@Laoch111 so uhhh what are you advocating ? capitalism? plenty of mercs and enviro fuckups there socialism? well we got plenty of examples of that working out well over the long term lol. and private ownership? really? would you like it if i came and took all the stuff you worked for and made ? why do anything if you cant have anything? im not obsessed with objects but i would beat someones face in if i spent all day making a nice pot of stew and someone came and took it .
@Laoch111 sorry i guess that may have sounded kind of rude and if you want to go and be without property and all that stuff in your own little community thats great and more power to you as long as you dont try to force that on anyone else more freedom to you and all but i just really have a hard time seeing that work on a large scale like the old saying goes " in a utopia who would volunteer to clean the toilets? " i would really like to hear your opinions , thanks
Important: information and ideas are not valid property in a voluntaryist society. IPRs are ridiculous so Microsoft shouldn't be have the protection of force if people share the software they programmed.
I enjoyed how Stef lit up while Max was making such an apt metaphor relating the open source success of Linux and the Web. Both smart and curious dudes that obviously appreciate well composed rebuts rather than scorn them with petty competitiveness
They didn't say anything about criminals and legal systems, did they? That's really the only major objection to anarchism that usually comes up. How come they don't even mention it?
regarding the issues to do with property rights and the internet, it is my opinion that property rights are not inherent when it comes to files stored on a computer.
if i have a house, i want to keep it for myself, because if someone else moves in, i will be out of a house.
if i have a house.jpg, i can simply copy it, so anyone else who wants to look at it can, without me losing out.
are copyright laws anything more than a monopoly on sharing?
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
Concerning the bill of rights, is nature our experiment, or are we an experiment of nature?
PS I agree, a love and admire Stef's clarity of thought and expression.
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
Concerning the bill of rights, is nature our experiment, or are we an experiment of nature?
PS I agree, a love and admire Stef's clarity of thought and expression.
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
Concerning the bill of rights, is nature our experiment, or are we an experiment of nature?
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
The ennemy, the indians, was not weak but open, very much, much more than those religious freaks and bandits who stole the land. if i remember correctly, the indians talked peace and wisdom in most of the negotiations signed treatys in good faith but the americans never respected even one !
So you had liars and thieves against people who were non violent and looking for peace. They lost. The White man can never be trusted, never again and the other colors are not to be trusted either.
@Hashishin13 Your are right on both counts but it doesn't change what i said. Europeans were monsters, slaves takers, children killers, ready to kill anybody for a treasure especially gold, with their stupid religion driving their basic murder instinct. Not the red men.
America was a paradise then, read Cartier' description of the sight he had of the St-Lawrence river when he came in. In 400 years we destroyed most of the land, go look for yourself. Are we happier ? I don't think so.
@nclusiau In day to day, hour to horu life we are definately far happier with elcetricity, clean water and plumbing. Have you ever tspent more then a few hours out in the bush? Mosquitoes during the summer and biting cold in the winter. AS for the idealistic native cultures, well in the North they seem like they were pretty good, I'll give you that. In the south on the other hand many of the native cultures were brutal and bloodthirsty, much more so then the europeans.
@Hashishin13 ... yeah, mosquitos and biting cold, that was probably what the europeens called the Wild Wild West then but the indians lived there in total harmony with nature. Yes i spent time in the bush but my experience or yours is nothing to compare that of the indians of the prairies, the mountains and desert etc.... I also read about canibalism and i am not sure our ou any civilisation made it disapear, still alive and well. Brutal? How dan you be more brutal than exterminate millions ?
@nclusiau I meant the specific tactic or sclaping was pretty brutal, and the Aztecs basically did exterminate the tribes around them, but we don't have any count as to how many.
You talk about "perfect harmony", yet you don't understand that living as hunter gatherers with limited agriculture would have been a pretty shitty life. Even in Europe with relatively advanced farming there were regular famines, these were probably much worse in te native tribes.
@Hashishin13 You find scalping brutal but it was a ritual, during a war only, not an everyday agression like we see today in our society. I can name at least 100 white's man methods that are much much more cruel. Indians use to say : "The Indian beats his horse and caresses his children and the white man beats his children and caresses his horse".
@nclusiau .... White man is very cruel to his own children and we can see the result in our society now, there are parts of Detroit (use to be french by the way) that were abandonned to gangs because the police won't go there anymore now how is that for regular violence? How many children were raped just yesterday, how many were forced to slavery, how many served as prostitute ?
I don't think that the nomads were violent, they were too much fragile in nature, they supported each other.
@Hashishin13 When the first Europeans kown to us came here, the viking Lief Erickson in the year 1000, there was the great plague in Europe that killed millions. The main reason that was never mentionned for the plague was the fact that the Catholic Church was in war against sorcellery, sorcerers and of course, black cats. They killed so many cats that there was a "rat boom", then the plague. hahaha can you believe how stupid white folks are ?
Maybe you should stop perpetuating the racism that nearly wiped out your peoples? Calling White men stupid is the exact same as saying the indians had no soul, it puts a false dividing line between you and them, which never does any good. We are all related, and pretty closely at that. 99.9% of our DNA we share with chimpanzees, so imagine how close indians and hites are, calling them dumb is calling you dumb.
Now if you had said look at how dumb the catholics were that would make sense.
@nclusiau I'm not saying that the technology that europeans brought over justified what they did to the natives, but I am saying that the natives that survived probably have an easier life now. They would have an even better life if the government stopped trying to "help" them, but that goes for everyone.
@Hashishin13 Oue governments cannot permit nomadism because we are a society based on "fences". We build fences everywhere and than we pretend the parameter is ours. Many americans find out now that the property they were so proud of owning doesn't really belong to them even if it's aid for. With this new "gaz shit" they drill for everywhere, our governments are changing our natural landscape into a lunar landscape.
@nclusiau Uhh I don't understand the second half of this comment, but you are wrong about the natives not owning land. Each tribe had territory that they owned the same as we own land today. Many of them also had farming, just like the europeans but on a smaller scale because the crops theyhad weren't as good as wheat. The antives didn't have many fences because their territory was so large that it would be impractical to fence.
@nclusiau The Apache, Commanche and Aztecs were all brutal and aggressive to everyone, including the other trives in the area. The plains Indians also scalped people and left them to die with no skin on their head. At least the Europeans tended to kill outright. Also acting like all the natives were pruely innocent and acting like all the Europeans were genocidal maniacs is a bit simplistic. I'm sure that in the long history even some of the Northern tribes aggressed against the Europeans.
