The idea that you have to mix you labour and extract resources precludes the possibilty of private nature reserves or at least ignores it.
I think it should be fairly obvious that there is a direct connection between rights and military force, after all the English tradition of Classical Liberalism is basically what brought the western world out of feudalism and it came directly from civil wars and rebellion in England. A right is nothing but a warning of potential violence.
This property arguement is one of the things that bugs me about most anarcho-capitalists, they always talk about what land produces as the sign of ownership, I think land is owned by someone when they claim it and either A) get their claim recognised by the local society or B) have enough force to exclude or defend against those who don't accept their claim.
All the people who talk about homesteading readily admit it has continuum problems, but I say it is nothing BUT continuum problems.
I really can't believe how fucking rude some people are. People are murmuring throughout the whole of this interesting speech. If I had attended, I would have told them to shut the fuck up. Makes me furious just to watch this clip and "hear their ignorance"
Seriously, SHAME on the organisers for allowing that level of clamour to continue for pretty much the whole of this time. People who don't want to listen have no place in a lecture hall.
The only way to defeat tyranny is to provoke it so that all can plainly see. Words and ideas are useful jargon among the witnesses. De-registration, tax revolt, the abolishment of fee-simple ownership and free association will initiate the state to use all of it's dirty tricks, confiscation, debt, eminent domain and agent provocateurs.
I wonder if he learned a few things from George Carlin and Bill Hicks. I am not a parrot in that I disagree with him on a few things; pretty good head on his shoulders though.
At 50:45 stephan talks about homesteading land. I would like him to elaborate more on acquiring monopolies on ideas, land or goods. Is there an objective way to homestead? I really don't know...Then it would be up to the market for justice, right?. How much labor should one mix with land to homestead it? Does the ownership hold for an idea alone or an idea in combination with a scarce good or just for the good alone? Can I homestead a complete inhabited island when other castaways will arrive
@alalelalex Have you considered asking yourself why you need to ask so many detailed and complex questions about a complex and large philosophical concept? Is one individual having every answer to your every question a prerequisite for putting an end to the violent way in which things are done now, or are you just desperate to avoid considering a virtuous way of living? Now, many of your questions have been answered by very many people, but you need to first ask why focus on these details...
For libertarians the word 'violence' is defined by what is who's property. So to understand how to stop violence one should agree with other people on the legitimacy of their property claim. If they obtained it from trade then the previous owner should have had legitimate claim, etc. Finally you end up with the person who homesteaded it from the wilderness. In a anarchistic society law is up to the market, so a previous valid claim may end up invalid when law develops on the market.
@alalelalex No, that's both incorrect and a biased proposition. The definitions of words are worthless, only that debates refer to agreed concepts. Theres no point in me laughing your car design out of the room if you've designed a table and I simply incorrectly define the word table. So, the concept of Violence is Universal - however the concept you actual mean to refer to which Universally refers to property is "Aggression". The Moral status of Aggression is Universal.
@alalelalex Whether or not the methods for enforcing and agreeing on property status changes in a market is inconsequential to this. I also believe that creating a life boat situation in which customary law suddenly removes the rights of valid property owners is abusrd, because it refers only to the Concept "market" and not to real people, acting. A Market is people, and people don't want to have there property suddenly become unowned, so the as the "law develops in the market" it develops...
@alalelalex ... to suit the whims of those people voluntary engaged in the property interaction, and not in spite of them and morality (which is generally enforced because of it's Universality and thefefore lack of need for serious confrontation of conflict of interests). I also again have to enquire into why the details of how a futuristic market neither of us willl ever see will work, is so important to you? People should be allowed to find a solution free of State Violence, what else matters?
Then tell me, what does the word 'violence mean to you'? Would do you consider self-defense violence? I mean, if I shoot you first because you where threatening to kill me over my wallet. Or, when someone pushes me off my homesteaded land, and I decide to handcuff him and deliver him to the nearest prison.The prevailing law will then decide whether I or the other guy initiated the violence.
