You hold a very positive view of the current state of affairs. I am not sure I agree. It's not like a racist will say "I don't hire you because you are of the wrong race". It's other things that are said. So it's not like we would revert to something more racist. There is still racism in the system and applied. And yes one can but hope that attitudes improve. Yet on youtube specifically there is an odd conflation between racists and anti-statist/libertarian views.
@XOmniverse I made a video about fringeelements' racism. I am amazed at the comments I am getting. Many youtube libertarians can't comprehend how racial segregation conflicts with a society based on individual rights.
One question: What exactly do you mean when saying free market? Free market seems like a utopia! There will always be people stacking large piles of money, when those money translates almost immediately to chips for survival... to political power and even knowledge.
Education, that supposed panacea, is the most sinister word on the planet today! In the context of cultural change it inevitably means indoctrinating people into holding a certain set of beliefs about the world considered 'progressive' or 'beneficial'. Education is only ever a good when based on firm, well-tested traditions that have arisen organically from a free people; never when based on some half-baked opinions & untested assertions.
@CeltoSaxonKnight I believe of all liberal traditions, the "education" one is the most devastating of all. I don't think the world wars and the other catastrophes of the 20th century could have been possible without what liberals call "education" - that is keeping masses of adolescents in artificial dependency while confronting them with irrational ideologies.
Not sure if you heard the part in the documentary 'The Bomb in the Brain' about the amygdala blocking out rational thought of dissenting values, so people will not change due to reason alone.. but moreso a healthy environment growing up that is conducive to critical thinking/being mindful. Thoughts?
Shawn, what do you think about the concept of a benevolent dictator being really the most effective means for enacting preferable change (which is largely subjective..but let's say preferable to your desired policies/actions/society, etc..which is pretty fringe I would reckon).. I mean you can eliminate the lack of financial incentive by getting rid of govt monopolies..but to what extent is this just going to further the intersubjective consensus as it currently stands?
@gn0m1k Whereas a benevolent dictator could be a catalyst that could force the status quo to change.. Perhaps motivated by a deep-seated early child hood rage at the contradictions and corruption experienced.. People voluntarily now listen to sociopaths/get duped by them, seek social status at the expense of global poor sweatshop workers, try to roleplay behaviors of controlling/ostracizing others (especially sociopaths). I think you need an ubermensch, lol
@gn0m1k I think anarcho-capitalism is a sound ends for certain pre-existing necessary conditions (ie: Total information flow, relatively equal power structures, sound psychology)... but then this could also be the case for, say, communism. You would just need certain information flow, people prescribing the ideology that are psychologically tied to communism, and psychologically molding the children into supporting communism.
I'd argue the rationale for employee protections is that the employer-employee relationship tends to be heavily skewed power-wise to the employer, and that it is too easy for the employer to exploit or abuse an employee, but not vice versa. With that line of reasoning, it's not a double standard to afford the employee additional protection.
@churchofstfu I disagree completely. I'm an employer & I can tell you, from my POV, the power in an employee/employer relationship is at least equally distributed, if not skewed in favor of the employee.
If one of my employees quits in favor of another job, my workload increases. I'm less productive because I'm doing the less productive labor that my employee was doing, which is why I hired them in the first place; so I could do more productive labor that makes me more money. Con't
@moshe88 I'm more replaceable to them, than they are to me, because they can, at worst, get another job where they make slightly less money. Maybe a buck less an hour or something. I, on the other hand, will be out $5-$50 an hour, depending on which of my employees quits and forces me to take on the workload they were handling.
@BairaagiVN are you denying that there is a significant correlation between 'black' named individuals and higher rate of negative incidents of stereotypical 'black' behavior?
even if you disagree with that, why shouldn't private entities be able to hire whoever they want in a free society. if they are placing themselves at a disadvantage, that's their problem. if diversity is truly a strength, why must it be enforced at threat of massive lawsuit?
I think people would in fact refuse to hire someone based on race. Hasn't it been shown that, when comparing identical resumes, employers will hire a "white"-named candidate before a "black"-named candidate?
Of course there is a judgment on their names. Who are you more like to hire? Deshawn Leroy or Simon Nathaniel? Black cultured names are usually from the ghetto. Simon could be black or white. His name seems easier to work with. If a person was called whitey mcwhiteface, I doubt his file would get any attention either. Besides, southern states pre 60s had no problem hiring blacks. They had lower unemployment than whites.
Thing is, I think having Ron Paul out and about like this does a lot more for libertarianism in general and specifically anti-statism than sitting around arguing on the internet alone. He's done more for libertarianism than the LP or Cato or fuckin any other individual or institution really.
I also believe that education and cultural change are really of key importance in tackling racism. But at the same time, I find absurd the idea that institutions can't, shouldn't or mustn't play any role in education and cultural change. To me it sounds as absurd as if someone said that for instance the Internet, buildings, roads, vehicles or utility providers can't, shouldn't or mustn't play any role in the process of education and cultural change among people.
