it’s ever been in the last millenium or maybe longer.

          • 8,

            “ without CO2 there would be no life on earth.”

            Exactly why this vile life giving substance must be banned!

  6. Before any government mask mandates, some businesses required them, others did. Small local stores made their own choices, and so did consumers.

    Major national retailers (I work for one) were teetering on the edge of public opinion. Some consumers were demanding masks (and gloves), while an equal number rejected them.

    Everyone held their breath, until the big dog made the first move: Walmart mandated masks, and within 3 days every major national retailer followed suit.

    That preceded most (all?) government mandates, and now that many state mandates are ending, the majors are keeping their policies in place.

    It’s clearly not fear of government mandates. The legal department bean counters are afraid of lawsuits.

    • Then it sounds like it’s time to sue them all anyway and get their worst fears over with so we can get on with our lives.

  7. Also it’s not even about private property y’all are crazy as hell for bringing this up all the time.

    They are hiding behind local/state rules, if you read the signage and hear the in-store radio they are pushing this propaganda under color of law.

    Demanding people restrict their fuckin oxygen and stew in their own bacteria and CO² in order to conduct business, speaks to a way bigger issue than could ever be made of trespassing.

  8. Fuck school, get money 😎

    Shouldn’t be falling for that college degree bs we’ve long known it’s a waste of time and hard earned cash.

    Tell em they can shove both the carrot and the stick right up their pedo peeholes, get yourself some industry certifications and network with real humans, learn a trade, and never look back.

  9. This is of a piece with Eric’s post “Closing Our Doors.” Let’s not argue the issue but rather take the private property argument to its logical conclusion and restore the right to free association.

    • Exactly! Their heads would explode if this happened, where businesses began to exclude those they didn’t like, and allowed smoking indoors, etc.

      Customers would still have the option to go or not to go…and businesses would have the right to reject service. I still remember the signs that used to be up in stores “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.”

      No more half-measures. Either private property owners have exclusive control over their property, or they are minions of the state.

  10. Our daughter just finished her first year at college. The school made her sign a paper that she would get a “vaccine” “if it became available,” but didn’t force it. However, she just told me her friend @ college just got her second jab, and didn’t feel well afterwards. Daughter says she would take the jab, despite my warnings and her friend’s experience, as well as the 0% risk of NOT taking it.

    Today we tried to pick up carryout at a local grass-fed burger place that we had heard was good. There is no dining in, and their order window has a lengthy sign about how “since everyone hasn’t been vaccinated yet, they must require [masks] to be worn in order to place an order. We hope you understand they’re just doing their job, blah blah.”

    Walked up barefaced, were asked to wear masks as promised, said “we don’t need it that bad” and walked away. This diaper mandate is NOT based on a reasoned, logical choice. However, we exercised our own choice to not give them our money.

    I’m thinking everyone from the top down that has created and maintained this satanic scam should roast in hell.

  11. **”What can you do, not go to school? It sucks.”**

    That is EXACTLY what such psy-ops are intended to do- make you think that ‘resistance is futile’ so you may as well submit if you want to play in their stupid game and win stupid prizes. But why would one want to, anyway?

    Go to college to acquire a huge debt and be drilled full of leftist ideology, only to have to spend most of the rest of your life being a tax slave and living where the cost of living is very high (“Because that’s where the jobs are”), assuming that one can even get a decent job in their chosen field? Yeah, fun…

    Most plumbers make more than most college grads; most self-employed/gray-market types are far happier and live just as well (and usually better). Avoiding the rat-race and staying free of these manipulative bastards who desire to control every aspect of our lives is a true path to happiness.

    If it’s education one wants, between the internet and cheap and easy accessibility to books, today is a veritable paradise for the would-be egghead! Instead of just hearing the viewpoint of one professor on a given subject, one can hear many viewpoints, and pick and choose which seem the most credible and align with their own values and outlook and style of learning.

    The very fact that a school would require one to accept a questionable unproven vaccine and to wear a mask which does absolutely nothing to curtail the spread of a disease which poses virtually no threat to college-age people should be enough to dissuade anmyone of the idea any true education or science is being conducted at such an institution that would blatantly promote such utter nonsense and antiscience.

    The main things taught in schools are conformity and submission, and the OP’s comment is proof of how eager some are to accept those things and give up their most precious liberty for what amounts to nothing but a lifetime of servitude to a system which demands conformity and submission.

  12. Oh, and I forgot about the shots that colleges are requiring. The answer isn’t to stop going to school, it’s to sue their asses off! You can’t mandate a medical procedure that hasn’t been approved by the FDA. The shots are only authorized under EUA. And of course you can transfer. I would.

      • Myles,

        This is my concern. I expect we are going to see a fast tracked ruber stamp for the “vax” where normally its 3 to 10 years to receive approval this time it will be approved in like 10 months. That will open it to court challenges though, but we all know how that will go.

        • JUST. SAY. NO.

          Don’t care if it’s “approved,” “validated,” “tested,” or any other label. It is poison no matter what they call it.

          NO is the only practical weapon you’ve got.

  13. I would go one step further. Does the sign at the entrance say that they’re requiring muzzles/diapers/masks because of local or state laws? Then they’re lying, and the sign can be safely ignored (there are no laws in most (all?) states, only executive orders). Does the sign “request” that you wear a face diaper? Then you simply deny the request. Does the sign state that they’re acting according to the governor’s diktat? Then familiarize yourself with the “executive order” decreeing such and see what the exceptions are, then exercise your right to live under the exceptions. If they’re doing it because they choose to (including because company HQ orders the store to do so)? Then find somewhere else to shop. No, OP, you don’t have to wear the muzzle.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here