Added: 1 year ago
From: minnesotachris
Views: 9,548
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (201)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Tab please!

  • This is so full of win.

  • what are the chords for this song? can't figure out the 2nd chord lol

  • Ok, so how much land can one own in an Anarcho-Capitalist society? Would there be an enforced limit?

  • @yinzjagoffs Why would there be a limit? Who would impose the limit? There wouldn't be a government

  • @yinzjagoffs

    The limit would likely be an organic limit. How much is not own, how much that person can afford to maintain, etc.

  • Meh... I like anarcho capitalism but I don't like the acoustic guitar rhythm. It needs more techno synth.

  • The problem with the lyrics is that it attempts to dismiss Islam as a legitimate threat to freedom. The person who wrote this is still allowing politically correct notions to control their thinking. They also seem to be defending the concept of due process which by definition does not exist for the person who doesn't want to follow it because they didn't agree it.

  • we dont need a state for a true Anarcho-Capitalist market....

  • this is great!!!

  • Thank you! This is my life! "I like where this is going, but then she tells me ..."

    What is so wrong about human freedom?

  • Any actual anarchists?

  • Is that Tom Woods' voice at the end? If so, what speech is that from? Where can I find it?

  • @chrislbrunner Yeah that's Tom Woods. Here is the video: /watch?v=064YTtSxVSo The part in this song is near the end of the speech.

  • Love the Tom Woods clip at the end, very profound.

  • What the hell is anarcho communism very big governent controling everything yet at the same time there is no governent sounds like. Paradox because those two ideas are completly opposie each other

  • @backle100 Communism is a classless and therefore stateless society - anarchy is the same ... I don't see how this is paradox.

  • @Neoscalex "Communism is a classless" This is patently false. Communism is a political class system that seeks total control of every aspect of peoples lives. It rejects freedom of any kind. Rather than a system where the producers have the power it is a system where the takers have power.

  • @Huboons That's simply not true. What you describe is state socialism.

  • Actually, in non-Austrian terminology it's not even original socialism because there worker's would also have direct control over the means of production. It's more like state capitalism - or state feudalism if you want to understand the term "capitalism" as an actually free market.

  • @Neoscalex Your post is a non sequitur

  • @Huboons How?

  • Can anarcho-capitalist and anarcho-communist/syndicalist societies coexist side by side? Or no? I honestly think that in the future labor won't be as big of a problem and we won't necessitate an economy because we'll have a mechanized labor force... but that's just my thoughts. I guess I would still throw my hat in with the anarcho communists but i see the point of view of Anarcho-capitalists and I respect it.

  • @XxAmericanLedxX

    It just happens to be that Anarcho-capitalism can have anarcho-communism in it, but not vice versa.

    Anarcho-capitalism, I think, would be the way to start it, then it depends on the will of the people, if most people then would like to share their money and land that is great.

  • @SlipAllCityToy Well I was thinking about two separate communities of Anarcho-Capitalist and Anarcho-Communists. Would they be able to coexist?

  • @XxAmericanLedxX

    Oh.. That's a great question.

    I suppose they could, they both have their own problems and neither want to force anything upon each other so I guess yes..

    Just my opinion.

  • @XxAmericanLedxX

    Anarcho-Capitalism pertains to the political philosophy of voluntaryism, which essentially states that valid institutional authority is derived from contractual agreement. Consequently, one must voluntarily enter into a binding contract in order to be legitimately subordinated to someone else; that person cannot impose his authority on you. It follows that all forms of social and economical organization is permissible to the extent that participation is voluntary.

  • @SlipAllCityToy You can remove anarchy from the equation on both sides without altering the answer. People in a free society can choose to live communally and some do. But no one in a communist society can be allowed freedom, to practice freedom, to produce for themselves and trade what they own for what they want. This isn't possible because communism doesn't respect property rights, one doesn't even own their own labor, so they have nothing to trade. Socialism is incompatible with freedom.

  • @wrjamescom

    You seem to be absolutely right, thanks for the thought.

