'Warlords Will Take Over' and Other Lines Libertarians Are Tired of Hearing
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 жов 2024
- We traveled deep into the woods of New Hampshire to ask the libertarians at the 2018 Porcupine Freedom Festival what they're tired of hearing when they tell others their political beliefs.
Subscribe to our UA-cam channel: / reasontv
Like us on Facebook: / reason.magazine
Follow us on Twitter: / reason
Subscribe to our podcast at iTunes: goo.gl/az3a7a
Reason is the planet's leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won't get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
----------------
Venezuela didn't try real socialism. Bitcoin is a tool for criminals. Without big government, warlords will take over.
We traveled deep into the woods of New Hampshire to ask the libertarians at the 2018 Porcupine Freedom Festival, a.k.a. PorcFest, what lines they're most tired of hearing.
Organized by the Free State Project, the annual festival is a week-long campout for libertarians, anarchists, and other self-identified fans of freedom. They gathered to attend workshops, purchase cannabis-infused coffee with cryptocurrency, and talk philosophy around a raging bonfire.
There was plenty of ideological diversity, but the attendees seemed united by the reactions that their friends and family members have to their political views.
Produced, shot, and edited by Justin Monticello. Music by Dan Lebowitz, The Grand Affair, Geographer, and Matt Harris.
“Why are you libertarian when we’re supposed to be democrats”
“If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black”
I love the smell of freedom in the morning
Blitzy Smells good either way
I smell what you did there. 🤟
Smells like whiskey and gun smoke.
The only way to stop a bad Syrian refugee with an AR-15 is a good Syrian refugee with an AR-15, though.
The freedom to serve a corporation instead of a state, but you keep believing that men are good and women are virtue incarnate. State has an professional army, corporation has mercs, state has fiat currency, corporation has company scrip, potato, potato.
And don't forget the ubiquitous "If you won't vote for someone who has a chance of winning, you're wasting your vote." As if that is anyone else's business.
Thank you!
I'd say half the poulation wastes their vote then
@@firearmsstudent I would say about 99.9% of voters waste their vote on one of the two Republicratic candidates.
@@vladimpaler3498 democrats are filthy, republicans however not really sure what they are, idc , i just want my guns my weed, and not have my police defunded because some idiot got butthurt at a thug being shot for trying to harm others. (and just to prevent people from screaming reeee so you support police bwutality) no i do not, there are good cops and bad cops. defunding them all hurts them all, so in reality your only really harming yourselves , fix the system not the funds XD.
guns weed strong military proper police force.
and sure as hell gay as fuck XD
yeet
Anytime someone says that to me I demand they lay out every single vote made and count them individually. They can't of course, and therefore their point is moot since there's no guarantee any of the votes are considered
New Hampshire needs to be the first place to get actual Libertarian Party officials elected.
I am in NH and I’m voting libertarian locally but Republican nationally. Libertarians have a chance here on the small scale but not yet on the big stage so we just gotta slow the growth of the FED until libertarians get their shit together nationally.
Live free or die is the state motto and I plan to abide by it.
@@gavinriley1636 I would like to see what would happen if the libertarians will win an election.
Will it prove that libertarianism is a truly effective form of governing or is it a failure?
@@sergiodasilva6505 According to you three, libertarianism is just the another political movement based on minarchism.
@@imulippo5245 Never heard of minarchism, I will look it up
That didn't work out too well
Notice how Reason let all these interviewees hold the mic and talk freely. More trustworthy, and definitely more articulate than their RNC and DNC videos!
Well yeah because it's not live so if they say anything against the narrative of the video it can be edited out.
@@organ.2729 Hell, is there a transparency report?
Best ending "I like being free"
Sums up libertarianism
freedom doesn't exist
Then go to the Sahara Desert. You will be very free.
@@Nimish204 America is the land of the free, y'all brainwashed commies should be the ones leaving
That "warlords will take over if we had no govt" BS really pisses me off because it's as if people never stopped to consider the number of wars govt has started. Govt is the warlord.
Q B isnt one goal of removing police to replace it with private protection agencies? Instead of one big faction, welcome to the days of the Mafia lol
The mafia that was formed due to govt prohibition on alcohol? Yeah, great endorsement of the state, jackass.