@alalelalex It must take some real desperation for the state to be right to completely ignore 90% of my responses. As I said, the term you were looking for is aggression. "Violence" is not immoral, accept when unwanted or in self-defense. Aggression is immoral, full stop, hence theres no point getting picky with the first concept when we already have the second. The rest of your post made no sense at all, and wasn't based upon any real world actions - we're talking morality, not practicality.
(50:45) Question about homesteading land or other property. I would like to hear Stephen elaborate more on the subject monopolies on material or idea's. How much land or ideas is one allowed to claim from the wilderness and how much labor should one mix with material to be allowed to claim it. When does one alienate oneself from property. I don't see an absolute definition for this emanating from nature, so my conclusion has to be that property rights emerge on the market as judges compete.
Fantastic presentation, but the crowd interaction was a bit distracting/unproductive (aside - Go Porcfest and Go Free Staters!!!!!) and I feel like a rerecord of this extremely valuable approach would be best in a podcast and maybe even a short pdf. Thanks Stef. And thanks Free State and Porcfest organizers. I'll try to get back next year.
I was torn between going to porcupine fest and the G20/G8... I went to the G20/G8. Looking back that was probably the wrong choice. It was still a lot of fun though. I experienced the full extent of state oppression. Watching an old lady get slammed into a wall by a police horse was a real eye opener.
You look like you lost a lot of weight Stef, good job.
Great presentation. Language is vitally important to the discussion in my opinion. As Robert Anton Wilson once pointed out, "people are completely hypnotized by the words they use."
I really like what you're saying - but is it mandatory for freedom lovers to speak in shitty locations with last century technology? Really, no pun intended, but this time it sounds like you were forced to speak in a carwash...
Lastly
To Stefan's credit he did make reference to fencing in land as an act of homesteading, so maybe thats how he deals with nature preserves.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
part 2
The idea that you have to mix you labour and extract resources precludes the possibilty of private nature reserves or at least ignores it.
I think it should be fairly obvious that there is a direct connection between rights and military force, after all the English tradition of Classical Liberalism is basically what brought the western world out of feudalism and it came directly from civil wars and rebellion in England. A right is nothing but a warning of potential violence.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
This property arguement is one of the things that bugs me about most anarcho-capitalists, they always talk about what land produces as the sign of ownership, I think land is owned by someone when they claim it and either A) get their claim recognised by the local society or B) have enough force to exclude or defend against those who don't accept their claim.
All the people who talk about homesteading readily admit it has continuum problems, but I say it is nothing BUT continuum problems.
Hashishin13 1 year ago
WOW who is the chick at 41:35?
jollygood43 1 year ago
Regarding the comment about patriot act at 11:00+, how can you not be against patriotism in itself?
jakelamotta456 1 year ago
I really can't believe how fucking rude some people are. People are murmuring throughout the whole of this interesting speech. If I had attended, I would have told them to shut the fuck up. Makes me furious just to watch this clip and "hear their ignorance"
MrChrisBlizzard 1 year ago
Seriously, SHAME on the organisers for allowing that level of clamour to continue for pretty much the whole of this time. People who don't want to listen have no place in a lecture hall.
MrChrisBlizzard 1 year ago
As with 90% of his stuff ... just awesome!
shepardh1 1 year ago
Great video Stef...loving the people vs the state at the end, thanks for highlighting it to me in that PM.
Stresemannite 1 year ago
I love his arm movement for "use."
masonkiller666 1 year ago
The only way to defeat tyranny is to provoke it so that all can plainly see. Words and ideas are useful jargon among the witnesses. De-registration, tax revolt, the abolishment of fee-simple ownership and free association will initiate the state to use all of it's dirty tricks, confiscation, debt, eminent domain and agent provocateurs.
kokopelli314 1 year ago
has steph been working out looks fitter than his older videos
Jangaboo 1 year ago
@Jangaboo Yeah he's lost some weight
masonkiller666 1 year ago
Once again, Stef owns. I would suggest everyone here read/listen to his books for free at freedomainradio dawght c0m
rmcc0002 1 year ago
Two words: Directional Microphone
CurtHowland 1 year ago 4
@CurtHowland - loved the talk - my ears are still ringing.
cheekieweekie 1 year ago
I wonder if he learned a few things from George Carlin and Bill Hicks. I am not a parrot in that I disagree with him on a few things; pretty good head on his shoulders though.
efrem1 1 year ago
"Property is not owned, it is created"...brilliant insight.
johnycannuk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is this guy an Atheist?