@Hashishin13 Well, you were well tought, cos that's what they teached us but, most of it are lies, dirty, filty lies. I have just ordered 3 books about the practice of slavery in Canada and French-Canada, It's disgusting, we have all the names of the masters and the slaves and yet, i never was told it even existed. We were told about the catholic mission but now, with all the pedophiles, we are just starting to understand what happened to all these indian kids prisonners in the schools.
@Hashishin13 Of course the indians resisted, what would you have done facing so much cruelty ? Is it bad to defend yourself against people who treat you like a sub-human ? According to the crasy religious freaks, an indian had no soul ! So, like the black man his role is to serve the real human, the white one ! So crazy but true througout history, in Africa to.
@nclusiu I wasn't talking about resisting agression, I was talking about aggressing. Also you act like this is a purely racist idea, its not, its entirely religious. You obviously haven't learned enough european history to know the word "barbarian" was a Roman word meaning: "anyone who isn't Roman or Greek". This is the start of the bigotry and superiority complex and it was directed from the Roman empire to the world, starting with Europe but continuing through catholicism to rest of the world.
@Hashishin13 You are right about barbarian. But was it the start of bigotry ? I don't think so.
Actually, it never started, it is, as simple as that. That's what humans are if you give them a chance to express it. They will hang themselves if you give them a chance.
I always found the civilized white man stupid but i may be wrong, so what? The catholic freak is definitly a stupid one, and all those flag lovers to, no doubt.
@nclusiau That screen your looking at, the electricity it uses, the plastic around the sides, the central heating or air conditioning your enjoying, were all invented by "the white man"
@Hashishin13 I never enjoy air conditionning. The plastic, although very usefull for civilisation, is polluting our seas now. And go look for yourself what the intelligent white man does to the environnement just because he wants the freedom of a cell. phone. Electricity was a major discovery although the kings of commerce fought it so violently that oil won. Yes the computer helped us exchange with lots of strangers but ...... are we better off and how about our chldren in this polluted world ?
@Hashishin13 Life expectancy maybe, what quality though, but what do we know about how long the elders lived 200 years ago ? We cannot compare, we don't know. We assume because we are blinded by science but i don't think that our numbers is a proff of health neither all these numerous new sickness, most of them created by mad sciebtists and for wich science has no answer, are not making our world better and us happier.
Happiness is the only goal on earth, at least for me, not a happy world now.
90% agreement. Your two organizing principles conflict. Property, and probably defense of property, is based on aggression. You might say using force in defense of property or rights of property is justifiable. But non-aggression and claiming more property than you need, while others have too little, seem incompatible to me. Philosophy or no.
The minute you have rules, you have individuals wanting to use violence to enforce those rules, no? Rules and violence go together. True anarchism is: no rules!
The business of government is the business of making laws (that they can later try and enforce thru violence, we agree on that). Are you also saying that a society of volunteerism would also be a society free of laws? I think addressing laws is as much fundamental as addressing violence.
keep fighting to get the word out. so how would this non aggression idea affect banks? is aggression limited to physical only? how about monopolies and financial takeovers? what if there are disagreements? who would be the arbiter? i am a bit confused how this model would solve corruption and the like? courts would be privately owned?
Mr. Molyneux is dodging the question on property ownership, because he can't answer it. There's a huge conflict in the idea of capitalist anarchism. You can't support the non aggression principle, and at the same time believe in property ownership. Even if you get rid of the government, with property ownership you will eventually get social stratification, therefore private police, hence violence. So you will eventually get "small private governments" ending up with the same problems.
@free7thinker Totally in agreement with you. Unless Stephan knows something we don't, the only human experiment in true anarchism was what the native amerindians were doing. And there was no land ownership in their society whatsoever. In fact, the notion of ownership does not exist at all. Ownership is rules, rules are laws and laws are violence. Anarchy means no laws. Like it or not, that's what anarchy is.
I was glad to hear a discussion of the history of pollution liability - I bring the point up often, but apparently most people don't know anything about it. It's something that needs to get out there and be understood - polluting is aggression against every person who is affected by it, and the only reason it has been tolerated for the past century is that the state protects the polluters and threatens anyone who would protect themselves from it.
Great video, good stuff Stef. I read an article on wired some months ago that saw things like wikipedia and opensource projects leading us into a new era of socialism or something. The thing about these projects is that they don't actually involve property rights since there is hardly any property to speak of involved. If we collaboratively build a car, we'll run into problems deciding who gets to use it when...not so when dealing with wiki entries or shared source code.
Glad i was able to find freedomainradio back when i did. Youtube has made it very hard to find shows like these, these days. Lately by having removed all functionality from the browsing section. Now the browsing section is just like TV, where you just sit down stop thinking and take whatever gets fed to you ie. whatever is on the page. Damn evil people at youtube.
The more I listen to Stef the more dumb I feel LOL... I always tink: Why can´t I be this clear and simple when explaining these sort of things... Brilliant minds make the complicated simple, but this guy makes stuff that people take a lifetime to understand so simple that a 2 yr old can get it. Im becoming a SteFAN!
One would argue the actual cause of the revolution was King George taking the colonies ability to print their own money legally, not a damn tax on tea
I'm sorry stef but your book DOES NOT stand unchallenged... Don't get me wrong, I really agree with much of what you have to say but UPB... there are many challengers...
@johngeetar I have defended the thesis against all debators, and written article responses and clarifications to those with objections, always to their satisfaction. Anyone is welcome to call me and correct my theory at any time. As yet, it has not happened. This does not mean it never will of course! :)
Great point at 12:28 a quick visit to cost of war.com and assuming every voter is a tax payer alter the tab to 'per tax payer' and the Cost of War in Iraq, today comes out at $5,148 each and the Cost of War in Afghanistan currently is running at $2,254 each. Imagine when Bush climbed onto the ground zero rubble pile with that fire fighter and said "the people who knocked these buildings down are gonna hear all of soon, as long as y'all pay Rummy and Dick $7,403 each"
One of the greatest things I've ever seen/listend too! Stefan, you are NOT alone, we are all over the place. Keep up the good work. Gretings from a Dane in Thailand
@MigDanskeren It was referred -to- several times, but like you I have had trouble finding original sources. Likely because I haven't gone through the entirety of Rothbard's works. Ugh!
