Avoidable vs Unavoidable subjection

[prajnasword]

I like you better with the beard.

[KenCat1337]

Although you commented saying the baby analogy may not be a good one, it was simply put and made sense.

In nature, the lion eats the antilope.

Does that mean the rich man should eat the poor man? Not at all.

We are not animals, we have higher states of consciousness and just because something may happen in nature, does not mean we must follow.

Besides, "Anarcho"-Capitalism is Capitalism without government -- it's uncontrolled.

It would be worse than our current system..

[Sepero1]

Monarchy was natural and it worked for a time.

Slaves were natural and it worked for a time.

Capitalism is natural and it may be replaced at some time.

Mass collectivism is unnatural...

[mr1001nights]

All ruling classes and their ideologues have identified their rule with natural forces. It's just vulgar apologetics, really.

[Sepero1]

When it comes to economics, I don't think in terms of apologetics. I think in terms of effective vs ineffective.

[mr1001nights]

and who doesnt say that?

[TasinAkiwo]

My nation's history, as well as the history of most other indigenous nations I've encountered on this continent, seem to disagree with you.

[Sepero1]

Yes, that comment is old. A sort of "collectivism" worked for Native American Indians before the British settlers arrived.

I think collectivism used to work quite well.

[TasinAkiwo]

Which disproves your statement that "mass collectivism is unnatural", right? Which means that any arguments derived from that assumption have also been disproved.

[Sepero1]

Yep, you win, because I don't really derive any arguments from it. My latest video states that I am against collectivism from a point of practicality and pragmatism.

[TasinAkiwo]

Well thats good to know. At least we aren't arguing over some ridiculous human nature point.

[Sepero1]

Haha. It is a rare moment on youtube where one party concede's that the other wins. ;o)

It's ok for me, though. My goal is not to be correct. My goal is to find truth.

Peace

[qtronman]

So you are a baby?

[mr1001nights]

that is just an example--maybe a bad one. Don't dwell on it. try to be honest and get at the substance of the argument. Do u perceive the difference between the unavoidable subjection of nature and the avoidable subjection of social structures?

[bilgreen713]

"anarcho"capitalism has genocidal tendencies. I think it would be worse than our current system.

[untilallarefree]

The only thing anarcho capitalists have in common with anarchism is only ONE THING; national anarchism, why? Because they are both as illogical as each other, as well as being direct contradictions with anarchism.

All in all, despite how much I appreciated watching your video, I wouldn't bother wasting much time on these people. When it comes to a revolution, just like the nationalist anarchists - they'll be stuck on the fence, not actually knowing which side to choose.

Love & Liberation.

[Moragauth]

Delude yourself all you like leftist drone. None of you idiots are anarchists in any sense of the word. It is you who have nothing in common with the term. Go on though, continue pretending to make legitimate use of it.

[mr1001nights]

& reason is well-thought-out arguments, not cliches. It's the capitalist system that favors wolves voting what's for lunch. Capitalists RULE society and impose a 'work for me or starve" status quo. Anarchism believes in decentralization of power and ppl having a say over decisions IN PROPORTION to how much they are affected by those decisions (not the same as majority rule). Liberty means placing the burden of proof on authority & realizing that grassroots movements win ur freedoms

[Psycarne]

A functioning socialist system is one in which matters of public consequence are managed democratically.

This means that the class system is eliminated, because property is managed democratically and cannot be used by a property owning class to exploit a subserviant class. That is not so hard to understand.

Socialism itself simply means, a system in which the economy is used for social gain.

[PrimeDirector]

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a "dismal science." But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance. Yet this sort of aggressive ignorance is inherent in the creed of anarcho-communism.

Murray Rothbard

[LeeGeeGee]

Did you go to university? A university contains hierarchy. Your professor is your boss. Not only that, but you PY him to be your boss. You WANT him to lead you. You need to realize that there is nothing unarchistic about hierarchy as long as it's voluntary.