NoLongerFooled 1 year ago
excellent talk, cant wait for next year
chaseantarctica 1 year ago
thats saturday night, oh friday... im busy.
BaDSPLeR 1 year ago
What is the new screen option on you tube that looks like a soccer ball, and why does it sound like a swarm of bees when I hit it?
hatcakefloss 1 year ago
@hatcakefloss I was wondering the same thing. keep waiting to hear a message in reverse!
EmpoweredByKnowledge 1 year ago
I have a blowgun. I ran out of darts, though.
OldWhig1688 1 year ago
At 50:45 stephan talks about homesteading land. I would like him to elaborate more on acquiring monopolies on ideas, land or goods. Is there an objective way to homestead? I really don't know...Then it would be up to the market for justice, right?. How much labor should one mix with land to homestead it? Does the ownership hold for an idea alone or an idea in combination with a scarce good or just for the good alone? Can I homestead a complete inhabited island when other castaways will arrive
alalelalex 1 year ago
@alalelalex Have you considered asking yourself why you need to ask so many detailed and complex questions about a complex and large philosophical concept? Is one individual having every answer to your every question a prerequisite for putting an end to the violent way in which things are done now, or are you just desperate to avoid considering a virtuous way of living? Now, many of your questions have been answered by very many people, but you need to first ask why focus on these details...
DreadLaw2 1 year ago
@DreadLaw2
For libertarians the word 'violence' is defined by what is who's property. So to understand how to stop violence one should agree with other people on the legitimacy of their property claim. If they obtained it from trade then the previous owner should have had legitimate claim, etc. Finally you end up with the person who homesteaded it from the wilderness. In a anarchistic society law is up to the market, so a previous valid claim may end up invalid when law develops on the market.
alalelalex 1 year ago
@alalelalex No, that's both incorrect and a biased proposition. The definitions of words are worthless, only that debates refer to agreed concepts. Theres no point in me laughing your car design out of the room if you've designed a table and I simply incorrectly define the word table. So, the concept of Violence is Universal - however the concept you actual mean to refer to which Universally refers to property is "Aggression". The Moral status of Aggression is Universal.
DreadLaw2 1 year ago
@alalelalex Whether or not the methods for enforcing and agreeing on property status changes in a market is inconsequential to this. I also believe that creating a life boat situation in which customary law suddenly removes the rights of valid property owners is abusrd, because it refers only to the Concept "market" and not to real people, acting. A Market is people, and people don't want to have there property suddenly become unowned, so the as the "law develops in the market" it develops...
DreadLaw2 1 year ago
@alalelalex ... to suit the whims of those people voluntary engaged in the property interaction, and not in spite of them and morality (which is generally enforced because of it's Universality and thefefore lack of need for serious confrontation of conflict of interests). I also again have to enquire into why the details of how a futuristic market neither of us willl ever see will work, is so important to you? People should be allowed to find a solution free of State Violence, what else matters?
DreadLaw2 1 year ago
@DreadLaw2
Then tell me, what does the word 'violence mean to you'? Would do you consider self-defense violence? I mean, if I shoot you first because you where threatening to kill me over my wallet. Or, when someone pushes me off my homesteaded land, and I decide to handcuff him and deliver him to the nearest prison.The prevailing law will then decide whether I or the other guy initiated the violence.
alalelalex 1 year ago
@alalelalex It must take some real desperation for the state to be right to completely ignore 90% of my responses. As I said, the term you were looking for is aggression. "Violence" is not immoral, accept when unwanted or in self-defense. Aggression is immoral, full stop, hence theres no point getting picky with the first concept when we already have the second. The rest of your post made no sense at all, and wasn't based upon any real world actions - we're talking morality, not practicality.