    I can respect the need to share what you have to help others, which should be practiced by everyone but shouldn't be forced upon anyone.

  • @XxAmericanLedxX

    I'd say they could co-exist so long as both sides stick to the NAP.

  • @codecixteen The problem with the NAP is that it is a package deal. Very much like the concept of capitalism that in modern society is used for mixed economies of state rules and private markets. The NAP includes a very specific conception of absolute property rights, above which you can hold up no moral principle. It is perfectly compatible with the NAP to let almost the whole humanity starve to death, but few people would accept this as just.

  • @Neoscalex

    I think you will find many, many fewer people starving in places where the NAP is followed more closely, than in areas where the reverse philosophy is applied...

  • @AK49Gunner Maybe, though I don't think this is necessarily true. However, that isn't the point. If the NAP ist a moral absolute, its validity does not depend on its consequences.

  • @XxAmericanLedxX I think both can exist peacefully together. Lookup youtube user rjweapon. He talks about this in a couple of different videos.

  • Now there's a band on stage screaming about anarchy

    They got the guitars up loud and the beats real fast

    Sticking a middle finger up to authority,

    And I like where this is going

    But then I delve deeper into their philosophy

    They're talking egalitarian communes and animal rights

    No system of arbitration or division of labor

    No law and order -- no property rights

    LOLLOLOLOLOL

  • What's up with the Cunieform letters?

  • @keenanwin It's a Sumerian symbol known as the Ama-gi. Originally, it was used in reference to slaves who had been freed from their masters, and is believed by many historians to be the first written expression of the concept of liberty. Today, it's often associated with libertarian organizations, especially the Austrian School of Economics and Anarcho-Capitalism in general

  • "She's got the proverbial gun literally aimed at my chest."

    Shut the fuck up. You have just lost your license to speak.

  • @WilliamHollender u mad statist?

  • Comment removed

  • @Jack102589 The market is made of people all trying to coordinate themselves, making decisions as and when they are needed. The state tries to coordinate people according to some central plan, the goals of which are ultimately up to a small group of people who can win a popularity contest.

  • "we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical"

    -Murray Rothbard on "anarcho-"capitalism

  • Actually, if you read that article, you would see he concluded by saying "we are not anarchists, or archists... we are strictly middle of the road non-archists"

  • @SlickExecutiveType Do you refer to yourself as a "nonarcho-capitalist"?

  • No, do you bother to the read the articles you quote?

  • @SlickExecutiveType Most of the time. For example, Albert Einstein said "I don't know how WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones." I have not read the original article in which that was said.

  • @SlickExecutiveType By the way, why do you call yourself "Libertarian" if you advocate such an extreme form of economic tyranny and subordination?

  • Because you commies stole the term liberal.

  • Sir, is there somewhere i can download this, preferably for a price that will be of a profit to you?

  • At least I know you won't try to shoot me if I steal the song and change the lyrics a bit (I probably wont but might).

  • @Jack102589 Haha, so you mean that capitalism, in other words free trade and volountarism, lead to poor and dangerous working condtions for the workers? Please, what source do you have? Government school? And are you saying that the only way to take care of theese problems are force and violence?

  • @STAB1L I'm a student of history, my friend. You can look at present-day China for an example of the effects of an unregulated capitalist system. It has resulted in widespread environmental degradation, serious human rights violations, and the birth of the Chinese labor movement. Anarcho-capitalists desperately need to gain an understanding of the reasons for the birth of the labor movement in their own nations. Then maybe they'll see the necessity of regulation to keep business in check.

  • I know you guys are kids though, and simplistic and consistent ideologies like anarchism, anarcho-capitalism, and communism appeal to people because they ARE so simplistic and consistent. It only takes time to begin to understand that there are really complexities and shades of grey in every situation, and there is no one quick fix or universal prescription that will fix it all. Take your time, research, learn.