[D4Shawn]

Socialist can't play in orchestras either because the director would be "ruling" over them. Personally, I think the whole notion of "voluntarily ruled" is a bit of an oxymoron. The whole problem with being ruled is that it's generally against one's will. I really think it's socialists who miss the whole point of anarchy (though I'm not childish enough to deny them the term).

[D4Shawn]

I just think it's retarded to be against voluntary hierarchy. If you were against it, it wouldn't be voluntary. It's an obvious contradiction.

[ithinkronpaulissmart]

Noam Chomsky comes up a lot in your wikipedia article.

[TruthDevours]

Nature "imposes" anything you find in it. Using the fact that "nature" imposes subordination justifies INsubordiation as well. No prey animal is going to allow a predator to simply devour it because it's "allowed". It's going to defend itself as adamantly and adequately as it can. It's sad that of all the observations one could extract from the natural world, the idea of COLLECTIVE SELF-INTEREST seems to completely elude every ancaper jackass in existence.

[TruthDevours]

Animals raised in the Amazon jungle will either evade or attack you, while most of the wildlife in the Galapagos Islands have no fear of human beings. Their habitat lacks natural predators, subsequently creating a nonhostile environment. Capitalism creates arbitrary competition, and demarcates the population into a hostile opulent minority and a hostile impoverished majority. This kind of pernicious cupidity is thriving in the 21st century? Ridiculous. Capitalism is barbarism. Period.

[nickglais]

The confusion of the natural with the social was the basis of the social darwininsts and today the socio-biologists are continuing this via the genetic route until social inequalities are completely naturalised and any opposition to inequality medicalised.

Keep the human spirit alive and expose these perverters of humanity

[IWW610]

It is interesting to note that I never even heard of this group ("Anarcho-capitolists") untill I started roaming around youtube. I have never seen two more contradictory words strung together, their like a Monty Python skit without the wit.

[notloz2]

The evolution of political philosophies follows our slow understanding of reality and our enviroment through history.

We have altered our enviroment by leaving the state of nature to pursue our own course. Anarcho-capitalists want to use old understandings in our new reality.

Survival of the fittest doesn't apply anymore unless you consider ruthlesssness being fit.

The economic superstructure not government holds us back from change, for it's the dominating hegemon between the two systems.

[buddhagem]

You continue to impress me, brother. This was an excellent response.

[Luke12000]

I never said that capitalists are justified in whatever they do because of nature. I said the same "coerced set of options", exist in YOUR society, and in reality in general.

[BrightHelmVellas]

Luke, the argument is over the definition of 'coersion'. Nature does not impose the institutionalised dominance (and thus coersion) of one human being over another. Capitalism does.

[Luke12000]

In what way does a voluntary free market that respects socialists right to exist "IMPOSE" anything?

[BrightHelmVellas]

That depends on how you propose to get there. What is to be done about current private property rights? Some ancaps believe all that needs to happen from our current situation is for the government to be disolved and that then only contractual relationships will exists. I am saying that in reality that would not be consistent with anarchism. Property ownership has to be justified. We could argue for hours over what utopia might be like but it would be more useful to deal with existing conditions

[Luke12000]

"Property ownership has to be justified."

...ok, how do you justify it?

[toesandumbrellas]

easy - you first have to understand the fundamental difference between personal property rights and private property rights-the former denotes actual direct usage (eg food you are actually eating, or land whereon you actually live)

[toesandumbrellas]

the latter denotes something with which you can coerce others (eg food you will never eat or grow yourself, or land you've never seen, that you use to coerce other into wage slavery and further centralize the concentration of power into destructive hierarchies)-quite antithetical to anarchism

[toesandumbrellas]

an example - you know how we're always told that 350 million people a year starve in india? - well, that country's granaries now, instead of growing food for its starving masses, export dog food and tulips to europe - and guess what else happened - the companies dumped 60 million tons of food into the ocean one year cos they couldn't find markets for it, and wouldn't give it to the 350 million who couldn't afford to pay

