Your cab license personal example shouldn't have been used. It can easily be construed to attack your position.
1. If the Cab was used the Cab would be forced to drive back and forth. If you had rented a Car you would only have drove there. (Within a vacuum cost half of the gas)
3. If the government raised taxes on car rentals. You would also be more inclined to use the cab.
Your internet-based technologies also fail because the internet was developed by DARPA and given away free.
1. Yes, but how do you know if a cab, that gets most of it's business from Airport would actually find someone before reaching a certain distance?
3. I fail to see what you are talking about. I am only using the Socratic inquiry to determine if his statements are imprecise or wrong. I pointed an exception to his examples. A more accurate formal logic depiction of my statement is If A therefore B. Or B -> A. Arrows aren't "therefore"... they are "if and only if."
1) I don't have to know any such thing. Logic.doesn't place the burden of proof on the criticizer. Me, the criticizer, only need to bore a hole in the logic and if I can, I have shown it to be fallacious. My job is then done.
3) "->" means if and only if.
@movcrit, are you trying to contradict my reason or confirm it? To me it looks like the latter.
@Idol2011no 1. Is an assertion that can be verified quantitatively or denied. That's the thing about efficiency and maximization, they are quantitative properties and therefore require quantitative proofs.
Margaret Thatcher was against the feminism movement. I owe nothing to women's lib. Would a civil rights activist support a famous black person who was for segregation?
You make examples where the environment benefits businesses benefit, but that's entirely accurate of today world. In most cases businesses benefit from the destruction of the environment. I could cut costs if I just dump the nuclear waste somewhere rather then seeking to seal it. Here only the state can stop me.
I recently started to dislike 'Green and environmentalist views' without really knowing why.It just felt wrong to support ideas such as the Carbon Tax here in Australia. Now I sort of know why.Lol Queen of Malta. I grew up in Malta and sometimes the degrees of influence by the church on the government sickens me. This is almost the same thing as the environment. I love the environment and I really don't hate religion. But I guess the link is the aggression involved in bringing about these ideas.
Steinem's idea of feminism meant a woman had to be pro-abortion, anti-family and anti-man -- anti-anything moral! I always believed that feminism was about what a woman wanted to do. That meant a woman had the right to make a choice. Palin and Bachmann are true feminists. They are pro-life, pro-family and they made it in a man’s world without invoking the victim status! Steinem is more about politics than about feminist! As far as eco-feminism? Learn about United Nations Agenda 21.
In the issue of feminism, its also quite disgusting to see how the relationships of families are being torn apart. Its disgusting to hear people place materialism over community and family.
What kind of state power are the environmentalists trying to expand ?? Also, isn't corporate lawlessness creating most of the environmental destruction?
Besides that apparently paper is made from trees. Well it is, but it is very strange technology. Wood is very awkward to make paper from. It is the outlaw of Cannabis that caused the cutting down of every real forest in America. Hemp delivers fare more cellulose per acre than wood ever will.
Discriminatory tax breaks in favor of women, special treatment in family court, state subsidies for childcare, primary aggressor laws against men, state funded women's shelters, state funded women's health clinics, state funded women's college grants, immunity from conscription; thank you feminism for dismantling the very equality you once stood for.
@Dirge987 Thanks for completely denying your privilege. Don't you realize that 'special treatment in family court' is a direct result of the partiarical belief that women are 'natural caregivers'. Women's shelters and aggressor laws against men are there because domestic violence is so PREVALENT and often GLAMOURIZED in current culture. Have you even heard of rape culture?
Wah wah! Women's college grants are so unfair, they're are already so many women at the top these days. What wage gap?
We will not find justice at the hands of corrupt judges. (See YouTube videos) Judicial Benefits & Court Corruption Update / Evil Triangle of Court Corruption / Richard fine / Dr Shirley Moore slush funds /SBX 211. To end this title wave of corruption in our country must start with the corrupt judges. We can not bring evidence of corruption to corrupt judges. Los Angeles Superior Court judges are illegally and unconstitutionally taking 50,000.00 each for a total of 23 million per year.
Environmentalism is a crock of shit. Of course taking care of the environment is a noble thing, and I don't argue against that, but I hate these politicians who push that agenda for their own gains. Just to think I bought into this nonsense when I was still in school. And women have had way more rights before feminism.
Margaret Thatcher did nothing about Long Kesh. That's right off the top of my head. I'm sure I would find she is quite far from libertarian anarchism if I chose to research her history. She was in the government.
I agree 100% and will go further with it ALL lefty movement are fronts for increasing goverment, they are designed to villify white people ( white men especially) and western civilization as both are seen as a threat to bigger government. Women and minorities are more likely to support it. Why do you think lefty's support islam? Islam is against everything they are supposed to believe in but islam is anti western civilization. That's what really matters to them..
favorited. ive been trying to tell people that all 3 of these (and i would add that parts of the race war/civil rights movement were also coopted and exploited by gov in the same way) are connected and have been used to lay the groundwork of tyranny for decades.
the agreement of one genius like youself is worth more than the dozens of fools that call me crazy lol.
the answer is simple. *if* someone were able to, say, make a converter for a car that allowed it to run on water (needing only 22 galons of water for a trip to NY from Los angeles for example) and turned down an offer of 1 billion from a saudi based company because they wanted to sell it for the good of humanity at only $1500 a pop...then that person would be dead within a year due to *accidental* radiation poisioning. true story, one going on 20 yrs old now.
@stefbot: On the feminism issue, just thought of someone else. Two words: Emma Goldman. Anarcha-feminist, anarcho-communist, more radical than any feminist then, commented on the suffrage movement saying: "We vote? What does that mean?" As an anarchist, she of course did not go for big government, or any at all. There's no denying her feminism, advocating the right to choose abortion and birth control while they were anathema, not to mention illegal. Is she not a heroine to feminists? (Yes).
@stefbot If you don't know what anarcho-communism is, or Emma Goldman was, then...nothing to do with state communism, is all I can say. Please do look it up.
@stefbot If you don't know what anarcho-communism is, or Emma Goldman was, then...nothing to do with state communism, is all I can say. Please do look it up. In actual fact, Emma Goldman went to Bolshevik Russia and hated what she saw in the end. This experience is recounted in "My Disillusionment in Russia" and "My Further Disullisionment in Russia." Of course she was already anarchist. Not all communists are for government. Some of them are anarchists.
@stefbot when you say communist, are you referring to Emma Goldman? from what i can tell she was purely an anarchist. Also, maybe you should look into green anarchism and anarcho primitivism.
...farmers to do this, as it would cost them money, and they would not gain anything from doing so. This is evidenced across the country. No doubt there are other examples like this across the world. So, I ask, what sort of peaceful solution is there to this problem? I am not trying to argue against the contents of this video, I am just genuinely curious as to how a problem like this can be resolved.
In my country one of the biggest environmental issues we face is caused by dairy farmers, whose cows pollute the air (which there is not an obvious solution for apart from having less farms) and pollute our waterways. The water-pollution can be easily minimized, if farmers were to install fences and keep their livestock away from rivers, creeks, streams, etc. However (apart from some terribly-enforced laws (which obviously are not the answer anyway)), there is no free-market incentive for...
I admit my choice of words leaves something to be desired sometimes, but wth, this is youtube, I've got a tough word count to finish outside of this. It should be obvious from how confused-sounding some of the comments I make are. Plus I have an edit of just clicking post from forums where you can post-edit. Give it the due forgiveness, I'm sure you generally know what I'm talking about anyway.
I'll tell you what the environmentalists were doing, they were busy with other issues. For instance GM went bankrupt. You could have revamped it for high speed transport throughout the country, you could have fixed up public transport in-city, green buses, more efficient subways. there was a lot of noise about this when the government took over operations. But no, that would have been too socialist. A lot of the fluff spouted by right-wingers depends on the lack of anti-corruption regs.
Two people who were about as right-wing as you can get, one famous for ruthlessly suppressing miner's riots for better conditions and pay by sending in insurgents to confuse and splinter the movement from within, the other whose every political fiction had some sensationalist allegory in it about why the weak are not worth welfare. Why don't most feminists like them? Because they don't like small government.
@rajasmasala I probably didn't mention the ruthless police actions that Thatcher is famous for, on top of her stripping away of civil welfare rights. Should have mentioned that along with the minor's thing. Which wasn't a riot, btw, as the Vietnam protest movement wasn't, until the government sent its firestarters in.
