Teachers in Denver, Colorado have recently taken to the streets of the state Capitol to call for increased pay, i.e., for a greater mulcting of the taxpayer. They are supposedly “underpaid,” and the greedy

If your average folk's argument of "why are we spending one-trillion dollars on the military when X people are Y" were taken all the way to see that all government action is at the expense of

Not Fascism: Self-ownership of body; Private property via original appropriation; Non-Aggression; Anti-statism; Freedom of association; Decentralization; Secession; Exclusion as a right (discrimination)

For the most part, socialists really only make normative economic statements (i.e., “the government should do X [raise the minimum wage]”) and not positive economic propositions (i.e., “government policy

Why doesn't every non-vote count, should be the question? A majority of the population—more than 200 million people—did not vote for either candidate! Approximately less than 20% of the total population

It was when I adopted the principles of liberty—namely that of self-ownership and non-aggression—that I feel I liberated myself, my mind, and became a changed person. Aside from the personal freedom I

Almost everyone thinks that self-defense is a natural right. We cheer when we see a bank robber get blasted by the private security guard upon entry into a bank; or when the purse-snatcher is thwarted

Socialists have no concept of opportunity costs in economics, and no one should assume they would anyway. If government "creates jobs", they don't reason that it must come at the expense of something

I really don't know, but even if there was I can see no reason why governments—of course huge polluters themselves as plunderers of stolen resources for their war machines and other such adventurism; a

There is no "reforming government", such as having term limits, to adjusting the tax-code, or voting for better politicians next time, etc. You can't polish a turd; it has to be flushed. If your

In fact, it's the only way you can be either. Anarchism and capitalism have the same definition to me: the lack of political authority that gives a legalized means of initiating aggression against private

The State's crimes rest fully upon public opinion; on the people's support of its aggression as moral and just invasions of property rights. Usually attached to this thought is that such actions – of violently

There's no time here to go at length into the atrocities committed by the U.S. Military around the world, in the name of "making the world safe for democracy", or supposedly protecting Americans

We might wonder if socialists actually think socialism (as characterized by invasions of private property in the form of taxes, regulations, price-controls, or nationalization, etc.) can create more wealth

When arguing for something other than libertarianism, one is caught in a spot where they're demonstrating that, in fact, they do accept the ethic of non-aggression by respecting the private property rights

Well, it's nothing special. It's the start to what I want to turn into a local print-publication. I thought linking it, and maybe it getting a few hits, would help expose it in Google better. Thanks for

There’s little space here to contend that taxation is morally indefensible, though I’d argue it’s patently coercive and that the State rests upon aggression, and no sort of voluntary “social contract.”

The State is not going anywhere, and anarchists would be good to recognize this. They're unlike a private business that one may boycott and watch its demise. They of course don't operate on voluntary payments,

What year is it? People are talking about border taxes, i.e., tariffs; or, in the statist-to-English translation, the government preventing you from freely trading with others to both of your mutual benefit

It's inauguration day, and Donald Trump has been elected to head the American Empire, the biggest State the world has ever seen. As so, a fine quote by the prolific liberty-lover, H.L. Mencken, is finally