Agreed about laws not changing behavior and laws rather being more likely (but not always) to be just reflective of the beliefs and attitudes of the general populace.Before the civil rights act, We had the 13th , 14th and 15th amendments that were supposed to insure equal treatment of blacks and they were supposed to be guarantee the same rights as whites , but obviously that didn't occur.
If Ron Paul were to be elected, doesn't that mean that a critical mass of the electorate support his ideas & policies? Aren't elections the formalization of the electorate's affirmation of the willingness to change the status-quo? Even if Paul isn't the perfect Libertarian candidate, wouldn't he take anarcho-capitalism further along than it would have been had Paul not been elected? Movement politics seem much more efficacious than the academic puritanism that political philosophers engender.
@BrotherWoody1 It would simply mean that he was preferred over Obama, not that his outlook is appreciated or endorsed wholesale. I think ending the wars would be popular. I think he'd get a LOT of resistance on ending many government programs, though.
On a further thought about why the other guy wouldn't allow discrimination against employees but against employers, my theory is: Ask yourself with whom the guy identifies. Most likely he's not seeing himself as an employer, but as an employee. He identifies with one case but not the other. He then uses the ideas available to him to justify his position. Most people are like that, they don't care about the contradictions unless too many of their peers call them on them.
It's the ideas that shape society, that's Oism 101 and one of the reasons why Rand rejected her unloved libertarian ideological child. I fully agree with you on this vid, including that the civil rights act is a consequence of the change in the Zeitgeist, not its cause, and that this goes for most institutions.
i don't think it's the one-way street i interpret you make it out to be. culture and institutions inform *each other*.
fede2 1 month ago
You hold a very positive view of the current state of affairs. I am not sure I agree. It's not like a racist will say "I don't hire you because you are of the wrong race". It's other things that are said. So it's not like we would revert to something more racist. There is still racism in the system and applied. And yes one can but hope that attitudes improve. Yet on youtube specifically there is an odd conflation between racists and anti-statist/libertarian views.
socrates856 1 month ago
@XOmniverse I made a video about fringeelements' racism. I am amazed at the comments I am getting. Many youtube libertarians can't comprehend how racial segregation conflicts with a society based on individual rights.
/watch?v=A-oAYVvf_-o
DayTimes121 1 month ago
One question: What exactly do you mean when saying free market? Free market seems like a utopia! There will always be people stacking large piles of money, when those money translates almost immediately to chips for survival... to political power and even knowledge.
borkoboyanov 1 month ago
Education, that supposed panacea, is the most sinister word on the planet today! In the context of cultural change it inevitably means indoctrinating people into holding a certain set of beliefs about the world considered 'progressive' or 'beneficial'. Education is only ever a good when based on firm, well-tested traditions that have arisen organically from a free people; never when based on some half-baked opinions & untested assertions.
Beware of those seeking to 'educate'!
CeltoSaxonKnight 1 month ago
@CeltoSaxonKnight By 'education', they really mean reeducation.
j1mmyZeta 1 month ago
@CeltoSaxonKnight I believe of all liberal traditions, the "education" one is the most devastating of all. I don't think the world wars and the other catastrophes of the 20th century could have been possible without what liberals call "education" - that is keeping masses of adolescents in artificial dependency while confronting them with irrational ideologies.
john42t 1 month ago
That is not a good look...
hurrrrrrrrrrr 1 month ago 3
Still one of my favourite youtubers. Keep it up bro
chitchcott 1 month ago
Not sure if you heard the part in the documentary 'The Bomb in the Brain' about the amygdala blocking out rational thought of dissenting values, so people will not change due to reason alone.. but moreso a healthy environment growing up that is conducive to critical thinking/being mindful. Thoughts?
gn0m1k 1 month ago
Shawn, what do you think about the concept of a benevolent dictator being really the most effective means for enacting preferable change (which is largely subjective..but let's say preferable to your desired policies/actions/society, etc..which is pretty fringe I would reckon).. I mean you can eliminate the lack of financial incentive by getting rid of govt monopolies..but to what extent is this just going to further the intersubjective consensus as it currently stands?
gn0m1k 1 month ago
@gn0m1k Whereas a benevolent dictator could be a catalyst that could force the status quo to change.. Perhaps motivated by a deep-seated early child hood rage at the contradictions and corruption experienced.. People voluntarily now listen to sociopaths/get duped by them, seek social status at the expense of global poor sweatshop workers, try to roleplay behaviors of controlling/ostracizing others (especially sociopaths). I think you need an ubermensch, lol
gn0m1k 1 month ago
@gn0m1k I think anarcho-capitalism is a sound ends for certain pre-existing necessary conditions (ie: Total information flow, relatively equal power structures, sound psychology)... but then this could also be the case for, say, communism. You would just need certain information flow, people prescribing the ideology that are psychologically tied to communism, and psychologically molding the children into supporting communism.
gn0m1k 1 month ago
I'd argue the rationale for employee protections is that the employer-employee relationship tends to be heavily skewed power-wise to the employer, and that it is too easy for the employer to exploit or abuse an employee, but not vice versa. With that line of reasoning, it's not a double standard to afford the employee additional protection.
churchofstfu 1 month ago
@churchofstfu I disagree completely. I'm an employer & I can tell you, from my POV, the power in an employee/employer relationship is at least equally distributed, if not skewed in favor of the employee.