I do keep looking, however. The "apple orchard owners" is the most specific reference I've seen, usually it's "pollution was treated like trespass until that was squashed by govt regulators".
I heard this too and was hoping to find something as mises.org or similar, but have been unsuccessful. If you should stumble upon some I'd love if you'd send a link :)
stef arent you sick of all that talking, i mean so much talk, talk...dont get me wrong a sharper mind would be hard to find, and your solutions are very real, but will never happen. how about solutions that can be achieved. put your brilliant mind to work out a way to undermine this crazy system. something we all could do to assist.
@dikkydoo1 I think he is undermining the system step by step. The first step is to establish property rights as a whole and build it as a foundation to the system that need be created. I could be wrong but i believe its a solid idea that just needs to take hold. I sometimes wonder though, is it human nature to adhere to a king and nobles such as we have with tribes all the way up. The kings of long ago were not always the business class like today yet the predatory lending almost always existed
Stef, you rock. It is so true we need philosophy more than ever. Not the philosophy like, "How do you know the thoughts you think are yours and where do they go once they've been thought?". I wish we could take time to explore that but we need guerrilla-based philosophy triaging society now. Without philosophy, we have no moral compass or beacon to get us there. Well done.
OK, that's very interesting stuff and I'm going to have to read more of your writings to see exactly where you're coming from (I remain unconvinced but open-minded), but just one point about the "Satanic Mills" you speak of.
In your example you say how the govt came down on the SM side. But if there was no govt the farmers would have no recourse at all and just have to suck it up. How would they get justice in your scenario?
@travis0629 true, might be, but it would effectively another state again, so we not realy got rid of the state in the first place. getting rid of the state is not getting rid of congress. its changing the statists mind sets. a big task of course, but has been done before. see slavery for example.
Max Keiser is a f-ing moron. He has no idea what Stef is talking about. He keeps thinking Stef is talking about foreign policy. Just trying to push his own ideological agenda.
@christiandhoffman you're probably right, but i like to pretend he's only playing stupid so that more of his listeners might be able to understand what stef is talking about.
Stef, in your response to Max's last question, you brought up a good point that not exercising your property rights is an option, but I thought you would have mentioned that intellectual property does not exist. Was there not enough time left in the interview for a discussion of objective reality?
@fnuzzoiv When you say that intellectual property does not exist, could you prove that your original ideas are not your your property? If you figure out a way to turn invisible and tell it to me, can I use it to my advantage regardless of how you feel about it? If original ideas are not property, how would you describe them? I don't necessarily disagree with you, I just don't understand it all that well. I need help.
I learned this from Stef. Existence must be an objective state, otherwise all claims of existence are equally valid. Science defines existence as that which is composed of matter of energy. An idea is not composed of matter or energy. Therefore, an idea doesn't exist. Intellectual property is an idea. Therefor, intellectual property does not exist. If intellectual property does not exist, then it is not property.
@fnuzzoiv Okay, I see what you mean. In order to be property, something must be tangible (objective). But by saying it's YOUR idea, doesn't that imply it's something you own?
@tesla921 You are right. Your implies ownership. That is a contradiction. You can't own something that does not exist. Technically, it is not correct English.
In a free society, there would not be a patent system. I believe that free people would come up with better ways to protect their ideas if they didn't use thugs to attack people who used them. It would evolve over time, just like any market.
This seriously sends chills down my spine! On TV again!?!?! And they said voluntarism! The future of the mainstream? Stef you will go down in history.
@theVAGINAntichrist I think you mean "UPB" - and yes, I've had over a hundred live call in shows since the book first came out, and I have successfully answered every objection to UPB, but if you have more criticisms, I am certainly happy to hear them. :)
Max just scored points in my book with this interview. Challenging questions and lets the interviewee speak without interruption. Not to mention inviting an advocate for a stateless society on to his show.
excellent stuff really cant argue with the ideas put forth here, the initiation of force is certainly one of the biggest evils in society, giving governments the power to "steal" & use force is a moral double standard that has no place in a society that values liberty/freedom!
The last 10 min made me think a little. However, I still can not see how less powerful will overcome the paradigm of social evolution - selection for more powerful. See - the powerful do not have to accept any philosophy or care about society or civilisation.
Linux is not exactly a commons. Sure, there are many different people and organisations all working with Linux for their own interests, but it is managed by the maintainers who enforce standards and keep the code working and clean. The final decision to include something comes down to Linus Torvalds (but usually anything which will badly effect others will be caught earlier). This can be seen by the recent example of Google's wake locks for Android being rejected.
I had to LOL at the rational "proof" of property rights there. But what can you do, I guess it's hard to turn around on a philosophy you have so much invested in, I can understand that.
@EdwardMandellHouse Instead of "LOL", why don't you point out the flaw in his logic.If you are interested in the truth and philosophy please enlighten us brotha, because it's all about reason, evidence, and our pursuit of truth right...
@usernameted1 to save myself some time I'll redirect you to Xomniverse's recent video "Property Rights, Stefan Molyneux, and Honesty". Brainpolice2 also did a pretty good rebuttal a couple of months back called "Stefbot On Property Rights".
Stefbot's lack of an adequate argument for property rights shouldn't be taken to mean I don't think some property should be viewed as legitimate, just that property can't be derived axiomatically at least not from self-ownership like he supposes.
You know, I believe Stef has mentioned multiple times that he does a Sunday show where people who disagree with him can call in and discuss said disagreements. He has pretty much put an invite out to anyone that wants to participate. So far, I don't think critics of Stef like xomniverse or brainpolice have bothered to even try to talk to him, but I'd certainly be interested to see it happen.
I don't fully grasp the supposed "disagreement" to be perfectly honest.
@TheCapitalistdog What's wrong with youtube as a format? If each person controls their videos and gets to state their case to its fullest, I think that's the optimal solution.
Real-time debates can easily be derailed. Sophistry often comes off best in that context -- snappy retorts make out better than a linear argument. Although it might be good for entertainment.
What a nice guy this mr. Keiser is. I doubt he agrees with Molyneux, but even having a guest with such currently radical ideas, he doesn't become a hysterical overbearing asshole like most talk show hosts would.