"Which wasn't a riot, btw, as the Vietnam protest movement wasn't, until the government sent its firestarters in."
Wow, were you there? That's amazing.
Anyway, your comments directed at this video amount to non-replies. A basic example of what you do: "Person X did / said Y thus they are shit and I am t3h winrar. No need to actually directly address anything." Or you do the, "No, let ME tell YOU what happened. Okay, now that it happened my way, because I said so, I must be right!"
@regresseur In both cases the fact that the movements only became violent when the FBI and the British police sent in agents provocateurs is well documented. Beyond that, your comments describe the problems with your attempt at refutation more accurately than mine.
Why bother addressing your comments directly? Here is your comment about Rand: "She was a 'right-winger' and her books sucked!" Wow, you must be a genius. Gd argument. Your comment about environmentalists: "I'll tell you what environmentalists were doing... " Right there the rest of your comment instantly becomes bullshit. 1) extreme generalization, 2) which you then go on to talk about what "they" (this abstraction with no real identity) were doing (in your fantasy world).
1)yeah that was a verbatim quote. of course. And no, she's a communist.
2) My statement was validated by the extreme generalization implicit in the title of this video: "Environmentalism, Feminism and Tyranny". I was giving one example of how libertarians, republicans etc. derive justification from obstructing plans to prevent the implementation of environmentalist policies that would create jobs. Not up to date, does Stefbot still believe global warming isn't happening?
Where's this documentation? Is the source biased? How will I be able to tell? Was the very first physical altercation caught on tape? Who did it? How do you know? Who directed you to this information in the first place? Were they biased? So many questions. I also like the word "movement" because it sounds so passive; I'm sure not a single civilian involved in these "movements" was being antagonistic in any way whatsoever. Get real.
@regresseur Look, what precisely are you, politically? Or are you just not up with your history? Look it up. It's the internet. I'd have to find the sources same as you. A google got me on appropriate references quickly enough. Yeah, sure, a few people may have turned violent, that proves your point. Amply illustrated by the Canada protests a few weeks back.
No need to reply to these last two comments. I won. Your attempts to inject more irrelevance into this discussion and lure me down the path of endless nonsense tell me so.
@regresseur Right, clever. No, Thatcher was not an autocratic right-winger managing a police state. No, Stefbot is Al Gore. You win. I might well quote your first comment again, but like you I can't be bothered.
I'd just like to point out that ARPANET was the primary contributor in the early development of email, and was primarily funded by the Dept. of Defense.
@HerBDerb666 Along with transistors, satellites, computers...the list continues. R&D is a major problem for market economics, as inventions can mean losses if funding doesn't pan out, or the invention doesn't. That's one problem, among others.
@HerBDerb666 Along with transistors, satellites, computers...the list continues. R&D is a major problem for market economics, as inventions can mean losses if funding doesn't pan out, or the invention doesn't. That's one problem, among others.
@stefbot Maybe they don't talk about Margaret Thatcher that much because they'd rather forget she was a woman? Thatcher was certainly no foe of violence, arguably no friend of feminism either, so there is that.
Also transistors, satellites, computers...the list continues. R&d is a major problem for market economics, due to uncertaintly of payoff.
@stefbot As for environmentalism, and feminism, tell me-is there some particular "free market" incentive to protecting natural resources or women in a world in which human rights=property rights? As for Thatcher and Rand: Thatcher was no stranger to violence, expanding military spending and the security state. Rand, they might have other problems with...
I don't really respect intelligent people who don't have children... however great ayn rand was, i lose some respect for her just for that. my grandmother was the first assistant DA in the state of oklahoma and she had 4 children. it upsets the balance of intelligence and perpetuates many of the atrocities you cite in other videos. you don't want to breed out intelligence. furthermore you are a "work at home" father (not just a housefather) i have extra respect for u b/c you have children...
@MrBluePsychbecause making these videos is work too... even if it doesn't make you money... it works for the comon good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Environmentalists are melons. Green on the outside but red on the inside. As 'environmentalists' they are frauds. They are socialists merely pretending to care about the environment as long as they can damage anything related to the free market and can fatten the wallets of the state. The only question that needs raising for melons is: "Is what I am doing bad for (free) business and good for the state?"
"Women go to work to have an income because you can tax that you can't tax staying at home...not only do women not get to raise their children but the money that they generate is used to sell their children's future...if that doesn't outrage you if that doesn't make you look in the mirror and change your ways then you are lost beyond hope." Brilliance! and thank you.
I think the whole " going green" movement is ridiculous. Biking to work, or choosing paper over plastic is going to reduce emissions at all, when petroleum and other such products make the world go round..
Looks like the CIA were involved in Ms magazine, which featured a shallow, anti-family type of feminism, just as they were known to be involved in Encounter.
When I first became interested in feminism about 30 years ago, I started to see the weird ideological tunnel vision (heck virtual monopoly) in the mass movement. There was only one large organization, NOW. Groups like the Association of Libertarian Feminists were tiny.
I would like to see a government with more power to protect us from all these all powerful corporations. But we get the opposite, a very powerful government to help all these big corporations crushing us even more.
That's because you clearly don't understand the government. Let me ask you a simple question: WHY do you think an organization that has SO much money for free (taxation isn't asking money for a service, but taking money for bad service) and SO much power, would attract "good" people who'd do the "right" thing?
The reason corporations can do these things is because government attracts scum (politicians) that will put power at your disposal if you put money in their pockets.
@tridentmovies I think you have a view from the government of the USA. But look how a socialist government is working so well in Scandinavian countries: lots of services, very low criminality, ... So the problem is more about the takeover from the corporate world than from the idea of government itself. This is what I believe.
Well Gee, tubetib. Which would/should i prefer? Some corporation that - without the help of government - wouldn't be able to do a damn thing? Or the government, which does EVERYTHING, and i do mean everything, by force? Which should i prefer? The con man, or the mobster with the baseball bat making me an offer i can't refuse? Lots of services? Oh you mean services i have to pay for even if i don't need/want them? Those services? Low criminality? Hah. Go to Malmo.
@tridentmovies Denmark is considered by many to most happy country on earth. Everyone is paying a lot of taxes for services that most of the time they don't use. But the overall effect is that even if you are the guy emptying the trash cans, we are going to have a good salary anyway and live very well. And because the system cares about each one, it leads to low criminality. But in USA it is too late for that. It is a doomed empire.
Yeah because deregulation of the taxi industry worked so well in Ireland. Try calling a cab in Dublin... pretty much any time. There are thousands of tiny taxi operators with 2-3 cars each. You have to call about 20 places to find one with an available car unless you're booking way in advance... and it's still expensive.
Lmao..the militant liberal groups such as the environmentalist only focus on what the J-team and their professors tell them to focus on. It’s not in the interest of the J-team to allow free competition duh.
Ayn Rand perfected the art of apologetics. Pro-Colonialism, elitist, hated gays, supported wars against "savages" etc. Margerat Thatcher, small government?
Damn, I knew Stephan was biased up to his eyeballs with raging Objectivism, but this is a new high.
The franchise system, which was created to reduce the high number of cabs in
Santa Monica along with the pollution and other problems it creates, will go into effect in January. Those not selected for franchises said this would mean jobs losses and company bankruptcy. The five companies approved for franchiseswere recommended by City staff following a lengthy selection process. They will each be allowed 50 vehicles.
@lek844 (continued). I know that every official agenda adopted by gatherings of socialists and communists over the last 20 years has prominently featured environmentalism. But I am looking for this first big meeting after the fall of the USSR and the communist bloc.
Shortly after the fall of the USSR, there was an international meeting of former communist apparatchiks. I understand that this dejected group nevertheless adopted an agenda to further the goals of socialism, and one of the items was, of course, environmentalism. Does anyone know the name of this meeting and when it was held?
Stef, do you suppose that there are those in government who have consciously supported these groups in order to create big government over the years or do you suppose that big government has been the result of people fighting over the same gun and increasing its power inadvertantly over the years?
Great video, as always, Stef. I appreciate hearing your interesting thoughts. $90 for a cab ride?! Damn... But then, in California, there are almost more cars than people. You wanna talk about there being too many cars on the road? Perfect example. I think your praise of Ayn Rand was a bit overblown though. I find her novels rather dry, especially considering how obvious it is which characters you're supposed to like. I find that rather tasteless. I'll choose my own heroes, thank you.