TheWeakMinded
So one big mafia is better?
Geesh! ANY and ALL governments are nothing more than criminal cartels with a monopoly on violence.
Get real.
"The idea that the State originated to serve any kind of social purpose is completely unhistorical. It originated in conquest and confiscation - that is to say, in crime. It originated for the purpose of maintaining the division of society into an owning-and-exploiting class and a propertyless dependent class - that is, for a criminal purpose.
No State known to history originated in any other manner, or for any other purpose. Like all predatory or parasitic institutions, its first instinct is that of self-preservation. All its enterprises are directed first towards preserving its own life, and, second, towards increasing its own power and enlarging the scope of its own activity. For the sake of this it will, and regularly does, commit any crime which circumstances make expedient. In the last analysis, what is the German, Italian, French, or British State now actually doing? It is ruining its own people in order to preserve itself, to enhance its own power and prestige, and extend its own authority; and the American State is doing the same thing to the utmost of its opportunities."
- Albert Jay Nock
The Criminality of the State
mises.org/library/criminality-state
Yeah, but you've got warlords you can appeal to. That's what Democracy is. At the end of the day, it's still force to protect property. But there's also no shred out doubt that if you give up your force, your shit will get taken by the first person to come along that has a different philosophy of organization than you.
William Burr
Forced to protect property? So eminent domain and taxes protect property? Seriously, your fear mongering won't work on me. Govt steals way more than people outside govt ever did.
the girl at the end is spot on.
“Why do you hate the poor?”
“You’re just greedy”
Sounds like the government to me
Taking someone's money and giving it to someone else is still stealing.
@@alanshoebridge9987 It's called pooling resources. If you don't want to live in a society with other people, please leave.
Libertarians tired of hearing valid criticisms.
“Libertarianism is when no roads”
Private citizens repairing roads sounds like a great idea at the local level, and I mean that honestly as I hate it when they let potholes accumulate. What's less clear is how that would be scaled up to an inter-state highway network.
Florida has no income tax and yet they build roads.
"I shouldn't object to paying 26 thousand dollars a year so I can have employees who can barely read"... Priceless!
The fact that he wants to "employ" (i.e. enslave) people undercuts his whole ideology.
My Mom never stops telling me that if I vote Libertarian, I ensure the Democrats win.
Mine tells me that if I vote Libertarian, the Republicans win.
Wait... So that means if I vote libertarian, I get two votes!
Adam Billman No, you have to move to Chicago, in order for that to happen. But, if everyone voted Libertarian, then the Libertarian would win.
Tell her by voting Republican, she ensures the Republicans win.
I try bringing the conversation around. "Oh, so, you're not really hoping your party wins, your main concern is that THIS other party LOSES?" However they answer that question (either with backtracking, or the affirmative) leads me to "I'm most concerned with voting for the change I want to see."
I'm tired of hearing how support for individual liberties and rights is akin to fascism and bigoted intolerance. Apparently, up is down, black is white, and wrong is right.
i'm tired of hearing "the codes and statutes apply cuz we say so"
Dude definitely. If the Law don't make sense, then it shouldn't be the law.
if you have a vagina and you're not getting laid you are doing something wrong
cruhg it’s a bot dude. Women get sex when ever they want. No subs no likes no playlists nothing. It’s totally a bot.
Elizabeth Green you are a bot.
Wait, are the dumb ancap defending parliamentary democracy and the franchise, times have changed.
"You're a rasist" is by far the most stupid one.
libertarians try to spell challenge (impossible)
You are a racist you just happen to be a racist who smokes weed.
My favorite is that “oh so you completely agree with this one libertarian, or that one anarchist,” like we’re one huge homogeneous cult that has the exact same beliefs.
It's because we don't accept the false dichotomy
But because we disagree on some things, we “can’t make up our minds what libertarianism is.”
"We're a nation of laws."
So, are you saying we never abolished chattel slavery?
Commit treason when we left Britain?
Property damage when the Boston Tea Party occurred?
Libertarians think disagreeing with things will change those thing.
"We can't lives without taxations"
I hate hearing "You're only libertarian because you don't have money issues. If you were poor, then you'd vote socialist!" No. If I were poor, I'd be praying every night that we become libertarian.