  • The arguments for voluntarism are not simplistic at all, and I don't see the value in being intellectually inconsistent; that just means you thinking is confused somewhere. Instead of vaguely assuring us that anarchy doesn't work, why don't you demonstrate what the problem with it is?

  • @SlickExecutiveType I'm not suggesting that you should hold inconsistent views, only that you should take particular circumstances by themselves and not pretend that there is some universal prescription that will work in all circumstances. This is essentially the gist of Joseph Stiglitz's argument in Globalization and its Discontents... freeing up markets can be a very positive thing and can generate a great deal of improvement in the quality of life of people, but there is a place for gov't.

  • Jack - you surely hold that it is wrong to initiate violence, to use coercion to bend another to your will. If you want sex, you do not rape. If you want money, you do not steal.

    So why, if it is wrong for all other individuals or organizations to use violence or coercion, is it okay for the state?

    I suggest you read the work of Murray Rothbard. He may never have been the head of a World Bank (could you have picked a worse appeal to authority?) but he has all the answers you are looking 4

  • @SlickExecutiveType By the way Stiglitz was the head of the World Bank and a member of the Council of Ecnomic Advisers under Clinton, also a Noble Prize winner in economics. He's an accomplished economist who has made some crucial advances in the field by highlighting the fundamental INefficiency of markets left to themselves because of information asymmetry and other factors. The fact is neoliberal economics in America is mainly a tool of the elite, and plays directly into their hands.

  • @Jack102589 I beg to differ. Unlike "anarcho-" capitalism, anarchism is not a simplistic ideology that starts with a few naive axioms and interprets the entire world in their context. It is a rich political meta-philosophy with many underlying currents of thought, going back as far as human history will allow. Its biggest strength is precisely that it is not a utopian philosophy. There is no "ideal" anarchist society; just a willingness to learn from mistakes, and constantly improve.

  • That...that is one of the more meaningful and humorous songs I've heard in a long time. Thanks!

  • Thanks I know it's compelling. I think anarcho-capitalism is idiotic because unregulated capitalist systems in the past have resulted in immense conflict between working people and their employers, which ultimately resulted in the creation of the legislation that exists today protecting workers' safety, upholding standards of safety, upholding environmental standards, etc. Calling for a free market in today's world plays directly into the hands of the moneyed elite in this country (America).

  • you people are idiots

  • @Jack102589 why?

  • @Jack102589

    Compelling argument.

  • This thought is necessary for Japan today. The politics of Japan is incapable.

  • Good shit!!!

  • Great song - Curious if anyone knows which Tom Woods speech that was or have a link?

  • @pipewerkz Look for Tom Woods, "Our Wise Overlords are Just Here to Serve us".

  • @jddrafts - Thanks man - got it.

  • I love this. I listen to this song ALL the time! Well done sir.

  • do liberal women usually wear lapels?

  • @ekeyra: That's Tom Woods at the end of the song.

  • who was that speaking at the end of the song?!

  • Yes! Yes! Yes! I love it! Great job.

  • "The Archo-Capitalist Theme Song" <--FTFY

  • Wow, simply excellent! I have felt every single frustration you sing about.  Great work.

  • every objection that all of you have to a free society has been effectively and completely dealt with by one author or another over at mises dot org. check it out if you are really interested.

  • AMEN BROTHER!! I love your stuff! This is exactly how I feel every time I hear some of the arguments from any side of the "political" axes.

    I AM an Anarcho-Capitalist! Bring on Agora!

    I run a website, check it out sometime: libertarianatheist (dot) com

  • Why are anarcho-capitalists so fond of cuneiform?

  • Comment removed

  • @epsilon8998 what do you mean?

  • This is hilarious. Absolutely hilarious. 

  • "Think of it as going camping...only forever"

    Great song

  • When business gains it's monopoly on force, it too will become a state, but not accountable to the masses. That's the thing you idiots do not get, power always seeks to monopolize and dominate, no matter where it comes from. That is why I am an authoritarian (Technocrat). I believe science should rule us, not some whimsical system of wasting resources. I also do not believe humans are capable of sustaining a system like the ones you ancaps advocate. We would just fall apart.