@MisterC0 I'm not telling him who he's supposed to like; I'm just saying I'm not a fan of Rand's novels. As for how much he's supposed to like someone: where exactly do I make any sort of quantitative assessment? You're reading way more into that comment than there was. I was simply stating an opinion. If you - or Stef, for that matter - disagree, then that's fine. It's useless to haggle over art because each statement either comes down to "I like it" or "I don't like it." There's no gun here.
There are tons of these examples. The italian gvt subsidizes Al Italia to fly around the world with empty air craft. To appease unions and prevent lay offs and bankruptcy. No environmentalists complaining there.
@donroche You don't really think it costs 25cents or so to send a credit card application out do you? The govt subsidizes the post office, and the post office charges less than the actual cost of delivering mail. That's why you get junk mail. If the true cost were imposed, there would be much less of it.
Steph...you've gotta stop lumping all environmentalists together. Believe it or not, theres a lot of anarchist environmentalists who are going to get alienated by your message if there is no distinction between pseudo-environmentalists who are merely trying to maintain the stats quo and more radical elements who identify the states as a completely undesireable institution.
Steph...you've gotta stop lumping all environmentalists together. Believe it or not, theres a lot of anarchist environmentalists who are going to get alienated by your message if there is no distinction between pseudo-environmentalists who are merely trying to maintain the stats quo and more radical elements who identify the states as a completely undesireable institution.
A third famous/accomplished/influential woman that Feminists don't seem interested in is Mother Theressa. This is probably because [conjecture] because she was very strongly against abortion and viewed that institution as a tragedy of epic proportion rather than something 'liberating.'
GK Chesterton said this: "Feminism is the mode of thought that hates everything feminine."
If feminism is all about taking their work & selling their children then that is an excellent descriptor thereof.
I disagree with Stef on about 1 out of 100 points, and overall I agree with Stef's
points in this video. However, Thatcher was simply another puppet of the elite powers who run the world. As with the vast majority of politicians, she sold her soul for money and power, and she is responsible for incredible amounts of grief, terror, and misery to many people. The fact that she had a vagina instead of a penis does not make her a hero(ine), simply because she rose to the top of a pile of t*rds.
Well I think to generalize the theme you're proposing Stef is people simply look to government to provide solutions and distrust the free market. People have put their faith in violence and not in freedom. And so any kind of conflict simply greases the slippery slope towards fascism.
I don't really understand logic in this argument. How can one blame environmentalist for bartering with a tyranny that only exists because our taxes. Also many environmentalist are jailed for their beliefs but you are free. So you obviously you set aside your beliefs by paying your taxes to remain free.
@0urGaia Because the environmentalist movement wants to use that tyrannical power to impose taxes and regulations on everyone else; to control lives of other people by means of violence.
@yoshimaroka, no thats what government wants do, not the environmentalist. When bartering anything its give and take, so government will only give environmental concessions for power.
@pretorious700. exactly, so environmentalist are being "USED" by government to further political control. As we are being USED by government to finance their political control. So argument is guilt by association. You could demonize all humankind with same logic.
Second on the mail discussion, We as the receivers of mail should be allowed to not accept junk mail, examples of present day situations are spam filters or blocking emails, or do not call lists, if we as the people are allowed to block mail this would help the environment, time, and lower subsidies given to these companies.
Stef great video as always, just a few key points I would like to discuss: I don't understand how it would help the environment with your taxi cab it would still use the same amount of fuel, also while i agree with the taxi cab license should not cost 250k, if it was free or cheap it would definitely drive the price down and be used more but also many more cabs would be on the road.
@0PsycoDad0 - I tend to agree. Another point: in the "rants", Stef appears to me to be seduced by his own rhetoric into creating straw men. He uses irony to propose things other people would say (even when they probably wouldn't) for rhetorical effect. This is a cheap trick, and has a built-in defence - as the person deploying the straw man can always respond with "lighten up!", "I was just joking", "don't be a pedant", thereby ridiculing in advance a serious response.
It outrages me as well that babies are passed onto daycares and not raised by thier own parents! Once woman were given more "power" and began working for that paycheque its actually screwing up the kids because they are not recieving the guidence they need to become well-rounded adults....instead they're all dysfunctional and its obvious by observing the state of this world. Stupid taxes....its all bullshit!
@LuluBre02 Actually when women were staying at home all the time they often had no life so they drove their kids crazy and their husbands too. Besides, can't men stay at home? I know a lot of men who'd love to be stay at home dads.
Also, men shouldn't have to work their asses to support the family; which isn't really possible these days anyway. Who can afford to have a stay at home parent?
(sorry for the repost, wasn't sure where to comment)
Stefan, love all the videos and couldn't agree more with your ideas on freedom - particularly in economics. You are a voice of reason in a world of insanity.
Why do you often use the word "Foreigners," as a derogatory term? In a stateless world, wouldn't the word "foreigner" be antiquated? By recognizing that there is no fundamental "us" vs "them," we strip down another fear tactic of the state and further reduce its hold over our freedom.
@JamesAAnderson1988 "Foreigner" in itself isn't a derogatory term; just a descriptive one. [Though like 'barbarian' in Roman times may have extra meaning attached as time goes on.] Even in a stateless world [which may not be good] the term would have meaning as applied to someone who doesn't share the same linguistic or cultural background.
@JamesAAnderson1988 A group of rational individuals who decide to form a polity because of their shared values (what I call 'a consentient society') should view those that live outside of that paradigm as "foreign", and the concept of "open borders" totally invalidates the consentient society.
@JamesAAnderson1988 You are absolutely right, and the best way to understand this is to live outside of your native land for a while. You begin to identify with others based on common philosophy and friendship as opposed to putting everyone in a cultural or national box.
Stefan, love all the videos and couldn't agree more with your ideas on freedom - particularly in economics. You are a voice of reason in a world of insanity.
One question though, why do you often use the word "Foreigners," as a derogatory term? In a stateless world, wouldn't the word "foreigner" be antiquated? By recognizing that there is no fundamental "us" vs "them," we strip down another fear tactic of the state and further reduce its hold over our freedom.
@MrWafflesMonster Welllll, they do not work quite so well when you have five suitcases and a 22-month-old baby sho is just coming off a five hour flight. :)
@MrWafflesMonster America has a wonderful road and plane infrastructure. In most urban centres they have trains that no one rides and busses no one really wants to ride. High speed rail for instance, as Obama is crying out for, in concept, seems a wonderful idea, but if you have to travel between far away cities, why not take the wonderfully implemented airport infrastructure. How much is your time worth? Under capitalism you can fly, under communism, we all take the train, wherever they decide.
@MrWafflesMonster Have you seen the price of Public Transport compared to a few years ago recently? More importantly, have you tried taking Public Transport directly between two locations that weren't already connected 60 years ago when Western Governments stole major transport routes and forcefully prevented new routes from developing?
I just searched "environmentalism+ "junk mail"" and "environmentalism+ subsidies" and Stefbot is completely wrong about the environmentalists stance on these issues. I encourage readers to test stefbots claims. He is deliberately misrepresenting the positions of others to bolster his own claims.
@StrafingMoose No, what I mean is it's easy to disprove Stefbots arguments with a minimum of research. I'm not making an argument, I'm simply stating that Stefbot is blowing smoke when he makes grand generalizations and misrepresentations. I urge people to check his assumptions, then decide the merits of his arguments.
@DeathToSophists I am seeing the same pattern here that we have seen with Thunderfoot - if you have been following that saga. The world is seen in such a way as it fits-in with one's own ideals, regardless of how the world really is.
@DeathToSophists Your missing the point, but i search it and you are right, in that respect. The real problem is that environmentalism want to use the goverment to suit theire needs and wants, and that means regulations, or to put it in other words, incarceration or fines.
At the end, the point that stef always mades is the violence inherent in the political system, if an everiomentalist group goes and says that it wants to stop this subsudies, they wont get a meating and there funding.
Hey Stef, I'm an environmentalist and I'm glad you paid $90 for cab fare. Next time, take the bus.
Hey folks, want to know more about Stefbot
search molyneuxrevealed, read and learn.the truth
BTW, Mr. Molyneux has blocked users who rationally criticize his "arguments", both from his forum, (fair enough) and from YouTube, (cowardly). Hardly a "free domain"
Excellent points Stef, there is certainly a large amount of collusion between modern mainstream feminism and the expansion of state power, and indeed I think this is a bad alliance for feminists. The state will inevitably betray them, and frankly already has.