@miamizsun Not really. But I didn't watch too closely. All I noticed was he kept deflecting Stef's ideas about aggression with foreign policy - The idea it was connected to tax just didn't materialise for him. Of course Stef couldn't really say Tax = Theft on air without being dismissed as a wacko by the mainstream
It would be great to have a proper talk between you two, to prove you are serious and know what it is you are speaking about. A series of 8 4 hour podccasts would be a nice pressure wave to bat the mainstream around the head. And for fuck sake you faggots stop rushing what you are saying, slow the fuck down and more facts of history slowly. Its a fantastic subject and we wanna learn. And how about enforcement of laws of peace upon the violent? Should the victims be entittled to judge the guilty?
In a 100% free market - what would prevent private armies or police forces from being formed to further the interests of big corporations?
There is not a snowballs chance in hell that a free market will treat the environment with respect.
You enter this world with nothing and leave with nothing -- stop constantly bleating on about ownership.
20:00 I dumped Windoze a long time ago - GNU/Linux is far superior.
Laoch111 1 month ago
@Laoch111 so uhhh what are you advocating ? capitalism? plenty of mercs and enviro fuckups there socialism? well we got plenty of examples of that working out well over the long term lol. and private ownership? really? would you like it if i came and took all the stuff you worked for and made ? why do anything if you cant have anything? im not obsessed with objects but i would beat someones face in if i spent all day making a nice pot of stew and someone came and took it .
whiterchocolate 1 month ago
@Laoch111 sorry i guess that may have sounded kind of rude and if you want to go and be without property and all that stuff in your own little community thats great and more power to you as long as you dont try to force that on anyone else more freedom to you and all but i just really have a hard time seeing that work on a large scale like the old saying goes " in a utopia who would volunteer to clean the toilets? " i would really like to hear your opinions , thanks
whiterchocolate 1 month ago
@whiterchocolate People wont be cleaning toilets. That would be automated.
Laoch111 1 month ago
Important: information and ideas are not valid property in a voluntaryist society. IPRs are ridiculous so Microsoft shouldn't be have the protection of force if people share the software they programmed.
god0fgod 4 months ago
I enjoyed how Stef lit up while Max was making such an apt metaphor relating the open source success of Linux and the Web. Both smart and curious dudes that obviously appreciate well composed rebuts rather than scorn them with petty competitiveness
SleepDirtyJazzySet 7 months ago
They didn't say anything about criminals and legal systems, did they? That's really the only major objection to anarchism that usually comes up. How come they don't even mention it?
john42t 8 months ago
really great interview ...I thought Stef might faint during his comments on the problem of the commons though.... take a couple more breaths! ;)
errorspending 9 months ago
regarding the issues to do with property rights and the internet, it is my opinion that property rights are not inherent when it comes to files stored on a computer.
if i have a house, i want to keep it for myself, because if someone else moves in, i will be out of a house.
if i have a house.jpg, i can simply copy it, so anyone else who wants to look at it can, without me losing out.
are copyright laws anything more than a monopoly on sharing?
iBurnedEverything 1 year ago
Comment removed
RochPhotog 1 year ago
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
Concerning the bill of rights, is nature our experiment, or are we an experiment of nature?
PS I agree, a love and admire Stef's clarity of thought and expression.
his thinking is first rate
dan27music 1 year ago
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
Concerning the bill of rights, is nature our experiment, or are we an experiment of nature?
PS I agree, a love and admire Stef's clarity of thought and expression.
dan27music 1 year ago
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
Concerning the bill of rights, is nature our experiment, or are we an experiment of nature?
dan27music 1 year ago
The interviewee, Stef, is arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our thinking. But what about going deeper, and arguing that the problem lies with something fundamental in our hearts? To bring about the non-initiation of violence, there must be a deeper change in ourselves?
dan27music 1 year ago
This is probably Max's most interesting show ever.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
The ennemy, the indians, was not weak but open, very much, much more than those religious freaks and bandits who stole the land. if i remember correctly, the indians talked peace and wisdom in most of the negotiations signed treatys in good faith but the americans never respected even one !
So you had liars and thieves against people who were non violent and looking for peace. They lost. The White man can never be trusted, never again and the other colors are not to be trusted either.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau The reason why the natives lost wasn't openness and trust, it was lack of immunity to European diseases and inferior weapons technology.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 Your are right on both counts but it doesn't change what i said. Europeans were monsters, slaves takers, children killers, ready to kill anybody for a treasure especially gold, with their stupid religion driving their basic murder instinct. Not the red men.
America was a paradise then, read Cartier' description of the sight he had of the St-Lawrence river when he came in. In 400 years we destroyed most of the land, go look for yourself. Are we happier ? I don't think so.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau In day to day, hour to horu life we are definately far happier with elcetricity, clean water and plumbing. Have you ever tspent more then a few hours out in the bush? Mosquitoes during the summer and biting cold in the winter. AS for the idealistic native cultures, well in the North they seem like they were pretty good, I'll give you that. In the south on the other hand many of the native cultures were brutal and bloodthirsty, much more so then the europeans.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 ... yeah, mosquitos and biting cold, that was probably what the europeens called the Wild Wild West then but the indians lived there in total harmony with nature. Yes i spent time in the bush but my experience or yours is nothing to compare that of the indians of the prairies, the mountains and desert etc.... I also read about canibalism and i am not sure our ou any civilisation made it disapear, still alive and well. Brutal? How dan you be more brutal than exterminate millions ?
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau I meant the specific tactic or sclaping was pretty brutal, and the Aztecs basically did exterminate the tribes around them, but we don't have any count as to how many.
You talk about "perfect harmony", yet you don't understand that living as hunter gatherers with limited agriculture would have been a pretty shitty life. Even in Europe with relatively advanced farming there were regular famines, these were probably much worse in te native tribes.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 You find scalping brutal but it was a ritual, during a war only, not an everyday agression like we see today in our society. I can name at least 100 white's man methods that are much much more cruel. Indians use to say : "The Indian beats his horse and caresses his children and the white man beats his children and caresses his horse".
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau .... White man is very cruel to his own children and we can see the result in our society now, there are parts of Detroit (use to be french by the way) that were abandonned to gangs because the police won't go there anymore now how is that for regular violence? How many children were raped just yesterday, how many were forced to slavery, how many served as prostitute ?
