I Want Nothing to do with Pitch Perfect 3


Is PP3 F—ing Kidding Me With This Blah Blah Blah!?

I promise my reasons are not about me being political

Instead, it is the movie trailer itself that is overtly occupied with politics. Hollywood is not even trying to hide its bias against liberalism, and for anti-liberal Marxism, anymore. And the Pitch Perfect Three trailer is unconditionally evidence to prove this fact of life. I will be describing this trailer in objective & neutral detail to everyone as I am not wanting anyone to have any incentive to go see the movie it’s advertising.

What I saw in the first trailer

So, like 20 seconds in they are painting far-left radical marxist lies about Western Culture as reality. First was the lie that no Westerner believes women can win at anything but culinary arts. Then was the lie that white privilege and thin privilege are somehow realities. And they topped this 20 seconds off with the lie that women are systemically oppressed in aspiring to be surgeons. So I count my blessings that this triple-dishonesty painting of theirs didn’t give me AIDS. Next, we see the one of the protagonists who is not slim wearing a red hat that says ‘Make America Eat Again’. Like my god… I can write good jokes, and real satire, that even teen girls would prefer over this trash! How on Earth do I not have a depressed skull fracture from having seen this vile film trailer, again? And as for the trailer’s side of this story, how is it not overtly occupied with far-left partisan tribalism again?

What I make of the trailer

As someone who more often doesn’t mind dumb looking trailers, this trailer is way too stupid for me to have any respect for human life if it even makes One Dollar off people seeing it. I genuinely hope this movie’s theatrical turn out puts all involved in its creation into irrevocable and unsustainable monetary debt to the world around them!

And if there are any actors and/or actresses in this ‘Pitch Tribalism Three’ as I call it, who are tremendously talented who are in this upcoming garbage… You guys are murdering no-one’s public image but yours by doing this movie. And if you lose your careers to this movie then…

Know I will be seeing to it you cannot restore due to newer, at-least-as-well-acting actors and actresses taking over the acting market in place of you. I will adamantly oppose any sympathy being directed at you for this movie having ended your respective careers.

What People should watch instead (this is the part where and when I cheer you readers and also myself up)

Guys and Gals, why not come to my Vid.me channel and follow it while I post videos there every Thursday, every Friday and every Saturday? I will be posting there starting this very week and I will do the recordings for it Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays. There are four shows you can see therefore I will have, when Hollywood is poisoning the Christmas Well at theaters with the infernal trash I talked about above, Four Christmas Specials. These shows are (genre in brackets):

  • Free Society Diary (Politics)
  • Battle for Middle-Derp (Gaming)
  • Militant Evolutionist (Brainfood)
  • Cloth N Cook (Lifestyle)

And the Christmas Specials (CS) will be as follows:

  • Free Society Diary CS = “How the Saudi King Stole Christmas!”
  • Battle for Middle-Derp CS = “Durin’s Bane the Snowman!” (featuring re-textured Balrog!)
  • Militant Evolutionist CS = “Merry Saturnalia, fellow Christmas Lovers!”
  • Cloth N Cook CS = “Forging Santa’s Workshop out of meat alone”

So please, look forward to those! Thanks in all my readers!

~KSP Perkins


Interrogating neolibertarianism as a neolibertarian myself


As I want nothing to do with the idiocy summed up here, I am going to interrogate my own political ideology.

First off, what is neolibertarianism?

Basically, it is perhaps the most poorly understood sector in the entire doctrine of free will. In other words, it is the least understood line of thinking within the ‘free enterprise & civil rights first’ line of thinking. I am trying to avoid referencing any other labels besides neolibertarian in this post for the same reason I am doing this post in the first place. To question my own beliefs, and to reveal to everyone at the end of this post that even my own political ideology ~ neolibertarianism ~ does not agree with me on everything!

What is it though!?

Okay, okay. A neolibertarian like me is basically a libertarian who advocates the assertive promotion of capitalism and individual liberty in world affairs by both diplomatic means and military means alike. This basically makes us similar to but different from the neoconservatives due to the difference between democratic peace theory vs capitalist peace theory. Plus our contrast to neocons is due to the difference between democracy and liberty, and also the difference between defending interests and defending individual rights.