  • @EpioN I thought you hated humans? obviously you don't if you care enough to try and give them all your opinions. Misanthrope? no. Scared boy who can't understand difference? yes.

  • @allwittynamestaken

    Huh? Dude, could you at least be coherent. What are you talking about?

  • What's so bad about animal rights?

  • your a douoouorky anarchist yeah,yeah a dorkie anarchist doo dooo dee dorkie anarchist, i choose a chaoitic discord jam to be my anthem, yours can just suck my balls yeah yeah a dorkie anarchist, a dorkie anarchist, quit trying to shove your lame ass answer down our throats, you dorkie anarchist, quit triying to establish a new anthem period, you dorkie anarchist yeah yeah you dorky anarchist.

  • awesome !!!!

  • OP, What is your opinion of cops? Are they not the mighty enforcers of capitalism? Don't they keep capitalism vibrant for the successful?

  • @EpioN capitalism is just the voluntary trade between 2 or more human beings, why do you believe police necessary to do so? do you need a police officer to make sure everything goes smoothly every time you have a yard sale or buy cannabis legally or illegally?

  • @allwittynamestaken

    Capitalism will always breed cops, they start as security guards, guarding those who have accumulated wealth. How do you expect to horde your shit without cops? Do you think those who have wealthy will just forego authority? even the ancaps? If you do, then you are incredibly stupid. A man who has nothing to volunteer in this system will take what he can iif devoid of morals. My opinion on cops isn't favorable at all, but I'm convinced capitalism needs cops.

  • @EpioN Your version of capitalism is what anarcho-capitalists call corporatism.

  • @MKeyserSoze

    I'm not a capitalist. All capitalism is the same to me. It all leads to corporatism one way or another, either via state capitalism (you call it communism) or Libertarianism (Robber Barron-ism)

  • @EpioN Capitalism cannot lead to corporatism without a state, since a corporation is a state creation. Communism isn't state capitalism, it may be many things, but it's not capitalism. Libertarianism is many things as well, but time traveling isn't a component.

  • @MKeyserSoze

    Capitalism needs a state to function and thus it creates corporatism. It's not that hard to comprehend you know, no mental gymnastics required. Without a state, capitalists cannot hold on to their property for too long before it's taken by someone with more force and influence. Capitalists desire a state, and will ditch their anarcho capitalist leanings to secure their property via a private police force they call a "public service".

  • @EpioN What part of free trade between two people requires a state there genius boy? Without a state there is no force to take anyone's property away, as the state is nothing more than a monopoly on force. Capitalists do not desire a state, that's why it's called anarcho-capitalism. There is nothing "public service" about a "private police force", as they are two different words genius...

  • @MKeyserSoze

    Free trade does nor will ever exist in a modern society. A state isn't the only thing capable of having a monopoly on force, business can also achieve that. Again capitalism absolutely needs a state to function, otherwise it's subject to the whims of non capitalists like me. As for cops, capitalists have a private police force, they just call it public so the masses can feel that the police are for their benefit too, they're not.

  • @EpioN Incorrect. Capitalism does not require a state, as capitalism is merely freedom in trade. It's not difficult to understand. Without a state people are free, to own property, to trade, also to defend themselves. It's called natural law, look it up.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Authoritarianism is like whack a mole. I hold no fantasies about it. An Authoritarian simply moves around.

  • Understand me man, I hate humans. I love nature. Do you see where all my thinking stems from? Your kind can't possibly beat people like me. I'm completely amoral, and it's people like me who get into power, people like you just sit there and philosophize about impossibilities. If you are not active within the state, you have no chance in hell to stop people like me. Understand?

  • @EpioN

    "I'm completely amoral, and it's people like me who get into power, people like you just sit there and philosophize about impossibilities."

    That's precisely why there must not be a state. When domineering sociopaths like you aspire to Empire, I don't want you to have any free, unearned legitimacy, and I want every member of society to have had the means and the incentives to think long and hard about how to stop you, rather than faith in some illusory system of checks and balances.