I don't think that the nomads were violent, they were too much fragile in nature, they supported each other.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 When the first Europeans kown to us came here, the viking Lief Erickson in the year 1000, there was the great plague in Europe that killed millions. The main reason that was never mentionned for the plague was the fact that the Catholic Church was in war against sorcellery, sorcerers and of course, black cats. They killed so many cats that there was a "rat boom", then the plague. hahaha can you believe how stupid white folks are ?
nclusiau 1 year ago
Maybe you should stop perpetuating the racism that nearly wiped out your peoples? Calling White men stupid is the exact same as saying the indians had no soul, it puts a false dividing line between you and them, which never does any good. We are all related, and pretty closely at that. 99.9% of our DNA we share with chimpanzees, so imagine how close indians and hites are, calling them dumb is calling you dumb.
Now if you had said look at how dumb the catholics were that would make sense.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@nclusiau I'm not saying that the technology that europeans brought over justified what they did to the natives, but I am saying that the natives that survived probably have an easier life now. They would have an even better life if the government stopped trying to "help" them, but that goes for everyone.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 Oue governments cannot permit nomadism because we are a society based on "fences". We build fences everywhere and than we pretend the parameter is ours. Many americans find out now that the property they were so proud of owning doesn't really belong to them even if it's aid for. With this new "gaz shit" they drill for everywhere, our governments are changing our natural landscape into a lunar landscape.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau Uhh I don't understand the second half of this comment, but you are wrong about the natives not owning land. Each tribe had territory that they owned the same as we own land today. Many of them also had farming, just like the europeans but on a smaller scale because the crops theyhad weren't as good as wheat. The antives didn't have many fences because their territory was so large that it would be impractical to fence.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@nclusiau The Apache, Commanche and Aztecs were all brutal and aggressive to everyone, including the other trives in the area. The plains Indians also scalped people and left them to die with no skin on their head. At least the Europeans tended to kill outright. Also acting like all the natives were pruely innocent and acting like all the Europeans were genocidal maniacs is a bit simplistic. I'm sure that in the long history even some of the Northern tribes aggressed against the Europeans.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 Well, you were well tought, cos that's what they teached us but, most of it are lies, dirty, filty lies. I have just ordered 3 books about the practice of slavery in Canada and French-Canada, It's disgusting, we have all the names of the masters and the slaves and yet, i never was told it even existed. We were told about the catholic mission but now, with all the pedophiles, we are just starting to understand what happened to all these indian kids prisonners in the schools.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 Of course the indians resisted, what would you have done facing so much cruelty ? Is it bad to defend yourself against people who treat you like a sub-human ? According to the crasy religious freaks, an indian had no soul ! So, like the black man his role is to serve the real human, the white one ! So crazy but true througout history, in Africa to.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiu I wasn't talking about resisting agression, I was talking about aggressing. Also you act like this is a purely racist idea, its not, its entirely religious. You obviously haven't learned enough european history to know the word "barbarian" was a Roman word meaning: "anyone who isn't Roman or Greek". This is the start of the bigotry and superiority complex and it was directed from the Roman empire to the world, starting with Europe but continuing through catholicism to rest of the world.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 You are right about barbarian. But was it the start of bigotry ? I don't think so.
Actually, it never started, it is, as simple as that. That's what humans are if you give them a chance to express it. They will hang themselves if you give them a chance.
I always found the civilized white man stupid but i may be wrong, so what? The catholic freak is definitly a stupid one, and all those flag lovers to, no doubt.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau That screen your looking at, the electricity it uses, the plastic around the sides, the central heating or air conditioning your enjoying, were all invented by "the white man"
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 I never enjoy air conditionning. The plastic, although very usefull for civilisation, is polluting our seas now. And go look for yourself what the intelligent white man does to the environnement just because he wants the freedom of a cell. phone. Electricity was a major discovery although the kings of commerce fought it so violently that oil won. Yes the computer helped us exchange with lots of strangers but ...... are we better off and how about our chldren in this polluted world ?
nclusiau 1 year ago
@nclusiau Standard of living as well as life expectancy are still rising even in spite of all the things governments have done to hinder us.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 Life expectancy maybe, what quality though, but what do we know about how long the elders lived 200 years ago ? We cannot compare, we don't know. We assume because we are blinded by science but i don't think that our numbers is a proff of health neither all these numerous new sickness, most of them created by mad sciebtists and for wich science has no answer, are not making our world better and us happier.
Happiness is the only goal on earth, at least for me, not a happy world now.
nclusiau 1 year ago
@Hashishin13 Standard of living and life expectancy increase slave productivity.
shougoo7 10 months ago
90% agreement. Your two organizing principles conflict. Property, and probably defense of property, is based on aggression. You might say using force in defense of property or rights of property is justifiable. But non-aggression and claiming more property than you need, while others have too little, seem incompatible to me. Philosophy or no.
keepaopenmind 1 year ago
@keepaopenmind you don't claim property. you create it.
travis0629 1 year ago
@keepaopenmind you don't claim property. you create it. also why would someone claim less than they need?
travis0629 1 year ago
I want to make my rules and have my rules obeyed too. ;)
BlancGivre 1 year ago
The minute you have rules, you have individuals wanting to use violence to enforce those rules, no? Rules and violence go together. True anarchism is: no rules!
BlancGivre 1 year ago
@BlancGivre you don't need violence to enforce rules
travis0629 1 year ago
People everywhere are having a tough time envisioning a society without laws, yet it is those precise laws that are the basis of all the violence.
Government cannot be controlled because, precisely, they make or break all the laws!
BlancGivre 1 year ago
The business of government is the business of making laws (that they can later try and enforce thru violence, we agree on that). Are you also saying that a society of volunteerism would also be a society free of laws? I think addressing laws is as much fundamental as addressing violence.
BlancGivre 1 year ago
I think you guys should unite your followers. Link up.
sonyerectson 1 year ago
keep fighting to get the word out. so how would this non aggression idea affect banks? is aggression limited to physical only? how about monopolies and financial takeovers? what if there are disagreements? who would be the arbiter? i am a bit confused how this model would solve corruption and the like? courts would be privately owned?
thereelstory 1 year ago
Mr. Molyneux is dodging the question on property ownership, because he can't answer it. There's a huge conflict in the idea of capitalist anarchism. You can't support the non aggression principle, and at the same time believe in property ownership. Even if you get rid of the government, with property ownership you will eventually get social stratification, therefore private police, hence violence. So you will eventually get "small private governments" ending up with the same problems.
free7thinker 1 year ago
@free7thinker Totally in agreement with you. Unless Stephan knows something we don't, the only human experiment in true anarchism was what the native amerindians were doing. And there was no land ownership in their society whatsoever. In fact, the notion of ownership does not exist at all. Ownership is rules, rules are laws and laws are violence. Anarchy means no laws. Like it or not, that's what anarchy is.