Okay, now I can get into the meaning of this post

Select Smart. This post I would like to deem tribute to them as they are the folks to credit for my awareness of this label. I learned this label in 2010 and had no idea that it was the exact word for who I am politically as of 2008 when I saw the history of dictatorship barbarism across human history. Learning this history made me doubt the idea that human nature is in any way totally good! But yes, I had no idea this label existed until 2010 when Select Smart filled me in on it.

However, are there other differences between myself vs what I can learn from select smart about my ideology? Yes! There just so happen to be!

Firstly, I have found that my support for replacing our current national tax system with just a national sales tax is not the norm in my ideology. Instead the tax policy norm of neolibertarianism is a flat tax wherein all citizens are taxed equally.

Secondly, I apparently conflict with my own ideology on unilateralism. Basically, I believe that every free society should only be duty-bound to its own citizens. For example I think America has a duty to defend me, no matter who’s soil I’m on, but Britain and Israel only have rights to defend me this globally but not duties. And also because I find it immoral to promote respect for the laws or the sovereignties of nations who flagrantly use terrorism, genocide, torture and slavery as means of exerting dominance over any human being.

Thirdly, there is the minimum wage thing. Personally, as a working class person in terms of gross income, I look at proposals for Living Wage like this. If we are going to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, then that I deem will require these six economic policies to be enacted first.

End of Post

Thanks for reading, but I suspect I will find more to disagree with everything and everyone but me on, my own ideology included!

~KSP Perkins

How to Fix Failing Schools? It’s a Multi Step Process, But Here Is How!


All this cosmic beauty. And kids are not learning about it. This’s only one problem schools in general tend to have these days.

Why I am Posting this

Basically, I am someone who believes bigger education spending does not inherently mean higher quality education. I also refuse to believe that education spending cuts do any harm to educational institutions. Instead I think the reality is that all government can do to education without damaging the national average IQ is make K-12 mandatory for all children. Yes, there is a stark difference between this mandate versus directing curriculums and budgets.

Socialists Censor the Nuance between Government and Culture

I will get this right out of the way right off the bat. Just because I want government role in education limited to just mandating K-12 for all does NOT pit me against the very idea of education! You see, socialists and statists and various other sorts of Far Left Anti-liberalism activists censor all they can about the nuance between government and society. They will make the argument that “Oh, you don’t want kids to be smart” or “You would rather kids go to church than school” or “You think only rich people should be allowed an education”. Notice how none of these mainstream arguments by the Far Left have anything to do with facts and instead are venomously fixated on emotion.

The other day I saw this video on someone’s Facebook wall about Trump’s education budget plan. Now, the arguments they make in this video I suspect are mostly lies. It was a video by a mostly lying activist club called The Other 98%. So, of course I doubted all of their emotional, put-words-in-our-dissenter’s-mouth arguments they make about why Trump’s secretary of whatever is cutting budgets and emphasizing private schools.

And that is exactly the favorite way of socialists to censor their opposition. Putting words in their dissenters’ mouths.

On to the actual topic at hand!

Frankly, there is broad consensus on the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development that bigger education budget does not inherently mean better performance. Using my great country America as the example, America has done better in the PISA when its government spendings on education were at their lowest. For example, in 2000 when government spending on ed was $54 billion, Science score was 15th highest in the world. Then in 2003 when government spending on ed jumped to $83 billion, the Science score for our country plummeted to 22nd in the world. Next, raising education spending to $89 billion in 2006 lowered our Science score in PISA to 29th on Earth. In 2009, Education Spending by Government lowered to $45 billion, therefore education quality (the science score) jumped to 23rd. Lastly in 2012 when government spending on education hiked to $106 billion the PISA score for the USA in Science lowered to 28th on Earth.

So basically the more involvement government has in education besides mandating K-12 for all, the worse students perform. Now what’s so great about mandating K-12? If that’s the only power in education government has, then it cannot set the curriculum for teachers, instead parents set it. Plus, given this, parents will voluntarily pay the teachers and the smarter students get, the higher teachers are paid. This is known as freedom of education, a system where for the K-12 part parents can choose to have their students educated in accordance with their secular or religious moralities. What about college?

So far as I can tell, college age is when it can be and should be entirely up to the student to choose what specific classes they want to pay for. And as someone looking to go to a community college, I can assure you I want to be able to choose which courses to go to. I would love to be able to pay for classes in Geology, Geography, Biology and Environment. As you can tell by this external link, I wish to take those classes and become a paleontologist.

Why it matters to be able to pay according to quality of teaching

Basically, if government is able to steal money from a worker’s paycheck and dump it onto teachers then teachers will have no incentive to care how their students perform. Therefore students will have no incentive to care about their grades!