Then why are most Libertarians wealthy?
Legalize freedom lol
You know what I am sick of? I am sick of people of every political view fearmongering instead of studying history, economics, other sciences, and basic dictionary definitions. Plain and simple for me.
I hate the PC culture and simply changing the meaning of words so we don't even know if we're talking about the same things. i.e. libertarian or classical liberal? leftist or progressive? Conservative or alt-right? Antifa or fascists? I dunno...
And what you bring up, Chris, are a handful of examples of what I am complaining about.
Where's the fun in that?
As a communist, I admit you're right on one point : a libertarian society won't be overrun by warlords. Instead, it will be overrun by brave New Hampshire black bears.
You can tell Libertarians don't like to read
The state of New Hampshire still proudly topping the "freest states" ranking (Cato, 2016). Good for them. The Free State Project seems to have paid off.
There are times when both main stream parties fall in line with libertarianism, so I get the experience of being able to agree with everyone while also disagreeing with everyone. Everyone loves me, and everyone dispises me at the same time, or more realisticly, I can make friends among any political group, but I can piss that group off at a moment's notice if I feel like it. I also know which subjects to tread carefully around and which ones I can just be absolutely streight forward about.
I support gun rights and religious freedom including the right to refuse service. This includes situations where discrimination is involved. No, I don't think it's right to be homofobic or racist, but if you run a business, you don't want to be forced to serve a KKK member, and you might not even want to serve evangelical christians because their attitude toward the lgbt community, so really, we should keep the government out of it.
Either way, yes, I do think you have the right to refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple. This makes the right happy, but then, I drop the bomb on them that I want to legalize weed and even decriminalize prostitution, and they feel betrayed.
The same happens with the left though. I want to legalize pot, decriminalize prostitution, regulate the police, reduce their funding, eliminate the vice squad, so I'm cool until I let it slip that I don't want to poor trillions in to environmental projects and as previously mentioned, Jack Phillips can refuse to serve the gay couple. No suddenly, I'm a nasty filthy bigot.
The biggest threat to freedom is people who love it, but not for everybody, just for them and their tribe.
You're not alone Brent. Have a terminal disease, and was fortunate enough to come across your comment. Had a miserable day, and a shitty outlook moving forward. Your words, lit the fire under my ass for at least another day. Reminded me of who I am, and what I stand for...not what I was, and can no longer do. My very existence will remain an act of freedom.
Sincerely,
Shu
You guys are awesome. It was a pleasure to sit by the fire and share my wines with you. I wish I had more time to talk about my views. Hope to meet again in the future. You guys are amazing and thank you for your diligent work.
Mom: "BUT WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS??!"
Me: "who built you phone mom? Was it the government?"
Yeah, I'd like to see neibours build an interstate, bridge, or tunnel, by renting a tractor for 100000 cars to use per day.
Taxes do provide essential things... I just hate the taxes that stifle business and liberty. Green taxes are fucking worst.
The phone wasn't built by government but they do invent and give you access to the internet. Entrepreneurs built the world wide web with government infrastructure. Limited government is good.. big government bad.
If you have that much traffic beating a path to your door or warehouse, you seem to have enough resources to fiture it out yourself
NOt he gubmint didn't invent shit, just needled their way into running those things. So, Nancy Pelosi is an inventor now, is it? I can think of a few things , but creativity isn't one of them.
The government helped you to be in the position to buy and use an iphone.
Ma Bell, NSA, looks pretty government to me, please try again ancap moron.
I am curious as to the libertarian view on Asbestos Exposure regulation. Should we or should we not have regulations in place for products that kill people who had little or no choice in the matter?
Market will regulate itself
@@baph0met except it didn't, Asbestos is still in use in the US. Deaths from Asbestos continue to rise and the people deciding to use it are not the workers being exposed to it, just their bosses
Because the Left wing, the Right wing are two different wings of the same bird. 🤔
Austin Kloud, most likely a dodo.
Nah, they're different.