I don't think most feminists reject Rand and Thatcher because they were for small government, however. I think they see them as conservative apologists who were allied with patriarchy, which feminists object to more than they do the state.
Do you seriously equate 'small government' and feminist equality with a woman who said on the telly 'there is a generation of people growing up in Britain today who will never find work, get used to it'? The i.m.f. ran britain throughout her tenure, along with the Rand corp'. A suicide on every street. A war of aggression that cost a thousand souls...mainly Argentine conscrpts, forced to fight.
I imagine any thinking feminist would be put off by the fact she was an authoritarian low level psyco
Stef, you could have chosen a better example for your "ideal" woman - mag thatcher. That was the monster that started a war with argentina gov in 1982 over a flock of sheep on los malvinas (falkland islands). Roughly 800 uk soldiers dead + 3000+ argentine soldiers + financial cost etc.
Your argument is fine, of course. I'm just saying.
Thanks for video - a very good and interesting one. Helps me to understand the mechanics of the way the greenies are manipulated.
@zalida100 He wasn't presenting her as "ideal" anything. He was using her as an example of how feminism is used to advance government control by pointing out anti-big government women who were substantial in the 20th century who are marginalized and ignored by feminists. People need to develop the intellectual capability to step outside of personal prejudice and opinion and examine arguments in their rational form.
@pretorious700 Yes. I know he wasn't. I was suggesting there are better examples to use for the very reasons you listed and for which you claim there is a need.
@MrHeiwa07 Well, I can see the problem with using maggie thatcher, just cos she is a politician and almost by default, a two-faced genocidal maniac. This would perhaps be a questionable role model for feminists to want to use. Ayn Rand I think is a fine choice though, cos although she had her critics, she also seemed to have integrity. (I don't know enough about her yet).
Of course the video doesn't lose anything because of our small opinion. The video is great. Cheers
The whole AGW memes and the belief in saving the planet is so powerful and appeals to some so deeply that they will dance with the devil. You should take this up the next time you interview Max Keiser, hes all for throwing those who are anti AGW into jail. Wether you see AGW being the issue or naught people should not be incarcerated simply for a belief.
you know you are making a good video when people start to bitch about it stef :), gj i totally agree with you, stupid environmentalists are the easiest sheep to heard
With regards to trains... you'll need to have more societies and communities where cars are not required, before you'll see trains become more popular. The bottom line is, you NEED a car in your daily life in most places. You already have that expense. You might as well use it. You would have to change the way the entire country feels about exurbs, suburbs, urban sprawl, and zoning laws before you'll see nationwide rail.
@nearlyape Environmentalists influence the public as well as private companies directly. This of course brushes against representatives, but it's not a direct appeal to government. Environmental boycotts as well as direct action are both effective and widespread actions. One of the reasons I'm vegan is because animal products cause huge environmental damage. That's consumer activism.
How is taking a taxi better than renting a car? Either way you're driving a car! What environmentalists want is a national rail system. Obama is the first one to make serious first steps in that direction.
One of my favorites of yours stefan. Beautiful.
DesMotsInsenses 2 months ago
This is, of course, the case of "bad examples but still decent argument" syndrome.
Also, are you a libertarian (very small government) or a anarchist (no formal government)?
movcrit 6 months ago
Your cab license personal example shouldn't have been used. It can easily be construed to attack your position.
1. If the Cab was used the Cab would be forced to drive back and forth. If you had rented a Car you would only have drove there. (Within a vacuum cost half of the gas)
3. If the government raised taxes on car rentals. You would also be more inclined to use the cab.
Your internet-based technologies also fail because the internet was developed by DARPA and given away free.
movcrit 6 months ago
@movcrit, you're wrong. In fact, wrong in such a way that it suggest you're a dumb fuck.
1) Cab takes passangers from anywhere, not only from airport.
3) Classic fallacy of this form: A -> C, B -> C => A == B.
(the object in a statement is not interchangeable when the predicate is attacked. Analogy that needs to do so is invalid)
Idol2011no 2 months ago
@Idol2011no
1. Yes, but how do you know if a cab, that gets most of it's business from Airport would actually find someone before reaching a certain distance?
3. I fail to see what you are talking about. I am only using the Socratic inquiry to determine if his statements are imprecise or wrong. I pointed an exception to his examples. A more accurate formal logic depiction of my statement is If A therefore B. Or B -> A. Arrows aren't "therefore"... they are "if and only if."
movcrit 2 months ago
@movcrit,
1) I don't have to know any such thing. Logic.doesn't place the burden of proof on the criticizer. Me, the criticizer, only need to bore a hole in the logic and if I can, I have shown it to be fallacious. My job is then done.
3) "->" means if and only if.
@movcrit, are you trying to contradict my reason or confirm it? To me it looks like the latter.
Idol2011no 2 months ago
@Idol2011no 1. Is an assertion that can be verified quantitatively or denied. That's the thing about efficiency and maximization, they are quantitative properties and therefore require quantitative proofs.
movcrit 2 months ago
Margaret Thatcher was against the feminism movement. I owe nothing to women's lib. Would a civil rights activist support a famous black person who was for segregation?
You make examples where the environment benefits businesses benefit, but that's entirely accurate of today world. In most cases businesses benefit from the destruction of the environment. I could cut costs if I just dump the nuclear waste somewhere rather then seeking to seal it. Here only the state can stop me.
movcrit 6 months ago
I recently started to dislike 'Green and environmentalist views' without really knowing why.It just felt wrong to support ideas such as the Carbon Tax here in Australia. Now I sort of know why.Lol Queen of Malta. I grew up in Malta and sometimes the degrees of influence by the church on the government sickens me. This is almost the same thing as the environment. I love the environment and I really don't hate religion. But I guess the link is the aggression involved in bringing about these ideas.
Diamondpyth 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Steinem's idea of feminism meant a woman had to be pro-abortion, anti-family and anti-man -- anti-anything moral! I always believed that feminism was about what a woman wanted to do. That meant a woman had the right to make a choice. Palin and Bachmann are true feminists. They are pro-life, pro-family and they made it in a man’s world without invoking the victim status! Steinem is more about politics than about feminist! As far as eco-feminism? Learn about United Nations Agenda 21.
vechorik 6 months ago
In the issue of feminism, its also quite disgusting to see how the relationships of families are being torn apart. Its disgusting to hear people place materialism over community and family.
SuperPhdiva 7 months ago
What kind of state power are the environmentalists trying to expand ?? Also, isn't corporate lawlessness creating most of the environmental destruction?
LothairApoclyane 9 months ago
@LothairApoclyane no, it isnt.
SecularNumanist 7 months ago
Besides that apparently paper is made from trees. Well it is, but it is very strange technology. Wood is very awkward to make paper from. It is the outlaw of Cannabis that caused the cutting down of every real forest in America. Hemp delivers fare more cellulose per acre than wood ever will.
TerrierBram 9 months ago
Discriminatory tax breaks in favor of women, special treatment in family court, state subsidies for childcare, primary aggressor laws against men, state funded women's shelters, state funded women's health clinics, state funded women's college grants, immunity from conscription; thank you feminism for dismantling the very equality you once stood for.
Dirge987 10 months ago
@Dirge987 Thanks for completely denying your privilege. Don't you realize that 'special treatment in family court' is a direct result of the partiarical belief that women are 'natural caregivers'. Women's shelters and aggressor laws against men are there because domestic violence is so PREVALENT and often GLAMOURIZED in current culture. Have you even heard of rape culture?
Wah wah! Women's college grants are so unfair, they're are already so many women at the top these days. What wage gap?
lVlusicLover 7 months ago
@lVlusicLover Privilege
Patriarchy
Rape Culture
Wage Gap
Bingo! I just won feminist bingo! =D
Dirge987 7 months ago
@lVlusicLover "Have you even heard of rape culture?" I've heard about it a lot, but I can't find it.
john42t 7 months ago
@5:30 he nails it.
eimb1999 11 months ago
keeping feminist cunts in check: MANHOOD101. COM
thenfm 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We will not find justice at the hands of corrupt judges. (See YouTube videos) Judicial Benefits & Court Corruption Update / Evil Triangle of Court Corruption / Richard fine / Dr Shirley Moore slush funds /SBX 211. To end this title wave of corruption in our country must start with the corrupt judges. We can not bring evidence of corruption to corrupt judges. Los Angeles Superior Court judges are illegally and unconstitutionally taking 50,000.00 each for a total of 23 million per year.
danielcooper1000 1 year ago
Environmentalism is a crock of shit. Of course taking care of the environment is a noble thing, and I don't argue against that, but I hate these politicians who push that agenda for their own gains. Just to think I bought into this nonsense when I was still in school. And women have had way more rights before feminism.