Meanwhile, if education funding is a matter of parents buying for their students the courses the students themselves want, then teachers are under the best scrutiny for students to see their teachers under: parental scrutiny.

That means if the teachers do not teach well then the student’s performance will reflect that, and the parent will demand and get refund and pick a different teacher for her kid to learn the same course material from.

Does there need to be an Education industry equal to Yelp, Meta Critic, IMDB etc?

Why, I do think this idea will be a requirement for full freedom of education! Frankly this is because the right to make honest reviews of products and services is not a niche feature. Meaning it is not a non-universal feature, instead the ability to make reviews is (or should be) around for every consumer for every industry.

And if you think no-one will punish bad service under total freedom of education, then that’s how I know the concept of customer feedback is unconditionally foreign to you! Because if I go to buy a school book from Amazon, for example, and the most up-voted review is a one or two star review that says things like these;

  • It’s heavily biased to far left or far right politics
  • It’s brazenly blurring religion and science
  • It’s filled cover to cover with basic scientific errors

Then I do not buy that school book! Simple as that. Thanks!

~KSP Perkins

The Non-Aggression Principle’s Biggest Flaw Is Purely A Terminological Error.


I look at this and then I look at the LP pledge… and I’m all like… what?

I see this Terminological Error as mostly on the Libertarian Party’s War Doves

Hello again other humans. I am your Cheshire CT neighborhood fiscally conservative and socially humanist independent thinker, Perkino. Basically I have been reflecting for quite some time on what I make of the Non-Aggression Principle. I don’t think I need to type the definition by words that WordPress will deem as part of the word count. And frankly my rationale is… well, look at my image choice above please and thank you.

Aggression as defined by the English Language vs Aggression as defined by Antiwar Activists

Eh… here goes something that might cost me custody of the Cheshire Libertarian Town Committee 😂 which I built online by my own Facebook account. I hope this case I am going to make will not but I suspect that it will. Anyhow, time for utmost intellectual honesty.

So basically the only thing stopping me from signing the aptly named ‘Libertarian Pledge’ is that it plays by a purely pacifistic definition of ‘aggression’. Here is their made-up definition;

  • Any use of force to achieve any political or social goal

Whereas…. if you look at the mainstay definition that currently all of Western Civilization, the only systemically libertarian and morally civilized culture in humanity, you see (or at least I see) an intrinsically different definition.

  • Unprovoked use of forceful action to dominate or to destroy another

Unlike the LP War-dove definition of aggression; the Western Cultural definition of aggression accounts not just for reality itself but also for a few other Western Cultural definitions. Two of them relevant to the focus of this online diary of mine.

  1. Right of Self-Defense: The right of the individual or the nation to use force to defend the lives of self and of other individuals or foreign societies, including the use of deadly force.
  2. Intervention: The behavior of using hinderance, obstruction and/or modification to change a process and/or a future.

What Does the NAP Allow & Forbid by Western Cultural Definition of the word ‘aggression’?

Okay, let’s start with what’s allowed.

Basically every lifestyle that does not involve unprovoked actions of intentional violence is allowed. No matter how revealing the attire, no matter how risky the form of athleticism, no matter how little known the morality.

What’s also allowed under this meaning of the NAP is buying raw bits for crafting and for resale of them as artsy crafts. Another economic behavior allowed under this dialect of the NAP is organized religions and secular moralities peacefully competing with each other for subscribers in accordance with the laws of supply and demand. Well, peacefully until someone does unprovoked acts of force with the intent of dominating and/or destroying.

Which leads into what’s not allowed.

Sexual violence against people for dressing revealingly for their free time is existentially not allowed. Another thing that’s not allowed is medically damaging actions against one’s own kids and/or against one’s own pets. And yes, my membership of the Austin Petersen freedom ninja army opens my eyes to legions of stories about pet abuse that do sicken me, greatly.

Now; time for puzzle games!

Puzzle games? Yeah, allow me to make up names for the purposes of these puzzle games, without care for if the names are real or not.