DreadLaw2 1 year ago
the audio is terrible but the content is awesome.
vidmasterofworld 1 year ago 3
(50:45) Question about homesteading land or other property. I would like to hear Stephen elaborate more on the subject monopolies on material or idea's. How much land or ideas is one allowed to claim from the wilderness and how much labor should one mix with material to be allowed to claim it. When does one alienate oneself from property. I don't see an absolute definition for this emanating from nature, so my conclusion has to be that property rights emerge on the market as judges compete.
alalelalex 1 year ago
Good speech Stefan. Makes me think a lot about "newspeak" in the book, 1984.
trentstrong 1 year ago
That woman @ 39:55 looks drunk
joshv89 1 year ago
Wow... how big is your garage?
thesimulacre 1 year ago
Glad Stefan is gaining popularity... even among semi-libertarians...
CounterViolenceInst 1 year ago
Stef has legs? :o
totheman 1 year ago 8
When will the debate videos be up?
tra789 1 year ago
Sounds like that might've been rain?
BobbyW3363 1 year ago
Too bad the audio quality is so dicey on this clip, what heck is making all that background noise 16:17?!
sethfulton 1 year ago
excellent video, and speech, cant wait to see you and all the FDR people at the BBQ
pelucas716 1 year ago 2
horrible audio echo echo echo
aletoledo1 1 year ago
Comment removed
thesimulacre 1 year ago
Fantastic presentation, but the crowd interaction was a bit distracting/unproductive (aside - Go Porcfest and Go Free Staters!!!!!) and I feel like a rerecord of this extremely valuable approach would be best in a podcast and maybe even a short pdf. Thanks Stef. And thanks Free State and Porcfest organizers. I'll try to get back next year.
WeThinkWereFree 1 year ago
@WeThinkWereFree having been last year and regrettably missing this year.
WeThinkWereFree 1 year ago
@WeThinkWereFree Good idea - definitely red room material.
Either way - excellent work Stef. It's a joy following your work.
chitchcott 1 year ago
I was torn between going to porcupine fest and the G20/G8... I went to the G20/G8. Looking back that was probably the wrong choice. It was still a lot of fun though. I experienced the full extent of state oppression. Watching an old lady get slammed into a wall by a police horse was a real eye opener.
You look like you lost a lot of weight Stef, good job.
T0X0Plasmosis 1 year ago
its weird to see stefs legs . im not used to it.
tob1203 1 year ago 5
Wonderful video. My wife and I watched the whole thing together and loved it.
chuska8383 1 year ago
Great presentation. Language is vitally important to the discussion in my opinion. As Robert Anton Wilson once pointed out, "people are completely hypnotized by the words they use."
TheEpicureanAtheist 1 year ago 3
Awesome! He sounds exactly like Professor X from the X-Men animated series!
stuartgibb 1 year ago
Ministry of homeland security...
drew335533 1 year ago
stand up philosopher
godofallbums 1 year ago 38
@godofallbums
I've noticed that.
I think humor is a really good way to break people's defenses.
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 year ago
@godofallbums As George Carlin and Bill Cosby demonstrated, the best comedians are philosophers.
.
The reverse is not always true.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
I really really really wish I got to see Stephan. For Liberty!
josda1000 1 year ago
Amazing! Stef's da bomb :)
lukeev 1 year ago
Eric's face (InthendIwasright) was on the left side of the screen. :P
Nice camera Eric...
BIackOp 1 year ago 15
@BIackOp lmao it is me haha Im if a stefbot video haha
InTheEndIWasRight 1 year ago
@BIackOp I was sitting on Erik's left :-p
Stargazer5781 1 year ago
I really like what you're saying - but is it mandatory for freedom lovers to speak in shitty locations with last century technology? Really, no pun intended, but this time it sounds like you were forced to speak in a carwash...
Aside that - you're brilliant like always.
LunkwillFook 1 year ago
I really want that t-shirt stef, where did you get it?
Alexlaird87 1 year ago 3
excellent :D
Alexlaird87 1 year ago 4