SimplyRich2060 1 year ago
Margaret Thatcher did nothing about Long Kesh. That's right off the top of my head. I'm sure I would find she is quite far from libertarian anarchism if I chose to research her history. She was in the government.
EnochEmery251 1 year ago
I agree 100% and will go further with it ALL lefty movement are fronts for increasing goverment, they are designed to villify white people ( white men especially) and western civilization as both are seen as a threat to bigger government. Women and minorities are more likely to support it. Why do you think lefty's support islam? Islam is against everything they are supposed to believe in but islam is anti western civilization. That's what really matters to them..
tesharika 1 year ago
favorited. ive been trying to tell people that all 3 of these (and i would add that parts of the race war/civil rights movement were also coopted and exploited by gov in the same way) are connected and have been used to lay the groundwork of tyranny for decades.
the agreement of one genius like youself is worth more than the dozens of fools that call me crazy lol.
knowthingman 1 year ago
the answer is simple. *if* someone were able to, say, make a converter for a car that allowed it to run on water (needing only 22 galons of water for a trip to NY from Los angeles for example) and turned down an offer of 1 billion from a saudi based company because they wanted to sell it for the good of humanity at only $1500 a pop...then that person would be dead within a year due to *accidental* radiation poisioning. true story, one going on 20 yrs old now.
knowthingman 1 year ago
@stefbot: On the feminism issue, just thought of someone else. Two words: Emma Goldman. Anarcha-feminist, anarcho-communist, more radical than any feminist then, commented on the suffrage movement saying: "We vote? What does that mean?" As an anarchist, she of course did not go for big government, or any at all. There's no denying her feminism, advocating the right to choose abortion and birth control while they were anathema, not to mention illegal. Is she not a heroine to feminists? (Yes).
mcc1789 1 year ago
@mcc1789 a communist cannot be for small government, i think she supports my thesis
stefbot 1 year ago 4
@stefbot If you don't know what anarcho-communism is, or Emma Goldman was, then...nothing to do with state communism, is all I can say. Please do look it up.
mcc1789 1 year ago
@stefbot If you don't know what anarcho-communism is, or Emma Goldman was, then...nothing to do with state communism, is all I can say. Please do look it up. In actual fact, Emma Goldman went to Bolshevik Russia and hated what she saw in the end. This experience is recounted in "My Disillusionment in Russia" and "My Further Disullisionment in Russia." Of course she was already anarchist. Not all communists are for government. Some of them are anarchists.
mcc1789 1 year ago
@stefbot when you say communist, are you referring to Emma Goldman? from what i can tell she was purely an anarchist. Also, maybe you should look into green anarchism and anarcho primitivism.
2deluxe58 1 year ago
@stefbot
she is an anarcho-communist, not an authoritarian communist
401pgm 4 months ago
How would it be better for the environment, it's the same thing?
dubified89 1 year ago
What about Naomi Klein? loljk
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
This Stefan Molyneux guy sounds like he's issuing a diktat from the Ministry of Truth.
What's with libertarians and their screeds?
pdfsio 1 year ago
...farmers to do this, as it would cost them money, and they would not gain anything from doing so. This is evidenced across the country. No doubt there are other examples like this across the world. So, I ask, what sort of peaceful solution is there to this problem? I am not trying to argue against the contents of this video, I am just genuinely curious as to how a problem like this can be resolved.
iBurnedEverything 1 year ago
In my country one of the biggest environmental issues we face is caused by dairy farmers, whose cows pollute the air (which there is not an obvious solution for apart from having less farms) and pollute our waterways. The water-pollution can be easily minimized, if farmers were to install fences and keep their livestock away from rivers, creeks, streams, etc. However (apart from some terribly-enforced laws (which obviously are not the answer anyway)), there is no free-market incentive for...
iBurnedEverything 1 year ago
I'd like to say that those propositions are politicians PANDERING to environmentalists--not the motivations of environmentalists themselves.
secrets0stolen 1 year ago
Green anarchism and anarcha-feminism. Ever heard of them?
Don't disparage the entire movement just because authoritarians hijacked the terms!
Grindermetalhead 1 year ago
I admit my choice of words leaves something to be desired sometimes, but wth, this is youtube, I've got a tough word count to finish outside of this. It should be obvious from how confused-sounding some of the comments I make are. Plus I have an edit of just clicking post from forums where you can post-edit. Give it the due forgiveness, I'm sure you generally know what I'm talking about anyway.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
I'll tell you what the environmentalists were doing, they were busy with other issues. For instance GM went bankrupt. You could have revamped it for high speed transport throughout the country, you could have fixed up public transport in-city, green buses, more efficient subways. there was a lot of noise about this when the government took over operations. But no, that would have been too socialist. A lot of the fluff spouted by right-wingers depends on the lack of anti-corruption regs.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
Two people who were about as right-wing as you can get, one famous for ruthlessly suppressing miner's riots for better conditions and pay by sending in insurgents to confuse and splinter the movement from within, the other whose every political fiction had some sensationalist allegory in it about why the weak are not worth welfare. Why don't most feminists like them? Because they don't like small government.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
@rajasmasala I probably didn't mention the ruthless police actions that Thatcher is famous for, on top of her stripping away of civil welfare rights. Should have mentioned that along with the minor's thing. Which wasn't a riot, btw, as the Vietnam protest movement wasn't, until the government sent its firestarters in.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
@rajasmasala
"Which wasn't a riot, btw, as the Vietnam protest movement wasn't, until the government sent its firestarters in."
Wow, were you there? That's amazing.
Anyway, your comments directed at this video amount to non-replies. A basic example of what you do: "Person X did / said Y thus they are shit and I am t3h winrar. No need to actually directly address anything." Or you do the, "No, let ME tell YOU what happened. Okay, now that it happened my way, because I said so, I must be right!"
regresseur 1 year ago
@regresseur In both cases the fact that the movements only became violent when the FBI and the British police sent in agents provocateurs is well documented. Beyond that, your comments describe the problems with your attempt at refutation more accurately than mine.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
@rajasmasala
1.
Why bother addressing your comments directly? Here is your comment about Rand: "She was a 'right-winger' and her books sucked!" Wow, you must be a genius. Gd argument. Your comment about environmentalists: "I'll tell you what environmentalists were doing... " Right there the rest of your comment instantly becomes bullshit. 1) extreme generalization, 2) which you then go on to talk about what "they" (this abstraction with no real identity) were doing (in your fantasy world).
regresseur 1 year ago
@regresseur
1)yeah that was a verbatim quote. of course. And no, she's a communist.
2) My statement was validated by the extreme generalization implicit in the title of this video: "Environmentalism, Feminism and Tyranny". I was giving one example of how libertarians, republicans etc. derive justification from obstructing plans to prevent the implementation of environmentalist policies that would create jobs. Not up to date, does Stefbot still believe global warming isn't happening?
rajasmasala 1 year ago
@rajasmasala
2.
Where's this documentation? Is the source biased? How will I be able to tell? Was the very first physical altercation caught on tape? Who did it? How do you know? Who directed you to this information in the first place? Were they biased? So many questions. I also like the word "movement" because it sounds so passive; I'm sure not a single civilian involved in these "movements" was being antagonistic in any way whatsoever. Get real.
regresseur 1 year ago
@regresseur Look, what precisely are you, politically? Or are you just not up with your history? Look it up. It's the internet. I'd have to find the sources same as you. A google got me on appropriate references quickly enough. Yeah, sure, a few people may have turned violent, that proves your point. Amply illustrated by the Canada protests a few weeks back.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
@rajasmasala
No need to reply to these last two comments. I won. Your attempts to inject more irrelevance into this discussion and lure me down the path of endless nonsense tell me so.
regresseur 1 year ago
@regresseur Right, clever. No, Thatcher was not an autocratic right-winger managing a police state. No, Stefbot is Al Gore. You win. I might well quote your first comment again, but like you I can't be bothered.
rajasmasala 1 year ago
@rajasmasala
TY.
regresseur 1 year ago
"Thank the Free Market for email"
I'd just like to point out that ARPANET was the primary contributor in the early development of email, and was primarily funded by the Dept. of Defense.