  1. Derpy decides he is going to hijack a construction worker’s bulldozer to tear down the office of a computer game modding club because he cannot understand how PC game mods can possibly qualify as a legit hobby. Has Derpy been provoked into needing to use force? No. Has Derpy used force? Yes. Was Derpy using force to pull off a political goal? No. Was Derpy using force to pull off a social goal? Yes. Was the social goal to dominate and destroy another? Yes.
  2. Jorgon is walking down the sidewalk on her way home from her town’s local coffee shop. She is right about to hit the button to be allowed by the traffic lights to safely cross the street when some sporty dude attacks her. His goal regarding Jorgon is to sexually assault her so hard as to literally kill her, and Jorgon’s defense against this is to whip out a huge pocket knife and decapitate her attacker with it. Now, has Jorgon been provoked into needing to use force? Yes. Has Jorgon used force? Yes. Was Jorgon using force to pull off a political goal? No. Was Jorgon trying to pull off a social goal? Yes. Was that social goal to dominate or destroy another? No!

No more puzzle games. Time for wrap up

Basically I am someone you can expect to tell the Libertarian Pledge to go f— itself in its current wording. Primarily when you’re talking about a tyrannical nation whose regime has totally nothing (or almost nothing) to do with free market capitalism. And when you’re talking about a nation of this nature posing even a latent threat of future attack on American civilians, so too do I keep telling the LP pledge’s current wording to lick a d—. However, that’s not to say that the wording can’t be changed. In fact, based on the terminological content about Western Cultural definitions, I say the LP pledge can and must be re-worded. Into something like this.

  • I certify that I oppose the unprovoked use of force to dominate or destroy any behaviorally harmless entity.

That’s all I got on the NAP. Byyyee!

~KSP Perkins

The Policy Agenda of the Libertarian Defense Atheist Page 1 Economic Liberty


My banner here and on the social media platform Minds

Economic Freedom

Separation of Economy and State

There should be a constitutional right to economic freedom modeled on the first amendment, and I recognize it needs to be a constitutional amendment imposed overnight and that such recognition is unconditional realism. This 28th Amendment should read like this.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of currency, or prohibiting the free banking thereof, or abridging the free enterprise, or of the markets; or the right of the people to freely trade overseas, and to petition the Government to address acts of fraud, theft or force initiated by any private corporations.

Liberty Focused Energy Policy

I wish to see an end to all subsidies for green energy and especially for fossil fuel, and I also support an end to EPA monopoly on producing environmental policies. Let paleontologists like the one I’ll be in my 30’s, ecologists and other environmental scientists be the people who warp energy consumers into favoritism toward green alternatives by one means and one means only: Authoring and selling books and other media in favor of Clean Energy.

Freedom Based Climate Policy

Just like I say on energy policy, government should not be involved in the market for climate change clean-up efforts and Pro-green activism. That is a market that only environmental scientists to engage in, and even so only by doing what scientists do best; independently researching but also authoring and selling books, documentaries and other media about what’s wrong with the atmosphere superheating as it is.

Labor Markets and Job Creation

I desire a 29th Amendment that reads exactly like this:

A work ethic based wage standard, being necessary to reward workers proportionally to how productive they are, shall not be set by any other authority than a department manager; just as well the freedom of contract and right to work shall not be limited by any authority, corporate or governmental.

In other words, I desire constitutionally ingrained economic freedom including in the context of bilateral agreements between department manager and working member of the department.

Charity Instead of Welfare

I would like to see total privatization of the industry called Non profit Charity. Because you are not being charitable if you put a gun to a harder worker’s head and command them to share a portion of their larger earns with a lazier worker. Charity is a product of empathy!

Decentralized Social Security

I desire the right to total control of my own retirement funding. And I wish to be able to fund it in my very own debit card account. That’s just one reason of many I bought a Visa NetSpend card sometime ago.

Freedom of Education

I want parents to be able to send their offspring to whichever schools they want without having to move. My parents had to move with me to Cheshire because both Cheshire and New Haven city governments were, and still are, allowed to take all students from within their respective local societies no matter how poorly they perform, and Cheshire was far less terrible in terms of treatment of people like me who have Asperger’s. Instead public schools should be privatized and forced to be efficient by the laws of supply and demand! This way there is no maltreatment of my own and it becomes about actual education.


I want to see full and total repeal of Obama Care, Medicaid and Medicare and replacement of them with a 30th amendment that mandates freedom of medical choice.

Congress shall make no law respecting a mandate to buy private healthcare, or prohibiting the voluntary purchase of private healthcare; or limiting the freedom of choice regarding insurance, or regarding medicine or hospital, including to pay the Government user fees, instead of taxes, for a public option.