  • I just want you ancaps to know how hopeless your ideas are. Don't waste your time, and find something better to follow. How about reforming the system we already have? It's a lot more possible than achieving an ancap society.

  • Sorry but anarcho-capitalism just won't work as a national system. It can only exist as a limited local system that relies on the stability of a larger system it exists in the presence of. It's called the black market, it allows you to buy drugs, slaves, it's called the black market. Generally, it doesn't treat people very well, but it does have it's non aggression principles, until there's some disagreement among cartels!

  • Comment removed

  • Good lyrics! Especially the "going camping forever" bit. The tune and singing could be better.

  • 2:57..... nope thats not it.

  • What is the Thomas Woods speech from?

  • There is no such thing as an anarcho-capitalist. All of the founding fathers of anarchism such as Proudhon, Kropotkin, and Bakunin were socialists. True anarchism is about abolishing all rulers. I can't be my bosses bitch and get paid minimum wage and seriously say I believe in anarchy and neither can anybody else. We should just call the anarcho-capitalists what they are: advocates for the privatization of tyranny.

  • @GuyMontag92 State Capitalism =/= market anarchism. Straw-man. There is nothing stopping you from having your workplace democracy in their society. Non aggression principle is the center of all things. This system doesn't exactly stop stupid actions, but it does grant the necessary recourse in deserved consequences for each action not to the liking of every other party, whether workers or customers. There is no such thing as private tyranny in a free society, for they self collapse.

  • @BIackOp

    1) Capitalism=/=Market

    Market Socialism has existed in many forms, including economic democracy. Trading things in a market economy is not the same thing as capitalism.

    2) I never equated state capitalism with anarcho-capitalism

    3) Of course there is no such thing as private tyranny in a free society. A society with a private tyranny is by definition not free! All of the original anarchists recognized that getting rid of the state was only one half of the battle.

  • @GuyMontag92 Market anarchism is another name for Anarcho-Capitalism. The usage of the word Capitalism is a different definition than what is associated with Statism, which can be misleading so others name were introduced to avoid the presumption. I agree its half the battle, which is why some form of property rights and law must be established from cooperation.

  • @BIackOp Capitalism is an economic system in which society is divided into two classes: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The bourgeoisie control the means of production and give the proletariat a wage to use the means of production to produce products that are then traded in a market. Anarchists (the real ones anyways) wish to destroy the bourgeoisie and believe that the destruction of the state is critical to this end because it is the state which has always defended the opulent against society.

  • @GuyMontag92 And what is your position of ownership?

  • @BIackOp Do you mean my position *on* ownership? I believe that a corporation should be owned by its workers. I support cooperatives because they give workers a non-authoritarian motive for working hard: the fulfillment of one's own happiness. The harder the worker works and the more successful the company is the more money they will make. The kinder they are to their fellow employees the more likely they are to not be democratically elected out of the corporation.

  • @GuyMontag92 But what type of property rights do you support? common property? Is that what you just described?

    Do you advocate the non aggression principle?

  • @BIackOp Just to re-clarify, not sustainable. History shows plenty of billionaires with their dad's fortune going under and ending up worse off by trying to bully everyone around, its when the state has your back when things turn to shit fast for obvious reasons.

  • @BIackOp Ha! What an understatement! It is only because of government that private property could exist in the first place. The notion of anarcho-capitalism is absurd when we consider that capitalism can only exist with a government. The closest thing mankind has ever come to a true laissez-faire society was under the Chilean dictator Pinochet. With the help of the U.S. he killed all of his leftist opponents, including the democratically elected leader leader of Chile, to enforce his policies.

  • @GuyMontag92 Old West in the United States in the period of 1830 to 1900

    Early Pennsylvania of Colonial America

    Icelandic Commonwealth between 930 and 1262 had "some features".