I love the way libertarians have no solid answers for any of these questions. Their entire philosophy boils down to, 'If we deregulate the entire economy and give the private sector total freedom without any legislative restrictions or penalties, everything will just work out OK somehow.' 👀
They just hate these questions because they cant answer them. They still cant answer who will build ALL the roads and deliver ALL the mail.
@@mikegreco4122and what to do about all the black bears
Wow amazing how well spoken they all are!
Does Reason TV care that UA-cam is censoring this channel? I have the notification bell selected & yet I have never received any of their videos in my mentions.
I'm tired of hearing "Its to protect the people that cant protect themselves" as if they know what it best for a person better than the person themselves. Self-righteous morons would rather live in a cage they know than free because freedom scares them.
⦓Za Warudo⦔ If you have ever been around people, you would realize, that some of the time, they truly don't know what is best for them.
We're not talking about drugies, we're simply talking about a universal rule that most people don't give a shit in finding out what is best for them, instead rely on home remedies and wishful thinking.
But government should still be limited at all cost.
_Some of the time they dont know whats best for them._ Oh well
Who died and gave you the privilege of leading people to salvation. If people's actions get them to Darwin themselves thats life. Either way you are in no place to dictate your will over somebody else.
erm, what about those with low-functioning autism or those temporarily Incapacitated by mental Illness, the Szichofrenia, those who have physical or physiological illnesses that prevent them from protecting themselves or working?
lol the liquor one my response is always "Oh you mean the instances of illegal liquor poisoning people during prohibition? You mean the liquor the US government intentionally poisoned to dissuade people from drinking alcohol?"
But the government just passed a $3.5 trillion spending bill.
That's $10,000 for every American.
Is there even a single person who expects to see $10,000 worth of value from this bill?
the thing is, they probably needed to get a permit just to set up tents in a field
People can't understand that Pre islamic Mecca and Medina were as Libertarian as they can be 1500 years ago with multitude of faiths, philosophies and life styles but they collapsed dramatically under the new collectivist authoritarian totalitarian ideology named Islam which they disdained and laughed at at first. That's why I have no faith in Libertarianism because it is not viable on evolutionary level. These Arabs laughed at the concept of taxation having a ruler and resurrection and believing in an invisible god and call the new religion "Myths of old nations". If you van not see any similarities here then you have a problem.
it's nice to have a libertarian community in a country where the federal govt will protect you from warlords
And also a geography that makes invasion practically impossible
I’m a libertarian, not an anarchist. Government, like everything else you need, but in moderation.
Shhhh! Keep your voice down! You wanna start a riot?? ;)
That's odd, since humans didn't need government for hundreds of thousands of years.
I'm not an abolitionist, Slavery like everything else you need, but in moderation
So you're not a libertarian, you're a classic liberal. The difference between libertarian and anarchists is pretty close, anarchists doesn't accept any kind of hierarchy, libertarians accept voluntary and conscious hierarchies(hierarchies in job for example).
Oh? Hear that everyone? We can drink cyanide in kool-aid with "moderation".
Killing, stealing, lying are all OK in "moderation."
I'm tired of people saying "axe" in place of "ask."
It's a different dialect to yours. Stop being so judgemental of others speaking differently than you.
@ 2:41 she says "I know the only thing that the universe cares about is how we treat each other." While saying that, she is wearing a shirt that says "I don't play nice." That's how she treats others.
Libertarians are ignorant, selfish pricks
I like that the one woman ignores the "white patriarchy" baloney and instead is free. Unfortunately a graduate with a degree in Comparative Art History is probably trying to find her for 'correction'.
As an Australian Libertarian I hope that festival is on in the future if I ever visit the US.
Yep, the next one is June 20th - 26th 2022.
BUT YOU SIGNED THE SOCIAL CONTRACT!!
With my ass.
So you guys want privatized roads, police, schools, army, mail, etc?
Not necessarily, just pointing out that all of the above are not only possible , but already existing without government providing these services; and that in many cases a better job can be done without government interference. Most Libertarians are in favor of national defense being run by the federal government, but really the rest of it is better left to local government or private enterprise. Not sure why in a country of this size why there cannot be areas of varying economic systems, instead there seems to be an all or nothing mentality where socialists and anarchists both feel some need to impose their philosophies on everyone else.