BlancGivre 1 year ago
@free7thinker how do you know this?
you cannot have any sort of capitalism without private property and i don't see how support of the NAP is conflicting with property rights.
travis0629 1 year ago
fabulously well spoken.
planktonicorganism 1 year ago
I was glad to hear a discussion of the history of pollution liability - I bring the point up often, but apparently most people don't know anything about it. It's something that needs to get out there and be understood - polluting is aggression against every person who is affected by it, and the only reason it has been tolerated for the past century is that the state protects the polluters and threatens anyone who would protect themselves from it.
Nphyx 1 year ago
Great video, good stuff Stef. I read an article on wired some months ago that saw things like wikipedia and opensource projects leading us into a new era of socialism or something. The thing about these projects is that they don't actually involve property rights since there is hardly any property to speak of involved. If we collaboratively build a car, we'll run into problems deciding who gets to use it when...not so when dealing with wiki entries or shared source code.
thechonan1980 1 year ago
Comment removed
thechonan1980 1 year ago
Wow that last question is one I have been contemplating myself for some time now. Well done Stefan, you are really good!
ergotwotwo 1 year ago
ALWAYS HAS GOOD POINTS THAT STEFBOT AND GREAT CHOICE OF WORDS
amcanmike 1 year ago
Glad i was able to find freedomainradio back when i did. Youtube has made it very hard to find shows like these, these days. Lately by having removed all functionality from the browsing section. Now the browsing section is just like TV, where you just sit down stop thinking and take whatever gets fed to you ie. whatever is on the page. Damn evil people at youtube.
fergus247 1 year ago
Excellent interview.
asdfgasdfasdful 1 year ago
The more I listen to Stef the more dumb I feel LOL... I always tink: Why can´t I be this clear and simple when explaining these sort of things... Brilliant minds make the complicated simple, but this guy makes stuff that people take a lifetime to understand so simple that a 2 yr old can get it. Im becoming a SteFAN!
FDRspanish 1 year ago 19
Let me take "mainstream" back, and insert "brilliant debater".
petkol 1 year ago 3
Props to Max Keiser, as a "mainstreamer" to go down in muddy gruddy in the wider scope of political academy.
petkol 1 year ago
stef had a creepy smile.
greenghost2008 1 year ago
stefbot is awesome.
agentzippo 1 year ago 2
One would argue the actual cause of the revolution was King George taking the colonies ability to print their own money legally, not a damn tax on tea
freakfiend32 1 year ago
@freakfiend32
Either way, it's state intervention into the markets that caused the revolt.
TheCapitalistdog 1 year ago
Peace Truth Justice
LibertyPoet
website
campaign4liberty 1 year ago
Max Keiser and Stefan are awesome
qkholster 1 year ago
I'm sorry stef but your book DOES NOT stand unchallenged... Don't get me wrong, I really agree with much of what you have to say but UPB... there are many challengers...
johngeetar 1 year ago
@johngeetar
Can you please share here and/or send us a link to those challenges?
laconic 1 year ago
@johngeetar I have defended the thesis against all debators, and written article responses and clarifications to those with objections, always to their satisfaction. Anyone is welcome to call me and correct my theory at any time. As yet, it has not happened. This does not mean it never will of course! :)
stefbot 1 year ago 21
@stefbot of course! your "modell" seems very robust thought! and of course that is, as natural things are robust :). cheers!
jm
dasdeck 1 year ago
@stefbot what you meant to say was "unrefuted" rather than "unchallenged."
kalliste23 1 year ago
@stefbot What do you mean by aggression?
movcrit 2 months ago
Great interview! A lot of Stefan's thoughts are similar to mine
silverfuturist 1 year ago
I've heard of you Stefan, but this is my first formal introduction to you. And I say, You are impressive!
HyraxX 1 year ago
Excellent
OneMove33 1 year ago
Great point at 12:28 a quick visit to cost of war.com and assuming every voter is a tax payer alter the tab to 'per tax payer' and the Cost of War in Iraq, today comes out at $5,148 each and the Cost of War in Afghanistan currently is running at $2,254 each. Imagine when Bush climbed onto the ground zero rubble pile with that fire fighter and said "the people who knocked these buildings down are gonna hear all of soon, as long as y'all pay Rummy and Dick $7,403 each"
Tohellwithoursouls 1 year ago
Thanks god for the Internet.
Fun interview indeed :)
kevinz1985 1 year ago
I'm happy to see Max become an anarchist.
fagan411 1 year ago 2
MMmmm. Another tasty liberty nugget. TY stef.
nicademus1974 1 year ago
STEFAN WILL BE DEFINED AS A MAINSTREAM THINKER SOME DAY :)
MirageScience 1 year ago
One of the greatest things I've ever seen/listend too! Stefan, you are NOT alone, we are all over the place. Keep up the good work. Gretings from a Dane in Thailand
laconic 1 year ago
@Stef
I found the part about pollution in early industrial London very fascinating. Could you provide some good sources?
MigDanskeren 1 year ago
@MigDanskeren Same thing happened in the US.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@CurtHowland
Do you have references?
MigDanskeren 1 year ago
@MigDanskeren It was referred -to- several times, but like you I have had trouble finding original sources. Likely because I haven't gone through the entirety of Rothbard's works. Ugh!
I do keep looking, however. The "apple orchard owners" is the most specific reference I've seen, usually it's "pollution was treated like trespass until that was squashed by govt regulators".
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@CurtHowland
I heard this too and was hoping to find something as mises.org or similar, but have been unsuccessful. If you should stumble upon some I'd love if you'd send a link :)
MigDanskeren 1 year ago
@MigDanskeren I will.
The problem is, I think, that I don't know exactly what words to search for.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
Max is asking some interesting questions.