  • @BIackOp

    4) The non-aggression principle is not the center of all things. Most anarcho-capitalists want to privatize the police and prisons. It would seem that the ideal anarcho-capitalist society is reminiscent of the late 19th century when robber barons would hire Pinkertons to beat the living hell out of their employees for having the audacity to form unions and protest their hellish conditions. Like I said, anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism because it is a mere privatization of tyranny.

  • @GuyMontag92 Last I checked there was a total rejection to the prison system ideal, you seem to be confused about what type of privatizing means. We are not talking about taking existing state monopolies and turning them into state granted monopolies... Straw-man. Robber barons were heavily subsidized, laws from the state made barriers to entry to their favor espeically in labor. You seem to be describing more about Mercantilism then free markets.

  • @BIackOp You seem to be out of touch with your fellow anarcho-capitalists. These nuts really do want to privatize all currently existing government functions. How do I know? Because I am friends with one. He continually tries to tell me how we need to privatize education (because poor people don't need an education), transportation (because poor people don't need transportation), and yes, the prison and police system. I would suggest reading more of their crap. It makes for a good laugh.

  • @GuyMontag92 Appeal to consequences (negative form).

  • @GuyMontag92 The real robber barons were lobbying to rid of a supposed "monopoly" (say Standard Oil) who did not actually own the entire market. When Rockefeller tried to buy out oil refineries he discovered people were building them just to sell it to him, because he was over paying. This process set him back from 90% to 45% in his market. The end results from various areas were raising prices, that was the legislation, to keep cartels in business and break any outsiders.

  • @GuyMontag92 /watch?v=xI43mAFjOM8

  • @BIackOp infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQ­SectionC4

  • @BIackOp Notice how the article that I linked to uses sources.

  • @GuyMontag92 mises.org/daily/2317

  • Comment removed

  • @BIackOp Did you type in three w's before you copied the link? If not then just go to anarchistfaqdotorg and go the section entitled "C What are the myths of capitalist economics?" and then go to C.4 "Why does the market become dominated by big business?"

  • @GuyMontag92 Thanks, I'll read this later. I missed the 3 w's.

  • @BIackOp

    Corporations get heavily subsidized because they have goons elected into the government to do their bidding. What part of that is so hard to understand? Government is a cooperative attempt at civilization from a human beings perspective, it doesn't involve state force until there is capital to build weapons, and incentives to buy them. The government is supposed to work for the people, by the people, but business has called itself a person now, so we're fucked. Business did this.

  • @GuyMontag92 Capitalism is all about choices, you may choose who to work for, you may even start your own business and become an entrepenuer. Capitalism means owning the product of the strength of your own muscle, the brilliance of your own mind and the might of your own will, not being a mindless drone for someone else, thats what communism and the army is for =)

  • @allwittynamestaken

    Such idealistic hogwash.

  • @EpioN why are you here?

  • Anarcho Capitalism makes very little sense in the context of reality. I could understand Anarchy through some mechanized world, or Luddite type of dystopian world, but they both could work could work. Anarcho Capitalism will always lead us back to the shitty conditions we currently reside under. You see, for if I was rich as hell, and made it legitimately through my own labor, I would still create for myself a large security force to fuck guys like you over.

  • See, I'm prone to control and authority. Lots of people are, and we desire to control people, especially those like you. You won't do a damn thing about it because of your NAP nonsense. So keep philosophizing away my man, your little world is a fringe element to be explored simply because it exists.

  • @EpioN well you do realize that not every Individualist lives alone and defenseless right? there can still be common interest groups silly boy.

  • @allwittynamestaken

    weak interest groups with no guns, little girl. I'm joining the club with firepower and a bent to destroy your ideology. :)

  • @EpioN I'm actually a man thank you, what makes you think my group won't have firepower? what anarchist in his right mind wouldn't carry the means to defend himself? "you may have my dead body, but you will never have my obediance" -Mohandas Ghandi

  • @allwittynamestaken

    You're not a man, you're but a little girl living in her tea party fantasy. That's you to the bone. Also, you'll never pick up arms against me and my kind, you won't even have the means to do so, as the masses swill be disarmed, and weapons should not be made available to the general populace. Gun control is what we'll work on and achieve so you can't achieve your goals (not that you ever could anyway). So dream on, 'cuz I will have the obedience of your children.

