Socialist Paradise adds yet another state to the list of prohibited destinations

By Nathan Barton

As reported by MSN, Chairman Jerry (Moonbeam) Brown continues to preside over the rapid deterioration of the People’s Republic.

‘A 2017 California law requires that its attorney general keeps a list of states subject to a state travel ban because of “laws that authorize or require discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression,” Becerra’s office said in a statement.

‘”California taxpayers are taking a stand against bigotry and in support of those who would be harmed by this prejudiced policy.” he said.

‘Oklahoma becomes the ninth state subject to the state-funded ban. Travel to Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and Texas had previously been prohibited due to the 2017 law. ”

I am so glad that South Dakota is a banned destination: Oklahoma joins a select group of states that (at least somewhat) recognizes that true freedom of association involves a right to reject association: it is our choice whether or not to associate with, cooperate with, commune or fellowship with other people.  Whether it is in religion, business, family matters, or everyday activities.

Hopefully fewer people from California will come to South Dakota and try to push their moral opinion (which many of us brand as “immoral”) down our throats.  Ditto for Oklahoma. And the other states.  At the same time, hopefully Californians who believe in liberty – for others as well as themselves – will emigrate to South Dakota and other places, and help us counter the haters of liberty.

But that will not solve the problem.  Nor would the secession of California and its rapid decline into a third-world slime pit, creating an intolerable situation. One in which more and more people would demand a wall to keep Californians (and the flood of other migrants from around the world) from fleeing to Nevada, Oregon, or Arizona.  (Shucks, even Mexico might put up barriers, as they’ve done with Central America.)

Because we’d still be living under the thumb of DC.  We’d still be living in a land where black-robes can create “rights” out of thin air while denying real rights.  Where they can redefine words to mean whatever they want, and then use the power of guns to ram those down our throats. Where their posturing and pronouncements and slick, disgusting reasoning is supported by the occupants of the White House with very little question.  Whether they have (D) or (R) after their name.  Whatever their hair color.  Or their skin color. Or their supposed values.

Just like the black-robes and the arrogant money- and power-hungry members of the California Assembly – and the holier-than-thou resident of their governor’s mansion.  Whether that be a Schwarzennegger or a Brown – or even a Reagan.

The rest of the Fifty States are not that many steps behind the increasingly-socialist progressive paradise of California.  Indeed, it is a matter of degree and not kind. And many, like Colorado with its progressive laws, policies, commissions, and executive branch, are very close on California’s heels.  (And the black-robes refuse to take a stand for liberty, instead slapping the State of Colorado on the hands (gently!) for not being nice enough about kicking businesses in the teeth.)

So we see stupidity like travel bans, and kids getting busted for selling lemonade without a permission slip, and people harassed for having the wrong kind of medicine in their luggage.  And hundreds of other examples of the stupidity, arrogance, and just plain evil lurking in the hearts of politicians and bureaucrats, including the armed-thug bureaucrats.  And it will get worse and worse. Unless we stop it, by refusing to be their puppets, their billfolds, their sheep, their servants.

I don’t know if there are enough of us, yet, who are willing to say enough is enough.  But the number is growing daily.

About TPOL Nathan

Follower of Christ Jesus (a christian), Pahasapan (resident of the Black Hills), Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer, Evangelist. Successor to Lady Susan (Mama Liberty) at TPOL.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Socialist Paradise adds yet another state to the list of prohibited destinations

  1. beau says:

    it is never easy to watch the death throes of anything, a nation included. what is being done in this nation is to ‘convert’ it from a semi – capitalist society to a full socialist society. what we are witnessing are the death throes of capitalism. the pain caused to so many by the ‘conversion’ and is being felt now PALES in comparison to the pain that will come. see VENEZUELA.

    never mind socialism has NEVER, EVER worked anywhere, save for the pols and bureaucrats involved. we will get it right, the deluded arrogant think.

    nations, like people, may, or may not, get what they want, but, in the end, all get just what is deserved based on what was done, or allowed to be done. in essence, ALL ARE AT FAULT WHEN THIS TAKES PLACE including those who fostered the change directly and those who did absolutely nothing about it.


    • tpolnathan says:

      The “Socialist Paradise” I’m referring to is, of course, California – or if you prefer, the People’s Republic. I am not really sure if this travel ban is something that can be blamed on a conversion from “semi-capitalism” (neat term) to socialism. It is more a totalitarian action – nothing can be allowed unless the State approves it, and the reasons for the State to NOT approve something are many and varied. And frankly, it is the ideology of fascism – “if you aren’t part of the solution, you are part of the problem” – with both problem and solution defined by the State.


    • tpolnathan says:

      I do not know if the term “semi-capitalist” can even be fairly applied, especially to California. I think it was Margaret Thatcher that said that “socialism works as long as you have someone else’s money” or words to that effect. But what we are talking about here is not whether California is socialist or communist or fascist, but how the State of California seeks to dictate what their citizens (employees of the state or not) can do, in order to punish other states who do something that California does not like.
      It had not occurred to me until now, with your comments, that California is in essence establishing an embargo (worse than a tariff) against states like South Dakota and Oklahoma, because of what those states have done Is this not very similar to what Trump is being condemned for, by some of those same progressive “leaders” like Brown and Pelosi, regarding his “trade war” against China, etc.?
      Hummph. Makes me wonder if next California will try to prevent people from those states from coming to California, at least on “official business” with the state.


  2. Whatever the reasons for the “bans,” they’re objectively libertarian — “you may not use money stolen from Californians to travel to X for the purpose of doing business involving any of the fifty sub-gangs and/or the Washington supergang.” The only real improvement I can see to that policy is to put a period after the word “Californians.”


    • tpolnathan says:

      How about just “you may not use money [which is] stolen” ? I do not see anything remotely “libertarian” about denying employees of California and its local governments from traveling to any of the other States, regardless of who pays for their travel – or the purpose of their travel.


      • “How about just ‘you may not use money [which is] stolen’?”

        Works for me.

        I consider it far more than “remotely” libertarian to prohibit the use of stolen money to send government employees on junkets. Would I rather see the policy universalized than applied only to certain states? Sure.


  3. Rocketman says:

    Kind of reminds me of a story that I read about an socialist English woman that moved to Rhodesia years ago and started strongly supporting the African National Congress. When the communist ANC took over and of course made a total mess of things, she was astonished that she was actively being discriminated against because of her white skin and left the country in tears complaining about it. Stupid cow.


    • tpolnathan says:

      Rocketman, thanks for the interesting story. It is, of course, a common situation. In a certain part of Montana, there was a large community of native Communists, back in the 1950s and 1960s. The story is told that many of them abandoned their Communist political views and membership when they learned that if (when?) the Soviets took over, the native Communists would be in the second or third wave of liquidations.
      A problem for the Western Slope of Colorado, and also in Southeastern Utah, is the large number of Californians who flee the People’s Republic and settle there. They are more conservative than California, but far more liberal than the average denizen of their new homes, and try to bring way too much Californication with them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s