RyanDJamieson 1 year ago
stef arent you sick of all that talking, i mean so much talk, talk...dont get me wrong a sharper mind would be hard to find, and your solutions are very real, but will never happen. how about solutions that can be achieved. put your brilliant mind to work out a way to undermine this crazy system. something we all could do to assist.
dikkydoo1 1 year ago
@dikkydoo1 I think he is undermining the system step by step. The first step is to establish property rights as a whole and build it as a foundation to the system that need be created. I could be wrong but i believe its a solid idea that just needs to take hold. I sometimes wonder though, is it human nature to adhere to a king and nobles such as we have with tribes all the way up. The kings of long ago were not always the business class like today yet the predatory lending almost always existed
INEXORABLE247 1 year ago
@dikkydoo1
He is. The best way he can. Organic growth is best.
xpz25nfh 1 year ago
@xpz25nfh thanks maybe i am a little impatient..regards
dikkydoo1 1 year ago
"cod-ified".
wow
as in 'fishy'.
that tells me everything I need to know
lol
natmanprime 1 year ago
i got a good laugh at you not plugging UPB at mention of the bible.
whyyoumadlol 1 year ago
BTW, I gotta ask. Are you and Max wearing pants? :)
xpz25nfh 1 year ago
Stef, you rock. It is so true we need philosophy more than ever. Not the philosophy like, "How do you know the thoughts you think are yours and where do they go once they've been thought?". I wish we could take time to explore that but we need guerrilla-based philosophy triaging society now. Without philosophy, we have no moral compass or beacon to get us there. Well done.
xpz25nfh 1 year ago
max keiser is an amazing interviewer wow much respect
jystyle 1 year ago
OK, that's very interesting stuff and I'm going to have to read more of your writings to see exactly where you're coming from (I remain unconvinced but open-minded), but just one point about the "Satanic Mills" you speak of.
In your example you say how the govt came down on the SM side. But if there was no govt the farmers would have no recourse at all and just have to suck it up. How would they get justice in your scenario?
mikef179 1 year ago
@mikef179 why would the farmers have no recourse?
in your scenario you've taken away the state. doesn't it make sense that something else would pop up to take advantage of the arbitration market?
travis0629 1 year ago
@travis0629 true, might be, but it would effectively another state again, so we not realy got rid of the state in the first place. getting rid of the state is not getting rid of congress. its changing the statists mind sets. a big task of course, but has been done before. see slavery for example.
dasdeck 1 year ago
@dasdeck
Yea the state is bad news for sure.
As long as something remains voluntary then it can't be a state so I don't see the problem.
I think it would be impossible for a society to devolve back into pre abolition period thinking where slavery is valued.
Once society grows out of statism I don't see how it will ever go back.
travis0629 1 year ago
Stef & Max; what a pair :-)
nanciqwerty 1 year ago
Max Keiser is a f-ing moron. He has no idea what Stef is talking about. He keeps thinking Stef is talking about foreign policy. Just trying to push his own ideological agenda.
christiandhoffman 1 year ago
@christiandhoffman you're probably right, but i like to pretend he's only playing stupid so that more of his listeners might be able to understand what stef is talking about.
whyyoumadlol 1 year ago
Stef, in your response to Max's last question, you brought up a good point that not exercising your property rights is an option, but I thought you would have mentioned that intellectual property does not exist. Was there not enough time left in the interview for a discussion of objective reality?
fnuzzoiv 1 year ago
@fnuzzoiv When you say that intellectual property does not exist, could you prove that your original ideas are not your your property? If you figure out a way to turn invisible and tell it to me, can I use it to my advantage regardless of how you feel about it? If original ideas are not property, how would you describe them? I don't necessarily disagree with you, I just don't understand it all that well. I need help.
tesla921 1 year ago
@tesla921
I learned this from Stef. Existence must be an objective state, otherwise all claims of existence are equally valid. Science defines existence as that which is composed of matter of energy. An idea is not composed of matter or energy. Therefore, an idea doesn't exist. Intellectual property is an idea. Therefor, intellectual property does not exist. If intellectual property does not exist, then it is not property.
fnuzzoiv 1 year ago
@fnuzzoiv Okay, I see what you mean. In order to be property, something must be tangible (objective). But by saying it's YOUR idea, doesn't that imply it's something you own?
tesla921 1 year ago
@tesla921 You are right. Your implies ownership. That is a contradiction. You can't own something that does not exist. Technically, it is not correct English.
fnuzzoiv 1 year ago
@tesla921
In a free society, there would not be a patent system. I believe that free people would come up with better ways to protect their ideas if they didn't use thugs to attack people who used them. It would evolve over time, just like any market.
fnuzzoiv 1 year ago
wow this was awesome
krychamin 1 year ago
This seriously sends chills down my spine! On TV again!?!?! And they said voluntarism! The future of the mainstream? Stef you will go down in history.
t2491tom 1 year ago
Hey Stefan have you seen "The Secret of Oz" it's a documentary on economics and the solution to the world's money problems.
Loveseekingmissile 1 year ago
really well done Stefan
notesleb 1 year ago
@MrChrisBlizzard Thank you I appreciate that!
stefbot 1 year ago
The Microsoft/Unix analogy Max gave was fantastic. 19:40
texme 1 year ago
Comment removed
texme 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Microsoft/Unix analogy Max gave was fantastic. 19:40
texme 1 year ago
9:40
"UPD stands unchallenged."
lolwut.
theVAGINAntichrist 1 year ago
@theVAGINAntichrist I think you mean "UPB" - and yes, I've had over a hundred live call in shows since the book first came out, and I have successfully answered every objection to UPB, but if you have more criticisms, I am certainly happy to hear them. :)
stefbot 1 year ago
Max knows his sheeple questions well!
andrewh817 1 year ago
Max just scored points in my book with this interview. Challenging questions and lets the interviewee speak without interruption. Not to mention inviting an advocate for a stateless society on to his show.
furyofbongos 1 year ago 3
excellent .
1968wadsworth 1 year ago
Great jobs Stef and Max!
TheCapitalistdog 1 year ago
@TheCapitalistdog thank you very much my friend!
stefbot 1 year ago
great job. thanks for your work over the years.
imyourgod2 1 year ago
@imyourgod2 you're more than welcome, thank you for the very kind words!
stefbot 1 year ago
excellent stuff really cant argue with the ideas put forth here, the initiation of force is certainly one of the biggest evils in society, giving governments the power to "steal" & use force is a moral double standard that has no place in a society that values liberty/freedom!
djdnauk1977 1 year ago
The last 10 min made me think a little. However, I still can not see how less powerful will overcome the paradigm of social evolution - selection for more powerful. See - the powerful do not have to accept any philosophy or care about society or civilisation.