If one of my employees quits in favor of another job, my workload increases. I'm less productive because I'm doing the less productive labor that my employee was doing, which is why I hired them in the first place; so I could do more productive labor that makes me more money. Con't
moshe88 1 month ago
@moshe88 I'm more replaceable to them, than they are to me, because they can, at worst, get another job where they make slightly less money. Maybe a buck less an hour or something. I, on the other hand, will be out $5-$50 an hour, depending on which of my employees quits and forces me to take on the workload they were handling.
moshe88 1 month ago
@BairaagiVN are you denying that there is a significant correlation between 'black' named individuals and higher rate of negative incidents of stereotypical 'black' behavior?
even if you disagree with that, why shouldn't private entities be able to hire whoever they want in a free society. if they are placing themselves at a disadvantage, that's their problem. if diversity is truly a strength, why must it be enforced at threat of massive lawsuit?
drcihlar 1 month ago
I think people would in fact refuse to hire someone based on race. Hasn't it been shown that, when comparing identical resumes, employers will hire a "white"-named candidate before a "black"-named candidate?
BairaagiVN 1 month ago
@BairaagiVN usually the other way around for ''affirmative action''
drchunkydee 1 month ago
@BairaagiVN
Of course there is a judgment on their names. Who are you more like to hire? Deshawn Leroy or Simon Nathaniel? Black cultured names are usually from the ghetto. Simon could be black or white. His name seems easier to work with. If a person was called whitey mcwhiteface, I doubt his file would get any attention either. Besides, southern states pre 60s had no problem hiring blacks. They had lower unemployment than whites.
TikofTok 1 month ago
Thing is, I think having Ron Paul out and about like this does a lot more for libertarianism in general and specifically anti-statism than sitting around arguing on the internet alone. He's done more for libertarianism than the LP or Cato or fuckin any other individual or institution really.
doucher337 1 month ago
I also believe that education and cultural change are really of key importance in tackling racism. But at the same time, I find absurd the idea that institutions can't, shouldn't or mustn't play any role in education and cultural change. To me it sounds as absurd as if someone said that for instance the Internet, buildings, roads, vehicles or utility providers can't, shouldn't or mustn't play any role in the process of education and cultural change among people.
danielsondanielson 1 month ago
The last 10-20 seconds pretty much sums up the reality we have. Social change precedes political/legal change.
reapfreak 1 month ago
Another video filled with logic and clarity.
TheEfkk 1 month ago
Agreed about laws not changing behavior and laws rather being more likely (but not always) to be just reflective of the beliefs and attitudes of the general populace.Before the civil rights act, We had the 13th , 14th and 15th amendments that were supposed to insure equal treatment of blacks and they were supposed to be guarantee the same rights as whites , but obviously that didn't occur.
Pentazoid111 1 month ago
If Ron Paul were to be elected, doesn't that mean that a critical mass of the electorate support his ideas & policies? Aren't elections the formalization of the electorate's affirmation of the willingness to change the status-quo? Even if Paul isn't the perfect Libertarian candidate, wouldn't he take anarcho-capitalism further along than it would have been had Paul not been elected? Movement politics seem much more efficacious than the academic puritanism that political philosophers engender.
BrotherWoody1 1 month ago 5
@BrotherWoody1 It would simply mean that he was preferred over Obama, not that his outlook is appreciated or endorsed wholesale. I think ending the wars would be popular. I think he'd get a LOT of resistance on ending many government programs, though.
XOmniverse 1 month ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
On a further thought about why the other guy wouldn't allow discrimination against employees but against employers, my theory is: Ask yourself with whom the guy identifies. Most likely he's not seeing himself as an employer, but as an employee. He identifies with one case but not the other. He then uses the ideas available to him to justify his position. Most people are like that, they don't care about the contradictions unless too many of their peers call them on them.
john42t 1 month ago
Comment removed
john42t 1 month ago
It's the ideas that shape society, that's Oism 101 and one of the reasons why Rand rejected her unloved libertarian ideological child. I fully agree with you on this vid, including that the civil rights act is a consequence of the change in the Zeitgeist, not its cause, and that this goes for most institutions.
john42t 1 month ago