  • @EpioN haha, silly fascist! the advent of global capitalism makes individualism and consumerism the ruling force in this world! it is the simple proletariat and bourgeois who decides the fate of the world. case and point, American Revolution, Mexican Revolution, Egypt and Greece. Need me to go on? finally, I'm no tea partier.

  • @allwittynamestaken

    I'm no fascist, I would love to see the destruction of business as it exists, and I would love to see it centralized and controlled by the states, not private owners. In fact, that's what will happen. More states will seize their land's assets. There will be no more armed revolutions, and people will happily trudge along watching American Idol and listening to pop music. That's why you can continue dreaming on, while I actively become a cog in the state.

  • @EpioN my mistake, Authoritarian Communist. Even your delving into fantasy now boy, totalitarianism has never worked, have you not noticed a transition from Fiefdom to Aristocracy to Democracy to destruction of authority? may I ask how you live with yourself knowing your trying to strip basic human rights from innocent men, women and children and creating the world of 1984 as envisioned by George Orwell?

  • @allwittynamestaken

    Fantasy, authority isn't a fantasy, it becomes reality by sheer force, it exists everywhere. As for human beings, dude, I'm a misanthrope, you think I care about human beings? The only thing I care about is the planet. We can all die off, and this planet will be better off. So if we parasites must live, then we must live in forced order so we can leave our animal instincts behind. Power is all I care about, and I'll get it.

  • @EpioN true, fantasy does exist, but if authoritarianism is as efficient as you claim it to be then the entire Industrial Revolution didn't happen, Communist streets should be paved in gold, Fascism would have never crumbled, the entire world should be Communist/Fascist and the world of 1984 would be commonplace. However man has always risen to his own desires and he will always do so. Need me to name authoritarian regimes that have crumbled due to uprisings? I have quite a few.....

  • @EpioN authority does exist*

  • @GuyMontag92

    Well said man. I my self am exploring anarchism through an authoritarian viewpoint and find it endearing. I believe the leaders can be moral and benevolent, but it will take a special breed of human for that to happen, and it may never happen. An anarcho capitalist society would be filled with so much lying and backstabbing precisely because it's still this state (capitalist) system that will be embedded in a society who needs to keep wealth under tight security for a few.

  • @GuyMontag92 Good one! You're a funny fella :D

  • @minnesotachris, Thank you for this video and for your efforts. If you don't mind, I suggest that you increase the volume of Dr. Woods in the last segment of the video so people can hear what he says more clearly. Again, I, and all other lovers of freedom, appreciate what you have done.

  • awesome lyrics!!

  • Awesome. Can we get this out to..oh, I dunno....a few million people in this country? :)

  • He's like Bob Dylan, except incredibly blunt and anarcho-capitalist.

  • youtube.com/watch?v=QXmz7Z5v0D­Q

  • I like it...The "giant hairball of humanity" if pretty good...I like lofi

  • good lyrics, subpar production though.

  • @MaurDL - I tried to get rick ruben to produce it but he never returned my emails.. had to settle for Garageband.

  • Fantastic! :)

    

  • Its okay.

    unitll this

    I adhere to the non-aggression principle

    Ethics... Cant stand teh stuff

  • Beatiful

  • I just noticed that it says "Theme" song hahaha. I never meant for it to be a theme song for an entire socio-political philosophy.

  • haha, awesome, nice job

  • Eh, not exactly a song that's going to get stuck in peoples heads is it?

    The lyrics are a stretch in rhyme and rhythm and the only people it doesn't offend are those that already agree with you.

    Keep plugging away at it though.

  • I love the lyrics, but I'm not a big fan of the singer. I'd love it if this sounded a little more like Black Sabbath.

  • So fucking cheesy man