Nomels 1 year ago
Huge fan of Max and I believe this is your second appearance on his show? Damn you guys are quite the duo, fucking loved it.
savemyplaylist 1 year ago
A good interview
Nomels 1 year ago 2
Stefan, you could be the sanest guy on the planet.
blujufirst 1 year ago
@blujufirst I hope it's not just you and me, brother! :)
stefbot 1 year ago
Linux is not exactly a commons. Sure, there are many different people and organisations all working with Linux for their own interests, but it is managed by the maintainers who enforce standards and keep the code working and clean. The final decision to include something comes down to Linus Torvalds (but usually anything which will badly effect others will be caught earlier). This can be seen by the recent example of Google's wake locks for Android being rejected.
shaurz 1 year ago
Also it doesn't make sense to treat software development like a "commons". It's not a resource to be used up. The main problem is managing entropy.
shaurz 1 year ago
@shaurz Also you are free to make your own private version and not share it with anyone. You can run your own personal version all for yourself.
MarkProffitt 1 year ago
very nice, loved the last bit of dialog especially.
haterdrinkinhaterade 1 year ago
@stefbot Thanks for the books. What do you mean by society? Is this like a club you can join or leave as you wish?
WoollyNZ 1 year ago
@WoollyNZ that's a pretty good way of putting it, you might want to check out my free book Practical Anarchy, available on my website... :)
stefbot 1 year ago
I had to LOL at the rational "proof" of property rights there. But what can you do, I guess it's hard to turn around on a philosophy you have so much invested in, I can understand that.
EdwardMandellHouse 1 year ago
@EdwardMandellHouse Instead of "LOL", why don't you point out the flaw in his logic.If you are interested in the truth and philosophy please enlighten us brotha, because it's all about reason, evidence, and our pursuit of truth right...
usernameted1 1 year ago
@usernameted1 to save myself some time I'll redirect you to Xomniverse's recent video "Property Rights, Stefan Molyneux, and Honesty". Brainpolice2 also did a pretty good rebuttal a couple of months back called "Stefbot On Property Rights".
Stefbot's lack of an adequate argument for property rights shouldn't be taken to mean I don't think some property should be viewed as legitimate, just that property can't be derived axiomatically at least not from self-ownership like he supposes.
EdwardMandellHouse 1 year ago
@EdwardMandellHouse
You know, I believe Stef has mentioned multiple times that he does a Sunday show where people who disagree with him can call in and discuss said disagreements. He has pretty much put an invite out to anyone that wants to participate. So far, I don't think critics of Stef like xomniverse or brainpolice have bothered to even try to talk to him, but I'd certainly be interested to see it happen.
I don't fully grasp the supposed "disagreement" to be perfectly honest.
TheCapitalistdog 1 year ago
@TheCapitalistdog What's wrong with youtube as a format? If each person controls their videos and gets to state their case to its fullest, I think that's the optimal solution.
Real-time debates can easily be derailed. Sophistry often comes off best in that context -- snappy retorts make out better than a linear argument. Although it might be good for entertainment.
EdwardMandellHouse 1 year ago
@EdwardMandellHouse Ahhh, the "LOL argument," first introduced by Socrates, if I remember rightly, well played!
stefbot 1 year ago
AWESOME, new video. I love your stuff.
mynameaborat993 1 year ago 2
wow stunned.. (A)wesome stef!
tilsetningsstoff 1 year ago
@tilsetningsstoff thank you so much, I hope it was not *completely* stunning! :)
stefbot 1 year ago
What a nice guy this mr. Keiser is. I doubt he agrees with Molyneux, but even having a guest with such currently radical ideas, he doesn't become a hysterical overbearing asshole like most talk show hosts would.
TotalAnomy 1 year ago 2
@TotalAnomy I agree, he was very enjoyable to chat with.
stefbot 1 year ago
This guy has a total mental blindspot at tax = theft
what a douche
Anarchyland2 1 year ago
@Anarchyland2, he's referring to any tax/fee that isn't voluntary. Hope that helps.
miamizsun 1 year ago
@miamizsun Not really. But I didn't watch too closely. All I noticed was he kept deflecting Stef's ideas about aggression with foreign policy - The idea it was connected to tax just didn't materialise for him. Of course Stef couldn't really say Tax = Theft on air without being dismissed as a wacko by the mainstream
Anarchyland2 1 year ago
@Anarchyland2
Have you listened to anything he has said?
boosuff 1 year ago
The guy has no clue how IP differs from physical property and seems to have no understanding of how property contributes to economic calculation.
Moragauth 1 year ago
refreshing vid of 2 guys that are entertaining and always enjoyable to watch. A1
damosapian 1 year ago 2
Max is mixing up volunteerism with voluntaryism..... calling it both voluntarism :-)
alalelalex 1 year ago
It would be great to have a proper talk between you two, to prove you are serious and know what it is you are speaking about. A series of 8 4 hour podccasts would be a nice pressure wave to bat the mainstream around the head. And for fuck sake you faggots stop rushing what you are saying, slow the fuck down and more facts of history slowly. Its a fantastic subject and we wanna learn. And how about enforcement of laws of peace upon the violent? Should the victims be entittled to judge the guilty?
jamerfunk 1 year ago
Stefan fucking owned statism in this video. There's not a person in the world that could disagree with his arguments and be correct.
TheStig000 1 year ago
awesome job, stef !
max needed some lessons in politics.
he always calls for more coerced regulations as a response to any problem.
1schwererziehbar1 1 year ago
Comment removed
Iamfatbrain 1 year ago
This is excellent! Two great minds finally come together. Love it!
creamrising 1 year ago
I read UPB universally Preferred Behavior, It's a masterpiece!!! It's like the scientific method for ethics. A total breakthrough in thinking.
Iseeyoursoul 1 year ago 7
@Iseeyoursoul high praise indeed, thank you so much!
stefbot 1 year ago
@Iseeyoursoul high praise indeed, thank you very much! :)
stefbot 1 year ago
ilu
fergus247 1 year ago