Blame and eliminate the welfare state for the problems people are having these days with the idea of freedom of movement. We need not blame the immigrants for coming here dishonestly because if you were fleeing a Sharia based hell pit then why not cross the fence? No one ever fled to escape from classical liberalism, okay people? However I do know the need to secure all borders, which is why I call for criminal and medical checks, for finishing the fence and for having immigrants take US English and US Civics classes for 4 years before becoming citizens.

Public Finance in a Neolibertarian Regime

What’s a neolibertarian regime? I will explain that in part here and far more in page 3 and maybe also page 2, but in the mean time I will explain it is a post 9/11 offshoot of fiscal libertarianism. And I cannot think of more fiscally libertarian ways to build up public finance than to have government charge user fees, royalties, rental contracts, and concession contracts; for lotteries, public services, and tourism to national monuments; added with sale of raw materials to governments of other OECD members.

Next Time…

I am going to talk about Personal Liberty and then my final page in this trilogy will be Strategic Defense. I will even explain in Page 3 what ‘neolibertarian regime’ means! In the mean time I need people signing onto giving $1.75 monthly donation, so I can continue to make this blog better and also buy a currently on sale domain name to plant the seeds of neolibertarian journalism.

Islamic Nationalism is NOT Compatible with Libertarian Principles


Truth about the ‘coexist’ signs and how naive they all are.

Islamic Nationalism is Not a friend of Libertarianism, anyone who says otherwise at present is dangerously naive.

Opening disclaimer: this is mainly meant to rally the Liberty movement against the Islamic Nationalist threat, but to do this the Liberty movement needs to understand the source material of that brand of religious Nationalism. I fully support the right of muslims to exercise their freedom of religion and to abide by their religion’s rules all they want but this right does not include the right to force any specific organized religion onto other people.

And obviously there’s 12 libertarian principles but I had to pick 3.

What the Koran Teaches About the NAP

What, the Non-Aggression Principle? Yeah, that’s the idea that fraud and theft are inherently wrong and that force may only be used in self-defense or defense of others. Very simple idea, as far as I am concerned, some alternate names out there like the Anti-Coercion Law, for one. But what does the Islamic Faith teach about the initiation of force to achieve social and political goals?

That’s right, the faith teaches its followers, in reference to skeptics of the faith, to ‘kill them wherever you find them‘, and this is right there in the passage called Sura 191 to 193. Bill Maher, the only left-wing comedian in mainstream media who truthfully understands Islam for what it currently is, notes in debate with Ben Affleck (six minutes; thirty seconds into the video I linked to) that Islam is the ‘Only religion that acts like the mafia, in that it’ll —- kill you, if you speak the wrong opinion, draw the wrong picture or write the wrong book!‘ This Koranic teaching does not sit well with the NAP.

What the Koran Teaches of Free Enterprise

In his book The Failure of Political Islam, meaning on page 132, Oliver Roy explains how the recent Islamic Nationalist movement demands economic nationalism, which means a religiously fanatical hybrid of protectionism with mercantilism. Such a hybrid was and is intended by these religious fanatics to create a Mixed market economic system.

In other words, the Koran teaches that a mixed economy, meaning one that’s a middle ground between marxist leninism and free enterprise, is infallible. This Koranic teaching does not sit well with the principle of Free Enterprise.

What the Koran Teaches on LGBT Rights

Basically, the Koranic holy book does not just label LGBTQ orientations an abomination but also calls it a cancerous polyp to be punished with the meanest deaths one can inflict onto another.

I really don’t think I need to tell you this has no room whatsoever, this Koranic teaching, for Marriage Privatization, and I can guarantee that as someone who’s into the idea of Separation of Marriage and State.

What Do Unaltered Opinion Polls Say?

Polling on organized religion, when it comes to wanting Sharia to be the law of the planet, aka espousing Islamic Statism, unveils that whether the majority of a Muslim majority country is with us Libertarians or with the Islamic Statists varies on an individualistic, nation by nation basis.

In Southeast Europe and Central Asia the polling on Sharia being Law of the Planet goes something like this.