HerBDerb666 1 year ago
@HerBDerb666 Along with transistors, satellites, computers...the list continues. R&D is a major problem for market economics, as inventions can mean losses if funding doesn't pan out, or the invention doesn't. That's one problem, among others.
mcc1789 1 year ago
@HerBDerb666 Along with transistors, satellites, computers...the list continues. R&D is a major problem for market economics, as inventions can mean losses if funding doesn't pan out, or the invention doesn't. That's one problem, among others.
@stefbot Maybe they don't talk about Margaret Thatcher that much because they'd rather forget she was a woman? Thatcher was certainly no foe of violence, arguably no friend of feminism either, so there is that.
mcc1789 1 year ago
Also transistors, satellites, computers...the list continues. R&d is a major problem for market economics, due to uncertaintly of payoff.
@stefbot As for environmentalism, and feminism, tell me-is there some particular "free market" incentive to protecting natural resources or women in a world in which human rights=property rights? As for Thatcher and Rand: Thatcher was no stranger to violence, expanding military spending and the security state. Rand, they might have other problems with...
mcc1789 1 year ago
Well...Then Romans:13 is true then....LOL!!!!
JimmyGunXD556 1 year ago
I don't really respect intelligent people who don't have children... however great ayn rand was, i lose some respect for her just for that. my grandmother was the first assistant DA in the state of oklahoma and she had 4 children. it upsets the balance of intelligence and perpetuates many of the atrocities you cite in other videos. you don't want to breed out intelligence. furthermore you are a "work at home" father (not just a housefather) i have extra respect for u b/c you have children...
MrBluePsych 1 year ago
Comment removed
MrBluePsych 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrBluePsychbecause making these videos is work too... even if it doesn't make you money... it works for the comon good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MrBluePsych 1 year ago
"Where are the environmentalists?"
Environmentalists are melons. Green on the outside but red on the inside. As 'environmentalists' they are frauds. They are socialists merely pretending to care about the environment as long as they can damage anything related to the free market and can fatten the wallets of the state. The only question that needs raising for melons is: "Is what I am doing bad for (free) business and good for the state?"
Then you know the melon's position on *anything*.
tridentmovies 1 year ago 2
"Women go to work to have an income because you can tax that you can't tax staying at home...not only do women not get to raise their children but the money that they generate is used to sell their children's future...if that doesn't outrage you if that doesn't make you look in the mirror and change your ways then you are lost beyond hope." Brilliance! and thank you.
weaver613moongypsy 1 year ago
I think the whole " going green" movement is ridiculous. Biking to work, or choosing paper over plastic is going to reduce emissions at all, when petroleum and other such products make the world go round..
WyldOrbit 1 year ago
Looks like the CIA were involved in Ms magazine, which featured a shallow, anti-family type of feminism, just as they were known to be involved in Encounter.
When I first became interested in feminism about 30 years ago, I started to see the weird ideological tunnel vision (heck virtual monopoly) in the mass movement. There was only one large organization, NOW. Groups like the Association of Libertarian Feminists were tiny.
givebirthathome 1 year ago
Comment removed
nocoercion 1 year ago
I would like to see a government with more power to protect us from all these all powerful corporations. But we get the opposite, a very powerful government to help all these big corporations crushing us even more.
tubetib 1 year ago
@tubetib
That's because you clearly don't understand the government. Let me ask you a simple question: WHY do you think an organization that has SO much money for free (taxation isn't asking money for a service, but taking money for bad service) and SO much power, would attract "good" people who'd do the "right" thing?
The reason corporations can do these things is because government attracts scum (politicians) that will put power at your disposal if you put money in their pockets.
tridentmovies 1 year ago
@tridentmovies I think you have a view from the government of the USA. But look how a socialist government is working so well in Scandinavian countries: lots of services, very low criminality, ... So the problem is more about the takeover from the corporate world than from the idea of government itself. This is what I believe.
tubetib 1 year ago
@tubetib
Well Gee, tubetib. Which would/should i prefer? Some corporation that - without the help of government - wouldn't be able to do a damn thing? Or the government, which does EVERYTHING, and i do mean everything, by force? Which should i prefer? The con man, or the mobster with the baseball bat making me an offer i can't refuse? Lots of services? Oh you mean services i have to pay for even if i don't need/want them? Those services? Low criminality? Hah. Go to Malmo.
tridentmovies 1 year ago
@tridentmovies Denmark is considered by many to most happy country on earth. Everyone is paying a lot of taxes for services that most of the time they don't use. But the overall effect is that even if you are the guy emptying the trash cans, we are going to have a good salary anyway and live very well. And because the system cares about each one, it leads to low criminality. But in USA it is too late for that. It is a doomed empire.
tubetib 1 year ago
Yeah because deregulation of the taxi industry worked so well in Ireland. Try calling a cab in Dublin... pretty much any time. There are thousands of tiny taxi operators with 2-3 cars each. You have to call about 20 places to find one with an available car unless you're booking way in advance... and it's still expensive.
TheAmazingBiped 1 year ago
Goverment = 99.99999999% of the problems in the world
Esoparagon 1 year ago
@Esoparagon Hierarchical authority=99.99999999% of the problems in the world.
Replace the government with any other social structure based on hierarchical authority and you'll have the same mess all over again.
Grindermetalhead 1 year ago
Lmao..the militant liberal groups such as the environmentalist only focus on what the J-team and their professors tell them to focus on. It’s not in the interest of the J-team to allow free competition duh.
MrHappy702 1 year ago
Ayn Rand perfected the art of apologetics. Pro-Colonialism, elitist, hated gays, supported wars against "savages" etc. Margerat Thatcher, small government?
Damn, I knew Stephan was biased up to his eyeballs with raging Objectivism, but this is a new high.
SPQRomantic 1 year ago
@SPQRomantic
Certainly nice to see you haven't managed to come up with one single meaningful argument.
Must be one of the reasons you hate Objectivism so much: too much reasoning.
tridentmovies 1 year ago
here is their reasoning for their gov. mafia
The franchise system, which was created to reduce the high number of cabs in
Santa Monica along with the pollution and other problems it creates, will go into effect in January. Those not selected for franchises said this would mean jobs losses and company bankruptcy. The five companies approved for franchiseswere recommended by City staff following a lengthy selection process. They will each be allowed 50 vehicles.
clawdiggie 1 year ago
Environmentalism = Communism w/a facelift
ashane77 1 year ago
You are pro life on what, abortion ? If so why ?
MrIStillDontCare 1 year ago
@MrIStillDontCare lol. everyone is pro life. everyone is pro choice. he made no stance on abortion.
JermJus 1 year ago
@lek844 (continued). I know that every official agenda adopted by gatherings of socialists and communists over the last 20 years has prominently featured environmentalism. But I am looking for this first big meeting after the fall of the USSR and the communist bloc.
lek844 1 year ago
Shortly after the fall of the USSR, there was an international meeting of former communist apparatchiks. I understand that this dejected group nevertheless adopted an agenda to further the goals of socialism, and one of the items was, of course, environmentalism. Does anyone know the name of this meeting and when it was held?
lek844 1 year ago
Why did you choose Maggie Thatcher? Do you really believe she was a supporter of small gov`t ?
MrHeiwa07 1 year ago
feminism and environmentalism are like communism, based on the concept of class conflict
zuiprax 1 year ago
Stef, do you suppose that there are those in government who have consciously supported these groups in order to create big government over the years or do you suppose that big government has been the result of people fighting over the same gun and increasing its power inadvertantly over the years?
vegetta00 1 year ago
$250,000? WTF?
DiwataMan 1 year ago
Great video, as always, Stef. I appreciate hearing your interesting thoughts. $90 for a cab ride?! Damn... But then, in California, there are almost more cars than people. You wanna talk about there being too many cars on the road? Perfect example. I think your praise of Ayn Rand was a bit overblown though. I find her novels rather dry, especially considering how obvious it is which characters you're supposed to like. I find that rather tasteless. I'll choose my own heroes, thank you.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
@IvanTheHeathen You certainly seem to be making it obvious not just which people Stef is supposed to like but how much.