Yes, no, yes, no, yes respectively
Police are "necessary" but also a giant pain in the ass and a liability to have around most of the time.
since i am libleft no i dont
@@mikek9488they tried your so called "Libertarian experiment" in Grafton, NH. It was called Freetown and it bombed. You should read a book every once in a while like "A Libertarian walks into a bear". Stop being an ignorant, selfish prick.
Finally some normal people.
I am sick of hearing "public goods"... There is no such thing
JD K There are. But there's as specific economic definition. It doesn't mean any good that has an economy of scale
Okay, I should stop commenting like this because I always end up having to answer some not well thought out and extremely vague two sentence reply to my comment. Look most people think public goods are things like; roads, schools, rivers, defense spending, etc. regardless of the economic definition. The public definition and economic definition are close but not the same, this causes confusion.
Anyway let's take an example where the two mindsets align as in defense spending. Both in the public's view and by economic definition defense spending is considered a "public good." And I hope we can both agree that defense spending is basically code for war, or at least building up for a war (training a military, missiles, ships, etc). Now some of my best friends are pacifists and to a pacifist, all war is consider evil, death dealing, etc. So to them defense spending isn't a public good it's a public bad. They are being taxed to do something that is completely against their wishes. So all it takes is one pacifist is any country and the whole "public good" nonsense goes out the window.
The same can be said with education. There an endless amount of controversial topics dealing with education of which you could go either way. Should we have traditional or progressive education, religious education or nonreligious education, sex-ed or no sex-ed, etc, etc. Whichever way any public school system decides some large group of parents, kids and teachers will be hurt because their wishes will be overridden.
This simple process can be applied to anything considered a "public good." Where the public good in question will be hurting large groups of people. How can you be hurting all these large groups of people, all of whom are apart of "the public" and still call it a public good?
Never thought about it like that
Anarchists and libertarians are on the opposite of the spectrum.. this was not a good example of libertarians..
I'm tired of hearing two things - "That will lead to chaos & anarchy" and the mind set since government has always done it, i.e. road, bridge building, NASA, public utility regulation etc. that it can not be outsourced or done better privately.
I'm tired of hearing.
"Well, Somalia has no government, must be a libertarian paradise." No, you need Rule of Law -government exists to protect citizens from those who wish harm, within or without, to run courts as a disinterested arbitrator and that's it. Everything else is overreach. And, Somalia... there is genuine desire on all parties' parts to impose an ideology (Islam), courts are Islamic (i.e. not disinterested)
Although, funnily, Somalia actually has excellent cell phone service, with competing companies, good rates, good service. All parties want and need this and, when one particularly Islamic group attacked the towers, everyone ganged up on them
Point taken. But libertarians have to be extremely disciplined. It’s very easy when you’re young and able-bodied. But when you get old, state assistance looks appealing.
IP Freely If you are not helped by a private charity, you will die.
I hate roads!
Mason Pelt I hate roads too. Nearly got bogged on one today. That's why I'm saving up for a helicopter!
Me too!
Who doesn't. You get into accidents and risk your life out there.
The only thing more toxic than nerd culture is libertarian culture, and I'm a libertarian.
Sebastian Colins I agree. Too many minarchists and not enough ancaps
And I'M tired of libertarians saying "we just need to VOTE for better candidates!"
And other ways to Bell the Cat.
Most of the people who badmouth Libertarianism really have no idea what it is.
Same goes for socialism.
I'd like to see an example of a libertarian state in the USA. I don't know if I'd wanna live there, maybe visit, but I just wanna see how their freeways, police departments, courts, economy, etc handle the anarchy thing without taxes. And if they don't do taxes, I'd be curious to see how they pay for things like infrastructure without any gov funding. I'd like to see exactly how this would work inside the USA. And if we could arrange it, I understand no state tax, but how would they get around fed taxes?
They already tried this Grafton, NH. It was called Freetown. Look it up.Also look up the book called "A Libertarian walks into a bear".
@@Marc-n5e LOL, I almost thought to correct your "walks into a bar" joke, but it was indeed a BEAR. OMG, I'm ROFLOL! My goodness! Parasites too? That sounds like a really bad nightmare. Most were registered Republicans.
