Skip to main content

Identity politics threatens the foundation of a free society

Communication is the cornerstone of sharing information. Information is the bedrock of any society. Being able to communicate effectively is vital to the health of a free society.

Identity politics creates an impenetrable wall of irrational emotion that shuts down any hope of meaningful dialog. 

While enjoying some online Texas Holdem poker, I had a very interesting interaction with another player.

I lost a big hand to a bad beat*. I made a cocky comment about always getting my bets in while my hand is the best at the time. 

Another player chimed in to tell me that I am an "entitled white boy who thinks society owes me." He also made a comment about me looking good, though it was not a compliment.

I was a little shocked by the comment and asked the player if they are racist, then mentioned I am not a "boy" but rather a 38-year-old man who apparently looks good for his age.

The player's comment could only have been prompted by my picture, and my screen name.
                                                                    This is the picture I have and my screen name is "Liberty"

 He then asked me if I had big guns too. "Little boys love their big guns."

 Another player chimed in, "let's just play poker."

The agitator responded, "I just hate Neo-nazis who wrap themselves in the flag."

 My response: I hate "Neo-nazis" too!

 At this point, the agitator left the game and left me puzzled at his belief that being good looking, white, having an American flag backdrop, a shirt with the Liberty Bell and the word "Freedom" or having the nickname "Liberty" could possibly lead to someone concluding a person is a gun advocate or a racist.

So a white person who supports America and believes in liberty and Freedom is a racist?

Saying I am opposed to racism is an understatement. Does that mean I have to hate America, or just give up on freedom? 

 And what about guns? Are guns a bad thing too? Guns are great tools of self-defense, especially for the most vulnerable and oppressed classes.





*A bad beat in poker is "when a player with very strong cards loses to an opponent who is statistically unlikely to win, but hits a lucky card (or two) and unexpectedly takes the pot." 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...
1 comment
Read more

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

How the Drug War Killed Liberty

 By Matthew Hayward 10/25/2025 When the State Declares War on Behavior Earlier this month, President Trump ordered United States military strikes off the coast of Venezuela, killing alleged “narcoterrorists.” He later boasted, “ We’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. ” Those words should chill every American who believes in liberty. Fifty years after Nixon declared his war on drugs, it has evolved from domestic raids to international executions, all under the same failed philosophy that government violence can cure human vice. When the state declares war on human behavior, it always loses and takes the people down with it. Every prison cell, every overdose, every cartel bullet is a monument to the arrogance of government trying to legislate morality. Back in 1988, Ron Paul said it best on The Morton Downey Jr. Show: “You can’t legislate morality. You can’t force people to be better by passing laws. If you want to solve moral and social problems, y...
Post a Comment
Read more