  1. Kosovo 80% Opposed to Sharia; 20% Supportive of Sharia; +60 Friend of Libertarianism of the United States
  2. Bosnia 85% Opposed; 15% Supportive; +70 Friend
  3. Albania 88% Opposed; 12% Supportive; +76 Friend
  4. Kyrgyzstan 65% Opposed; 35% Supportive; +30 Friend
  5. Tajikistan 73% Opposed; 27% Supportive; +46 Friend
  6. Turkey 88% Opposed; 12% Supportive; +76 Friend
  7. Kazakhstan 90% Opposed; 10% Supportive; +80 Friend
  8. Azerbaijan 92% Opposed; 8% Supportive; +84 Friend

But in muslim majority nations in Southeast Asia, South Asia, Middle East, and North Africa; the sway goes more like this.

  1. Malaysia 86% Supportive; 14% Opposed; +72 Enemy
  2. Indonesia 72% Supportive; 28% Opposed; +44 Enemy
  3. Afghanistan 99% Supportive; 1% Opposed; +98 Enemy
  4. Pakistan 84% Supportive; 16% Opposed; +68 Enemy
  5. Bangladesh 82% Supportive; 18% Opposed; +64 Enemy
  6. Iraq 91% Supportive; 9% Opposed; +82 Enemy
  7. Palestinian 89% Supportive; 11% Opposed; +78 Enemy
  8. Morocco 83% Supportive; 17% Opposed; +66 Enemy
  9. Egypt 74% Supportive; 26% Opposed; +48 Enemy
  10. Jordan 71% Supportive; 29% Opposed; +42 Enemy
  11. Tunisia 56% Supportive; 44% Opposed; +12 Enemy
  12. Lebanon 71% Opposed; 29% Supportive; +42 Friend

And with regards to supporting or opposing Koranic Law on LGBT people, on free markets and on Anti-Coercion Principle; the patterns go roughly similarly to this.

Is American Foreign Policy to Blame for this?

Absolutely not. Yes, it’s stupid of us to go on Wars of Democracy Promotion against secular tyrannies to feign a dependence on foreign oil! But that has nothing to do with why Islamic Nationalist regimes like Saudi Arabia sponsor terrorism against us, Sorry Blowback Theorists but blowback theory is inherently trashy lies.


Thanks everyone for reading this input of mine, and if you like intellectually honest content in general, then for you to sign onto donating $1.75 per month to my site would allow me, if I get 15 or more donors, to upgrade my website enough to start uploading podcasts & videos directly to this website. Thanks again;


Cults of Personality vs True Libertarians


Bro, can you even liberty?

The Ron Paul and Gary Johnson fanatics who are sometimes called “PaulBots” and “Johnsonites” respectively are NOT libertarian!

Most people among both the left and the right tend to associate libertarian philosophy with the cult of personality of Ron Paul, and sometimes the philosophy of Gary Johnson.

But I am going to take you, reader, on an intellectual journey about how Cult of Persona and libertarian ideology are in fact puritanically antonyms. I am going to use Merriam Webster English dictionary to define the ideological terms you are about to learn, and whenever Merriam Webster refuses to give me a definition I am going to fall back on Dictionary.com, using Wikipedia only as a Plan C.

What is a Libertarian?

  • A person who advocates free will and upholds principles of individual freedom especially of thought and action.
  • This means that if you do not uphold principles of individual freedom in thought and in action, and people who obsess on blood oath to Ron Paul or Gary Johnson and demand closed mindedness to any other influencers, then you are not a libertarian.

Principles of Individual Freedom?

Yes, principles of individual freedom include, with regard to thought and action:

  1. The right to express one’s very own individual opinions freely
  2. The right of journalism hubs to report the news without being controlled by any outside authority
  3. The right to choose what religious or secular morality to follow and abide by the rule of without external interference
  4. The right of individual humans to travel from place to place within the atmosphere of the planet, including the right to change one’s workplace and residence
  5. The opportunity to make a choice based on two or more options (i.e. clothing options in summers), without outside interference.
  6. The freedom of a merchant to organize and operate for profit in systemic competition with only enough government oversight to stop fraud, theft & force
  7. The right to trade along with the unrestricted planetary exchange of goods with only enough government oversight to stop fraud, theft and force
  8. The right to economically operate freely by competing with other merchants or other laborers
  9. The right of workers to gain and keep their jobs without having to unionize if they do not wish to unionize
  10. The right for a person to use defensive force, deadly or otherwise, to defend the life of oneself and/or the lives of others
  11. The right to not be killed by another individual for as long as one abstains from fraud, theft and force

Is there a limit to all this in libertarianism?