MisterC0 1 year ago
@MisterC0 I'm not telling him who he's supposed to like; I'm just saying I'm not a fan of Rand's novels. As for how much he's supposed to like someone: where exactly do I make any sort of quantitative assessment? You're reading way more into that comment than there was. I was simply stating an opinion. If you - or Stef, for that matter - disagree, then that's fine. It's useless to haggle over art because each statement either comes down to "I like it" or "I don't like it." There's no gun here.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
There are tons of these examples. The italian gvt subsidizes Al Italia to fly around the world with empty air craft. To appease unions and prevent lay offs and bankruptcy. No environmentalists complaining there.
modelmark 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@spazzDog "Japan, Europe, South Korea, they all have a public railway transportation service. They run just fine, thank you very much."
Not without state subsidies they don't.
kevinjoubert 1 year ago
@donroche You don't really think it costs 25cents or so to send a credit card application out do you? The govt subsidizes the post office, and the post office charges less than the actual cost of delivering mail. That's why you get junk mail. If the true cost were imposed, there would be much less of it.
kevinjoubert 1 year ago
Steph...you've gotta stop lumping all environmentalists together. Believe it or not, theres a lot of anarchist environmentalists who are going to get alienated by your message if there is no distinction between pseudo-environmentalists who are merely trying to maintain the stats quo and more radical elements who identify the states as a completely undesireable institution.
jrwindett 1 year ago
Steph...you've gotta stop lumping all environmentalists together. Believe it or not, theres a lot of anarchist environmentalists who are going to get alienated by your message if there is no distinction between pseudo-environmentalists who are merely trying to maintain the stats quo and more radical elements who identify the states as a completely undesireable institution.
jrwindett 1 year ago
Can someone explain to me how junk mail is subsedied?
meirpolaris 1 year ago
@meirpolaris They get to send mail at a lower price than first class mail.
cchessmaster 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@meirpolaris "Can someone explain to me how junk mail is subsedied?"
All mail handled by the USPS is subsidized. Junk mail, or bulk mail, is given discounts beyond the normal subsidies.
kevinjoubert 1 year ago
A third famous/accomplished/influential woman that Feminists don't seem interested in is Mother Theressa. This is probably because [conjecture] because she was very strongly against abortion and viewed that institution as a tragedy of epic proportion rather than something 'liberating.'
GK Chesterton said this: "Feminism is the mode of thought that hates everything feminine."
If feminism is all about taking their work & selling their children then that is an excellent descriptor thereof.
OneWingedShark 1 year ago
I disagree with Stef on about 1 out of 100 points, and overall I agree with Stef's
points in this video. However, Thatcher was simply another puppet of the elite powers who run the world. As with the vast majority of politicians, she sold her soul for money and power, and she is responsible for incredible amounts of grief, terror, and misery to many people. The fact that she had a vagina instead of a penis does not make her a hero(ine), simply because she rose to the top of a pile of t*rds.
MrDorkusMaximus 1 year ago
If anyone ever was born to kick government butt, it is our Stef! Original, and deadly pertinent as ever . . .
not2tees 1 year ago
Well I think to generalize the theme you're proposing Stef is people simply look to government to provide solutions and distrust the free market. People have put their faith in violence and not in freedom. And so any kind of conflict simply greases the slippery slope towards fascism.
whitechocolatespace 1 year ago
Standing Ovation.
daizee106 1 year ago
Each time I go to the post office, I push the junk mail back through the box and onto the floor. Eventually they get the message. Yes it does work.
babaluto 1 year ago
I don't really understand logic in this argument. How can one blame environmentalist for bartering with a tyranny that only exists because our taxes. Also many environmentalist are jailed for their beliefs but you are free. So you obviously you set aside your beliefs by paying your taxes to remain free.
0urGaia 1 year ago 2
@0urGaia Because the environmentalist movement wants to use that tyrannical power to impose taxes and regulations on everyone else; to control lives of other people by means of violence.
yoshimaroka 1 year ago
@yoshimaroka, no thats what government wants do, not the environmentalist. When bartering anything its give and take, so government will only give environmental concessions for power.
0urGaia 1 year ago
@0urGaia The government uses enironmentalism and by extension environmentalists to further the growth and influence of the state.
pretorious700 1 year ago
@pretorious700. exactly, so environmentalist are being "USED" by government to further political control. As we are being USED by government to finance their political control. So argument is guilt by association. You could demonize all humankind with same logic.
0urGaia 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the evironmentalist movement has been hijacked by communists.femanism was created by communists.
kingneddy 1 year ago
Second on the mail discussion, We as the receivers of mail should be allowed to not accept junk mail, examples of present day situations are spam filters or blocking emails, or do not call lists, if we as the people are allowed to block mail this would help the environment, time, and lower subsidies given to these companies.
morlandoemtp 1 year ago
Stef great video as always, just a few key points I would like to discuss: I don't understand how it would help the environment with your taxi cab it would still use the same amount of fuel, also while i agree with the taxi cab license should not cost 250k, if it was free or cheap it would definitely drive the price down and be used more but also many more cabs would be on the road.
morlandoemtp 1 year ago
Your angry rants are ludicrous. "The enviromentalists" you´re depicting are cave dwelling Amish style tech deniers.
Purely emotionilizing fearmongering.
If we´d desubsidize fossil fuels you´d understand.
0PsycoDad0 1 year ago
@0PsycoDad0 - I tend to agree. Another point: in the "rants", Stef appears to me to be seduced by his own rhetoric into creating straw men. He uses irony to propose things other people would say (even when they probably wouldn't) for rhetorical effect. This is a cheap trick, and has a built-in defence - as the person deploying the straw man can always respond with "lighten up!", "I was just joking", "don't be a pedant", thereby ridiculing in advance a serious response.
Myrmecia 1 year ago
@Myrmecia So as to leave the level on "somewhat cozy".....
Sad in my opinion as too much nonesense is spewd everywhere.
0PsycoDad0 1 year ago
..out..
0PsycoDad0 1 year ago
It outrages me as well that babies are passed onto daycares and not raised by thier own parents! Once woman were given more "power" and began working for that paycheque its actually screwing up the kids because they are not recieving the guidence they need to become well-rounded adults....instead they're all dysfunctional and its obvious by observing the state of this world. Stupid taxes....its all bullshit!
LuluBre02 1 year ago 17
@LuluBre02 You sir, are a misogynist and an antifeminist.
Thought I'd beat the idealogues to the punch.
pretorious700 1 year ago
@LuluBre02 empirical evidence seems to indicate that (private, not "public") daycare is better for raising children that stay at home moms.
LordAgonis 1 year ago
@LuluBre02 Actually when women were staying at home all the time they often had no life so they drove their kids crazy and their husbands too. Besides, can't men stay at home? I know a lot of men who'd love to be stay at home dads.
Also, men shouldn't have to work their asses to support the family; which isn't really possible these days anyway. Who can afford to have a stay at home parent?
MsFlattire 1 year ago
this is dumb, maybe feminists do not talk about ayn rand because she did not focus on gender relations
ChurchofMe88 1 year ago
Because "isms" love the state's gun.
Mahoivlich 1 year ago
Also why don't these greenbots care about chemtrails
ratm3413 1 year ago
I want and need more power....I'll go be an environmentalist.
TheRealNickBravo 1 year ago
(sorry for the repost, wasn't sure where to comment)
Stefan, love all the videos and couldn't agree more with your ideas on freedom - particularly in economics. You are a voice of reason in a world of insanity.
Why do you often use the word "Foreigners," as a derogatory term? In a stateless world, wouldn't the word "foreigner" be antiquated? By recognizing that there is no fundamental "us" vs "them," we strip down another fear tactic of the state and further reduce its hold over our freedom.
JamesAAnderson1988 1 year ago 10
@JamesAAnderson1988 I think you raise an excellent point, I consider myself corrected, thank you so much! :)
stefbot 1 year ago 13
@JamesAAnderson1988 "Foreigner" in itself isn't a derogatory term; just a descriptive one. [Though like 'barbarian' in Roman times may have extra meaning attached as time goes on.] Even in a stateless world [which may not be good] the term would have meaning as applied to someone who doesn't share the same linguistic or cultural background.