One important fact left out here. As demonstrsated over eons, monopolies and greed always rise to the top. How to dampen that drive, while remaining reasonably gov't and tax free is never, ever answered by Libertarian advocates.
Btw, i was one in the late 70's and due to that gap in the philosophym i had to move on. Btw, the meme that we all, as a group have to stand on honor, integrity and fair play, on any scale beyond a cityh/state, has never happened in human history...
I'm sick of being told that we're isolationists and I always reply that we are anti-interventionist, not isolationist.
Quit playing the root insurance ad
My people!
Yeah. Look at all those... Republicans...? 😂
wanna know how libertarians can achieve small gov? control ten to twenty percent of government, as such the libertarian govenment has enough power to create a deadloclk in the electoral college where the power will go to congress and thus we can bargain with the republican party to have rand paul be bresident and either a conservative or libertarian as vice president as can be decided by how powerful our bargaining chip is by representation in congress, but to acheive this we need to COLLECTIVLY start moving towards smaller states with populations of less then one million first, and a few states should be able to deadlock the electoral college which will shift towards the congress to decide as we will occupy certain electoral districts and states, and a brutal propaganda campaing targeted towards millenials with education plus the promise of cheap weed, afterwards we can pass legeslation to reduce government with our power, following this we will make the states we control as examples for the nation to follow, and as such we will need to start a large media company to the size of nbc, cnn, or fox plus start tv stations.
So no government when I think of that I think "I can have any gun I want" so I agree
Make liberty great again.
The only thing the universe cares about is how we treat each other.... and heat death.
I think the best argument for Libertarianism is that when myself a right leaning Lib. Meets with a left leaning lib. We can have a conversation and agree / compromise on 90% of the stuff that separates us. Meanwhile check out whats happening in Red Vs Blue :D
If there is a libertarian revolution, what do ya'll do with the nukes?
Feudalism isn't necessarily warlords. It could be just private courts like Wal-Mart Court in Arkansas, Apple Court in California. Vertical "live/work" companies, etc.
Ken MacDonald agreed, just commenting on the passive form of feudalism that libertarians are in denial about.
"Crypto is anonymous and can thus be used for criminal activity."
As opposed to regular money?
i wanna keep anonymous money.
It's right because the law says its oK
We can implement and repel bad laws legal and right are not the same
What about the roads
Isn’t it crazy how we get accused of not caring about things we actually do care about? The only difference between us and them is that we don’t want so much government intervention in any of it.
These are my type of people.
Also I had porcupine once it was good but really greasy
I'm with the Mexican. I have known people that just saw needs in their neighborhood and took care of them and the people were grateful. No government needed.
Question I would ask libertarians after watching this video:
"So wait, you're hippies?"
Hippies of the right
Holy shit, never found a place that seems so fitting. While trivial, I always felt like despite more right-wing politics, I'm drawn to more "liberal/lefty" culture and things. Art, nerdy stuff, cafe stuff, and yet here the first thing you see is some crazy gypsy stuff and a guy with guns and coffee starbucks parody shirt. Flowery artsy blankets, pop culture shirts, and yet that bit of conservative flea market stuff I'm used to seeing with pro-'murica stuff, coin collections, and pro-gun rhetoric. It feels really good.
That said, if I were to argue just a bit, I'm not exactly an anarchist (or an-cap, if we're to be technical) and I will say there's still a point when the warlord argument is used. Its not just about "warlords" though, and the thing is their answer here isn't exactly debunking it. The point of the warlord argument isn't "but what if", it's rather a nod to human nature, its just that warlord is the biggest hyperbole in expressing that. The real idea is groups, or groups of strong power. Maybe warlords, maybe companies, maybe a self-appointed mayor entirely selfaware that he's trying to restate a government, or maybe a combined effect of it all. Actually, probably a combined effect of it all. Eventually it becomes a powerhouse that owns or rules over a vast amount and becomes the exact equivalent of some kind of government, throwing out the anarchy. People will gravitate to the safety of these groups, or their propaganda, and then the act of anarchy isn't a politically grounded work, but a phase towards transitioning out an old and into a new. At its very strongest, you'll have a small community holding itself up well as idealized, until a bigger power hits it, maybe even foreign from a place that never underwent an anarchy.