Why yes there absolutely is, and I call it the Anti-Coercion Law, the idea that

  1. any behavior fitting in any of the three categories called fraud, theft and force is automatically evil but
  2. the individual or nation is free to use force for self-defense or for defense of others

Last Words of this Post

Basically if you do not uphold the, in total, twelve principles named or described above, including for people you do not agree with on foreign policy or climate change or abortion or gay marriage or whatever, then you are not a libertarian by any dictionary meaning in the English language.

Thanks everyone for reading this, I know some might have been thinking this would be longer but I try to keep every post I do 600 words or fewer. Also if you want me to post my reviews of novels, games and other media directly relevant to this blog than please earn your right to see me do that with the $1.75 per month subscription button below.


Just So I Am Clear For All of 2017… And I am Only doing one post like this every year.


Alternate version I did of someone else’s LOTR Morgoth painting with an AP4LP Make Taxation Theft Again Hat.

Pay Undivided attention to this post of mine because I am not doing several similar posts again this year! Only one time.

Last year, as in I am referring to Twenty Sixteen, I have done at least ten posts like this one across that year explaining what I believe and how much I know about reality.

This is not to prove anyone in particular wrong about anything but rather it is to prevent false rumor from being spread about what I believe as well as how much I know and of course I will be doing another post like this at every starter of every year until I pass away of… probably old age.

What I Believe

The Principles

I believe in an honest and simple approach to every single political issue there is to debate over and offer solutions to. I abide by five very simple principles and base my every political belief on them.

  1. On social issues and culture, individual freedom is the best thing ever.
  2. On power structure and regime, Western democracy is the best thing ever.
  3. On public finance and economy, economic freedom is the best thing ever.
  4. On foreign policy as in diplomats and merchants, OECD members spreading freedom across the world is the best thing ever.
  5. On defense policy as in soldiers, caring purely and only about victory against the tyranny who attacked on its turf is the best thing ever.

Other than the above, my principles are strictly my own batch of principles.

Referring to specific issues, I support free trade, marriage privatization, and pure freedom of choice in all basic necessities of buyable commodity (housing, food-and-drink, clothing, self transportation device, medicine, education reception center).

The Evidence

I took a few quizzes, both from within Pew Research Center and from outside of it. Let me start with those of the Pew Research Center quizzes that are of relevance to this section of this article.

Firstly I did both of the two readily versions of the Political Typology Quiz, the 2011 guy and the 2014 guy. And those years’ editions of the Pew quizzes have labeled me as a Libertarian and a Business Rightist; respectively. The 2014 labeling of me is actually business conservative but I prefer the term business rightist because then at least I can reject the simplistic Democrat vs Republican polarization with much more ease. Their Political Party quiz has, with its marvelous accuracy, brandished me an Independent voter.

But also I have done quizzes elsewhere. Starting with the World’s Smallest Political Quiz and came out as 80% on Personal Issues and 100% on Economic Issues and as such that website I linked to paints me for someone who is a mix of hardcore libertarian and moderate right.

How Much I Know About Reality

I went right ahead and took the Pew quizzes on the News, Science, Technology, Religion and Internet. And I came out with results like this:

  • My News IQ is 91% and above 77% of everyday America
  • My Science IQ is 75% and above 52% of everyday America
  • My Religion IQ, even though I have a secular morality built on an almost even mix of reason and empathy, still manages to top 80% of everyday America at 73%
  • My Internet IQ is above 81% of other Americans besides me at 75%
  • Lastly my Tech IQ is ahead of 52% of my own nation at 69%

Combined and averaged, I know what I am talking about 76% of the time and my intellectual capacity surpasses that of 68% of the American people.

Thanks for your understanding, and please prove your understanding is solidified by signing onto donating $1.75 per month for my intellectual capacity. If I get one new Paying donator every hour until my 23rd birthday (May 6th 2017) then I promise I’ll set up 1/2 of the donations to inherently go to the first Relay For Life 2017 rally my humble town of Cheshire, Connecticut has after my 23rd.


Explaining My Political Identity


Friedrich Hayek – a very fine economist!

I do not exactly fit in 100% with either US political party in particular.

Hello again world. Today I am going to fashion a writing about how I describe myself politically, mainly for a site I recommend called Minds, which is in beta at the time of me doing this.

If I were to keep myself brief on where I sit in each major philosophy in America from now until my passing, I’d call myself a cultural liberal and a fiscal conservative. In other words, I’d call myself a libertarian but only in the sense of a pragmatic & beltway libertarian and/or neolibertarian. Please allow me to define these terms.