[toesandumbrellas]

that's kinda what capitalism does - it values money over life - i don't have a problem with you wanting to be rich or whatever - but as soon as your money or anyone else's comes at the expense of 350 million a year in india, that'll be a bit of a PR problem for you

[toesandumbrellas]

do you not understand that "anarcho"-capitalism would mean no regulation on things like slavery, child labor, ecocide, stuff like that? god forbid the government butt into "free enterprise"! capitalism without government to protect some people from these assholes, as pathetic and negligible a job as they do at the moment, would probably be even worse than what we have now - anarchism isn't about "no government" or chaos - it's about removing all anti-democratic hierarchies

[dbrockttu]

I love your videos.

[saronson93]

Great video. What anarcho capitalists don't understand is that humans actually evolved living comunally in a stateless, classless, society with no authorities in the hunter-gatherer societies. That is the non alienated version of human nature.

[D4Shawn]

So... you basically want the lowest standard of living possible... like a cave for a house I guess... and a life-expectancy of 30 years.... no laws, no rights.... no economic life or opportunity, etc.. Ok, that's fine. The ONE thing I don't understand then, is why you are explaining this USING A COMPUTER.

[saronson93]

You obviously do not have the slightest idea of what classless and stateless society means. Hunter-gatherer tribes were classless and stateless, but it does not mean that that is what people who want classless and stateless society want to go back to. They did not have surplus labour. However, capitalism has now performed it's historic role, so we now have the productive forces to ensure everyone can fully develop to there mental and physical potential instead of a small few with no classes.

[D4Shawn]

"Hunter-gatherer tribes were classless and stateless, but it does not mean that that is what people who want classless and stateless society want to go back to."

That's basically why I felt your example was a bit silly. You seemed (clearly) to be implying that because we "evolved through" something, that makes it a good thing. That would be similar to saying that because slavery is pervasive throughout all of human history, it must be a good thing. I don't see the logic.

[saronson93]

What I am describing is alienation. Because humans evolved naturally in a stateless and classless society, that is what there natural state is. Slavery is alienation from that natural state, as is capitalism. Ending this alienation from humans' natural state will undoubtedly make life better.

[D4Shawn]

I always get a bit suspicious when people start talking about what is or isn't "natural"... like when people say, "Homosexuality isn't natural". I'm convinced that the term is completely meaningless when applied to human affairs. Living in a house, or reading a book could be construed as "unnatural". I'm not convinced that the word has meaning in the context you're placing it in. As such, I would ask you two questions:

[D4Shawn]

1) What do you mean by "natural" (define the term as it relates to this discussion)?

2) Why is "natural" automatically good or preferable?

[saronson93]

1) When I say natural state of human, I mean the original essence of humanness, the non-alienated human.

2) This natural state is preferable because it will undoubtedly increase the happiness and well being of all people. This is true in every case. For example, currently people are alienated in the work place because they are treated as machines. If work comes back to the natural state, they will not be alienated and instead work will be a satisfactory and creative activity.

[D4Shawn]

"The original essence of humanness"

Classic!

If you were any older than 14, I would karate chop you in the eye for talking complete nonsense and inventing meaningless new agey phrases. But... since you're still a kid, I'll just forgive you and move on.

Take it easy!

[GabeTheArchAngel]

5 stars

[PuppyHate]

They're just anarcho-capitalists because they live in a capitalist social system and are bombarded daily with propaganda of the wonders of free-market capitalism. If they lived in France 500 years ago they would be "anarcho-feudalists". If they lived in Rome 2000 years ago they would be "anarcho-Slavery-ists". If they lived in Iran they would be "anarcho-islamists". All as contradictory as "anarcho-capitalists" of course, but you could never convince them of that.

[mr1001nights]

very well put PuppyHate!