That's why I'd much rather just settle for a stricter republic. You have a solid nation and government that defends its people, and upholds the freedoms you set. They, like the warlord scenario, could still try to grab at more power, but you've still got the actual outlines for the ideal society. By the very fact of the matter that countless libertarians are going strong on the words of the constitution, regardless of how much its being trampled on, is a show of such power that a lawless nation does not have. By its nature, the anarchy will be bound by nothing, and will fade in due time, whereas a constitution is history and preserved to be fought over and won another day. It better understands we're social, structure our world, and set rules and ideas, and even if it ever fails it will hold stronger binds and inspire the generations to come for a better position.
jgunner280 Join classical liberals.
We are the best mix!
We need a philosopher king who is me. I am more libertarian than anyone but I would like to see to it that everything starts with good inertia, and that takes breaking eggs once in a while.
i am a ancom so i dont really agree with you but i respect your opinion
WhO WiLl bUiLd ThE RoAdS???!!!!!!
When I shit on the minimum wage I hate hearing people say, "so you're fine with people getting paid $3 an hour?"
And that's not a valid question...why?
@@squatch545 From a non-libertarian perspective here - because it's treating the symptom (insufficient wages) rather than the disease (hilarious power imbalances between workers and capital). We know of at least two countries with either non-existent (Sweden) or pathetic (Germany) minimum wages - they do fine, and are usually held up as a left-wing example, because there they have powerful unions and other factors which avoid the imbalance in power we have here in Canada/USA/Anglosphere.
@@DarkwarriorJ The disease is capitalism. Germany and Sweden are capitalist countries. As long as you have capitalism, you're going to have to treat the symptoms with bandaids like min. wage and/or strong unions. Critcizing treating symptoms and doing nothing about them is malpractice.
I thought the libertarian "logo" was a snake that said don't tread on me not a porcupine.
That was the logo of a military company. Libertarians don't have a logo, they are libertarians.
But they’re able to live like that because they’re being protected by the government.
Funny that.
Sam Seder will try debunk this.
I'm VERY Surprised I didn't hear a single one of these fine people say "But voting Libertarian is like wasting your vote! Better choose the best of the other two evils" or some version of that.
Ergo decido fallacy: you can always move to Somalia.
Why? They have a state in Somalia.
starrychloe
You statists could always move to North Korea!
You'd love it there! Worshiping the police, military, the flag, government and "beloved leader" is mandatory. You'd feel right at home. All the government you could ever love and then some!
Idiot!
North Korea is a cherry picked example whereas Somalia isn't, it is what a stateless society/failed state looks like.
+M Street
Strawman.
>it is what a stateless society/failed state looks like.
These two are not the same thing, though. Ever notice in all the anarchy-is-chaos dystopian movies there is always a catastrophe, like a global war or a meteor or zombies, that leaves everyone in a shitpile of post-apocalyptic doom? Of course you'd expect people to be all fucked up after something like that, completely unprepared and unwillingly tossed into that cauldron of shit stew. You never see movies where everyone decided that they could do things better without a state interfering and so they just abandoned the idea, because that would be boring as fuck. Hell, it'd be as boring as eBay. We spend 99% of our lives in anarchy as we go about our day, and 99% of our lives are boring as fuck.
Muh roads!!
The lady at the end says it all: "I like being free."
Except she's not free. So I don't know why she is describing her situation as 'free'.
WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS
INJUNS
Definitely going next year, can one of you remind me?
AMEN.
The thing that I'm tired of hearing is the connection between libertarians and open borders. I do not see how libertarian principles lead to open borders. Property rights alone dictate that borders not be open. My land is private. Why can't my country be as well?
The main reason that I see is that you are stopping me from interacting who I want. I'd love to rent to people or buy from people that I want. Whether or not they are on the other side of the the imaginary line don't affect this. It comes down to whether you see us a collective or as individuals. That's the ethical argument. You don't own my private property just because you live in the same country as me.
Ahh, I see the disconnect (or, at least, I think that I do). That isn't your liberty being violated. In fact, the only people whose liberty is violated here is the people who own the land on which that person would have to cross to move there. Currently, that land is owned by the state (unfortunately) and therefore they have the right to refuse entry. In the ideal case, there would be communities with agreements that dictated who could enter and who could not (though, one could ask: how is that different from the state? The obvious answer: the communities are bound by the same morals that the individuals in it are).