Cultural Liberal

  • A human being who believes very strongly in freedom from cultural norms, and believes the only unlisted social rules in place should be rules against fraud, against property crimes and against violent crimes.

Fiscal Conservative

  • A human being who very strongly supports balancing budgets, reversing deficits into surpluses, keeping taxation minimalist, and keeping government Non-defense budgets minimalist. Fiscal conservatives like me also favor opening free trade and keeping market regulation minimalist. And most, myself proudly included, endorse privatization of social institutions like marriage and others.

Pragmatic & Beltway Libertarian

  • A fiscally conservative and culturally liberal person who wants to stick to cultural liberalisms and fiscal conservatisms that are marketable. And the reason ‘beltway’ libertarian is a synonym for ‘pragmatic’ libertarian is because the kind of libertarian I am wants to stick to culturally liberal reforms and fiscally conservative reforms that are electable.


  • A pragmatic & beltway libertarian who desires a strong military capability and supports remarkably ruthless use of that military for Self-Defense and Defense of Others. Furthermore, a neolibertarian like me is someone who favors a foreign policy of unilateral free trade and of openly playing favorites with free societies. Our support for use of the military for Self-Defense and Defense of Others includes endorsement of preventive strikes. And in terms of stopping a genocide, preventive strike means a free society uses its military to stop a genocide on its very first day of being carried out, long before it reaches 1% of its target.

Democrat, Republican, or Independent?

Independent voter. Without a single doubt.


Now hopefully people over at Minds know what I am like politically. Thanks,


The Future of Neolibertarianism and of American Politics in general


Abraham Lincoln is rightly angry at us for narrowing our electoral choices down to marxist Hillary vs fascist Donald. (screen capped from Epic Rap Battles; on YouTube. And yes, this image choice is meant to provoke laughs.)

What I offer to America’s political Land Scape from 2017 to 2020.

So… I have been doing some thinking over of not just my political ideology (neolibertarianism aka republitarianism) but also of American political discussion in general. I am going to point out what I have to offer to keep people optimistic, independent, inspired and educated and to some degree even humored for the time that be.

What I Predict For American Politics

Honestly, I predict one of the two major party candidates are who will become president. I don’t want either one to become president, I want Austin Petersen to be our next president, more so than I wanted Marco Rubio. But the painful reality is that one of these two authoritarian tyrants is who will win the Executive Branch role because of the bipartisan duopoly on our elections.

After one gets chosen over the other, there is going to be mass uproar from about six in ten Americans. This I say due to the fact that Hillary and Donald have roughly around 60% of American human beings able to at least agree that neither of them should be president. Plus, these three-in-five Americans will be craving a movement they can look to that represents the pro-defense, pro-American libertarian leanings most Americans have on most issues. How they will express this craving remains to be seen, but all I can guarantee for now is there will be no civil war. Not without a crackdown on it in its first few minutes as Congress is empowered to be able to do regarding insurrections. Otherwise, this leads right into the future of the Pro-Defense, Pro-American wing of the Liberty movement, otherwise known as republitarian and/or neolibertarian ideology.

What I Offer To American Politics

Hm… let me see… Ah, yes! Starting in January 2017, I am going to use technology called BlueHost to create a professional, elite successor to this website. I have come up with twelve different URL domain titles, and I currently cannot decide which one I want to use. In other words, I am having a 12-sided debate with myself about what the name of my future professional successor site should be.

After I have settled that debate, I am going to roll out a new layer of the website every months or every few months depending on how well it does. This new website will include once-a-day journalism, an online encyclopedia, comedic memes, and maybe also online games. Plus I will be selling digital copies of podcasts and videos.

Just as well, I am going to be advancing this pro-defense, pro-American libertarianism in ways that stick to the following behavioral patterns:

  • Freethinking Sense of Humor
  • Facts in place of Feelings
  • The Scientific Method
  • Balancing Honesty & Simplicity
  • Using professionalism without using political correctness
  • Diffusing misunderstandings caused by other ideologies (including those caused by other libertarianisms)
  • Educating the public about economic rights, civil liberties etc.
  • Eliminating needless fears planted by other ideologies
  • Proving republitarianism is incredible with much to offer
  • Extensive Optimism balanced with Scientific realism
  • Inspiring people to happily flock to the republitarian philosophy


I look forward to delivering on all of these ideas. Thanks for the read my readers,