OneWingedShark 1 year ago
@JamesAAnderson1988 A group of rational individuals who decide to form a polity because of their shared values (what I call 'a consentient society') should view those that live outside of that paradigm as "foreign", and the concept of "open borders" totally invalidates the consentient society.
BenettFreeman 1 year ago
@JamesAAnderson1988 You are absolutely right, and the best way to understand this is to live outside of your native land for a while. You begin to identify with others based on common philosophy and friendship as opposed to putting everyone in a cultural or national box.
pretorious700 1 year ago
Have you heard of a bus ...?
ewadesign 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Stefan, love all the videos and couldn't agree more with your ideas on freedom - particularly in economics. You are a voice of reason in a world of insanity.
One question though, why do you often use the word "Foreigners," as a derogatory term? In a stateless world, wouldn't the word "foreigner" be antiquated? By recognizing that there is no fundamental "us" vs "them," we strip down another fear tactic of the state and further reduce its hold over our freedom.
JamesAAnderson1988 1 year ago
Cabs? What a joke, in my country we have things called buses, and even (shock) trains
Do such things even exist in America?
MrWafflesMonster 1 year ago
@MrWafflesMonster We had to sell them all to pay our huge debt. Personally I use my solar powered pogo stick.
BrainInSkull 1 year ago
@MrWafflesMonster Welllll, they do not work quite so well when you have five suitcases and a 22-month-old baby sho is just coming off a five hour flight. :)
stefbot 1 year ago 10
@MrWafflesMonster America has a wonderful road and plane infrastructure. In most urban centres they have trains that no one rides and busses no one really wants to ride. High speed rail for instance, as Obama is crying out for, in concept, seems a wonderful idea, but if you have to travel between far away cities, why not take the wonderfully implemented airport infrastructure. How much is your time worth? Under capitalism you can fly, under communism, we all take the train, wherever they decide.
MrXstacey 1 year ago
@MrWafflesMonster Have you seen the price of Public Transport compared to a few years ago recently? More importantly, have you tried taking Public Transport directly between two locations that weren't already connected 60 years ago when Western Governments stole major transport routes and forcefully prevented new routes from developing?
DreadLaw2 1 year ago
Comment removed
JamesAAnderson1988 1 year ago
Environmentalists support public transport (trains, buses, etc), which is why they don't encourage the use of taxis.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway [more] Trains and buses, of course, do less harm to the environment.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
I just searched "environmentalism+ "junk mail"" and "environmentalism+ subsidies" and Stefbot is completely wrong about the environmentalists stance on these issues. I encourage readers to test stefbots claims. He is deliberately misrepresenting the positions of others to bolster his own claims.
DeathToSophists 1 year ago
@DeathToSophists
You mean you Google'd four words and think you've made an argument ? I love Google, but I don't think I would put them in charge of my argumentation.
StrafingMoose 1 year ago
@StrafingMoose No, what I mean is it's easy to disprove Stefbots arguments with a minimum of research. I'm not making an argument, I'm simply stating that Stefbot is blowing smoke when he makes grand generalizations and misrepresentations. I urge people to check his assumptions, then decide the merits of his arguments.
DeathToSophists 1 year ago
@DeathToSophists I am seeing the same pattern here that we have seen with Thunderfoot - if you have been following that saga. The world is seen in such a way as it fits-in with one's own ideals, regardless of how the world really is.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@DeathToSophists Your missing the point, but i search it and you are right, in that respect. The real problem is that environmentalism want to use the goverment to suit theire needs and wants, and that means regulations, or to put it in other words, incarceration or fines.
At the end, the point that stef always mades is the violence inherent in the political system, if an everiomentalist group goes and says that it wants to stop this subsudies, they wont get a meating and there funding.
megatherium100 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey Stef, I'm an environmentalist and I'm glad you paid $90 for cab fare. Next time, take the bus.
Hey folks, want to know more about Stefbot
search molyneuxrevealed, read and learn.the truth
BTW, Mr. Molyneux has blocked users who rationally criticize his "arguments", both from his forum, (fair enough) and from YouTube, (cowardly). Hardly a "free domain"
koko314159 1 year ago
@koko314159 what do you mean?
DeathToSophists 1 year ago
Excellent points Stef, there is certainly a large amount of collusion between modern mainstream feminism and the expansion of state power, and indeed I think this is a bad alliance for feminists. The state will inevitably betray them, and frankly already has.
I don't think most feminists reject Rand and Thatcher because they were for small government, however. I think they see them as conservative apologists who were allied with patriarchy, which feminists object to more than they do the state.
Stargazer5781 1 year ago 2
Hey Stef, what about Emma Goldman? I'd figure, at least in terms of "small government", that she would be higher on the list than Thatcher.
ViolentMonopoly 1 year ago 3
Do you seriously equate 'small government' and feminist equality with a woman who said on the telly 'there is a generation of people growing up in Britain today who will never find work, get used to it'? The i.m.f. ran britain throughout her tenure, along with the Rand corp'. A suicide on every street. A war of aggression that cost a thousand souls...mainly Argentine conscrpts, forced to fight.
I imagine any thinking feminist would be put off by the fact she was an authoritarian low level psyco
zealotnut 1 year ago
6 people were burned.
gradiu3rox 1 year ago
could not have said it any better
jystyle 1 year ago
Stef, you could have chosen a better example for your "ideal" woman - mag thatcher. That was the monster that started a war with argentina gov in 1982 over a flock of sheep on los malvinas (falkland islands). Roughly 800 uk soldiers dead + 3000+ argentine soldiers + financial cost etc.
Your argument is fine, of course. I'm just saying.
Thanks for video - a very good and interesting one. Helps me to understand the mechanics of the way the greenies are manipulated.
zalida100 1 year ago 4
@zalida100 He wasn't presenting her as "ideal" anything. He was using her as an example of how feminism is used to advance government control by pointing out anti-big government women who were substantial in the 20th century who are marginalized and ignored by feminists. People need to develop the intellectual capability to step outside of personal prejudice and opinion and examine arguments in their rational form.
pretorious700 1 year ago 10
@pretorious700 Yes. I know he wasn't. I was suggesting there are better examples to use for the very reasons you listed and for which you claim there is a need.
zalida100 1 year ago
@zalida100 Agreed! Great topic but using Maggie and Ayn for examples was very weak.
MrHeiwa07 1 year ago
@MrHeiwa07 Well, I can see the problem with using maggie thatcher, just cos she is a politician and almost by default, a two-faced genocidal maniac. This would perhaps be a questionable role model for feminists to want to use. Ayn Rand I think is a fine choice though, cos although she had her critics, she also seemed to have integrity. (I don't know enough about her yet).
Of course the video doesn't lose anything because of our small opinion. The video is great. Cheers
zalida100 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Before you know it we will need a license to breath.
hellavadeal 1 year ago
Awesome video man.
cory2146 1 year ago
@donroche
Do you get much junk mail fedex or ups?
FlailingJunk 1 year ago
The whole AGW memes and the belief in saving the planet is so powerful and appeals to some so deeply that they will dance with the devil. You should take this up the next time you interview Max Keiser, hes all for throwing those who are anti AGW into jail. Wether you see AGW being the issue or naught people should not be incarcerated simply for a belief.
NeddLudd1811 1 year ago
@NeddLudd1811 Dunno if you've seen this. I think it's quite good fun.
v=eScDfYzMEEw
zalida100 1 year ago
you know you are making a good video when people start to bitch about it stef :), gj i totally agree with you, stupid environmentalists are the easiest sheep to heard
baalshin 1 year ago
With regards to trains... you'll need to have more societies and communities where cars are not required, before you'll see trains become more popular. The bottom line is, you NEED a car in your daily life in most places. You already have that expense. You might as well use it. You would have to change the way the entire country feels about exurbs, suburbs, urban sprawl, and zoning laws before you'll see nationwide rail.
kevinjoubert 1 year ago
@nearlyape Environmentalists influence the public as well as private companies directly. This of course brushes against representatives, but it's not a direct appeal to government. Environmental boycotts as well as direct action are both effective and widespread actions. One of the reasons I'm vegan is because animal products cause huge environmental damage. That's consumer activism.
JTsmiley14 1 year ago
How is taking a taxi better than renting a car? Either way you're driving a car! What environmentalists want is a national rail system. Obama is the first one to make serious first steps in that direction.
SpazzzDog 1 year ago