I don't appreciate your defense of communitites, but it is a problem I myself have. Why can gated communities keep people out or demand fees, or regulate how high a persons grass can be if a country cannot? It is a difficult question, but we will put it aside since we agree on it.
I disagree with you that the government owns my land. I don't think they should own any land, but they certainly do not own mine (well I don't own any land, but I mean they don't own my landlord's land). So they cannot restrict entry. It would be immoral if they said that people from Reno can't shop at Subway, it would be immoral if they said Californians couldn't come to Nevada and it's immoral to do it to Mexicans.
That said, it's a minor immoral deed. Somewhere between putting taxes on cigarettes and arresting an 18 year old for being drunk. Little evil, not big evil.
I didn't say that the government owns your land (I do understand how you go that though.). How can someone get to your land without going through the state's land? They cannot teleport. They have to go through airports/seaports/landports or on roads. They cannot restrict entry to your land from other's land, but they can restrict entry to their land.
I don't really understand your point about morality and not letting people come through. I can think of many reasons why you might not let Californians come into Nevada (hypothetically, not in current day) and Nevada has every right to not let them in as it is 'their' land. If you could manage a straight path of privately owned land that people could enter on, then that is a different story. Currently, I don't think that is the case.
As for your point about communities, it is a good one. I guess that I only mean it in the example I gave. i.e. if the community owns the roads, they can deny access to the roads to whomever since the roads are theirs. I don't think that they can require people's grass to be at a specific level unless your contract when you bought the land had that in it.
K I, I would not define myself as an anarchist, but I guess the definitions of libertarian and anarchist vary significantly from person to person. I'm think hierarchies are necessary and I have no problem with a government as long as it doesn't have the monopoly on the initiation of force (though, you could say it is no longer a government then -> anarchist). I don't really get what you mean by 'a bit more from him' as I don't think that you addressed my point at all. If I group up with some people to buy a ring of land around an area, we can then stop all the people that we want from entering it because it is ours. We would need some contract governing how we do it, but I see no problem with that. We can apply this to the current state similarly. The not-really-a-contract-which-should-be-fixed says that there is government land and, therefore, we as a people should be allowed to decide who can go on that land and who can not.
To your response to Ken, the difference is that the people to whom you would be selling are already in the 'community' (the state) and thus do not need permission for entrance. You could say that a neighborhood could decide that they don't want 'x' group to be allowed to buy property, but that would require a contract signed by all the people in the community. This is not the case in America anywhere (as far as I know). His argument pre-supposes a community which I think is fair as we have one. The legitimacy of that community is in serious doubt as no contract was signed and it is held together at the point of a crap ton of guns, but opening borders is not going to help things. It will only make them worse.
I'm sympathetic but in the end someone's morality will be the basis of a community. I haven't heard a deep thinking, well spoken Libertarian address this.
Try Murray Rothbard.
Per your recommendation I've done some initial reading of Rothbard and it seems he was an advocate of natural law theory. I believe he was correct but that position inevitably leads to questions about a natural law-giver.
mchristr: Yes, he is somewhat idealistic, but I really find his works on history and economics to be his best stuff. In his American history, in 3 volumes I believe, he describes an early anarchic/free market society in Pennsylvania during the colonial era.
Almost everyone already has the same basic morality, just a huge consistency problem when it comes to applying their own ideal freedom to others.
well he might not address it but if you want to learn about how the world could work without the state read peter kropotkin and some good books by him would be conquest of beard(altho i disagree with the dating part near the end since it outdated) and mutual aid(where he talks about the world post markets)
Damn where do I buy my ticket?
What about cutting corners to save a buck like not winterizing your power grid even thought you knew you should have like Texas?
"Warlords will take over"
Not lying, I paused the video at the beginning, haven't watched it yet. I imagined this being the prediction if the 2nd amendment weren't willfully ignored. More reaction later...
where can i get the t-shirt at 0:57 ?
"Muh roads."
" I like being Free"
"What about them roads."