capitalism = private property and do whatever you want with ur money
sorry, but i dont see anything wrong with capitalism, is not good or evil, its just useful like the money. If some people are corrupt and violent in the capitalist system or some people do bad thing for money, do not blame capitalism or money
That's not capitalism. Capitalism as an economic system is "private ownership and control of the means of production", and what's wrong with it is it concentrates and centralizes economic power in the hands of a small elite who hold almost all decision-making authority; effectively making every capitalist economy an economic oligopoly.
And the ability to "do whatever you want with ur money" is NOT a good thing when you can use it to coerce or control others.
@MsSexySocialist Yes it does, concentrates and centralizes economic power. Sorry but the human race can not have progress with small business. Advances in technology, health, education, etc, can not be done without money and rich people. I dont like rich people, but we need those bastards
voluntary actions should never be controlled by groups of people or government so long as the 2 or 3 party's are all in agreement and the contract is excepted by all party's
Oh, so you do regard contractual agreements in which someone sells their labor as not really agreements at all. This seems quite odd. Many socialists seem to regard this employer-employee relationship as unjust for some reason, but there really is nothing wrong with it. Employers are necessary so that workers can be paid as they work instead of having to wait until they finishing producing a product before finally getting paid when they sell the product.
Self-managed cooperatives wherever they are set up cope just fine without any kind of minority-rule or hierarchy; just look at the film available on my channel "The Take" for evidence.
And the employer-employee relationship IS unjust in most cases for precisely the reasons stated in this video; no voluntary agreement between two parties is truly voluntary unless both parties possess equal bargaining power.
1:30-3:00 Voluntary=without coercion. If you voluntarily exchange your output for a return that is voluntary. So-called 'Anarcho-Syndicalism' is mob rule Statism.
@Nawledge1 Well, I'm certainly not against everything in it. It does have some protections that are important. But overall, any constitution that can't protect blacks, Native Americans, children, employees being beat by their bosses, women's right to vote, etc. is a pretty filthy piece of paper. (A) are also against being born into a contract that was never signed - especially when most of the writers were slave owners.
They do have amendments to the Constitutions to protect those things you said, but do you think it would be better that when people become of age (18-21), that they should have the opportunity to either sign an agreement with the Constitution or leave the country if they like? Or should there simply be no constitution?
@Nawledge1 They do have amendments but the damage has already been done. Plus crimes continue in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and I can go on and on. I don't think a constitution is needed but this creates all new problems. So (A) have always created their own constitutions/contracts that are libertarian in nature. It also depend on what type of libertarian society you are talking about. Thanks for the question. I wrote this down for a future video where I can explain this in more detail.
@Nawledge1 I'm sorry, but by what authority does one group assume a monopolistic control over a geographical region? Why is that person stuck with the cost of having to re-locate, when they're only there in the first place through an accident of geographical birth local? How about allowing people the dignity not to participate in this club if they wish, without running them from their homes? The Con. is just four pieces of paper with ink on it, not a magical talisman.
@LeftLibetyAppendix you need to understand that , at that time,....slave was 'normal' for that era,...all nation been using slaves ,....and we still ahve slaves today, but they are paid to get what they need for work and to live, poorly ,.....so you have to understand that ,...secondly,..where blacks are from ? Africa ? ,..if so ,..is Africa better that usa on freedom and human rights ? ,....so no, the constitution is not perfect, and no, the authority dont follow the constitution neither, ....
Well the constitution is supposed to protect all people. So to put people in categories is part of the problem. I dont think the constitution says anything about white people can only have the right to vote. Even though through out our history most white people interpreted it as such. That doesnt mean the constitution gave them that right. IT SAYS ALL PEOPLE. so when something says all people I believe its meant for everyone.
@LeftLibetyAppendix the constitution should protect human rights not the rights of a group but the rights of every individual and their rights to freely and voluntarily trade exchange communicate it should empower the individuals to make coalitions to create a business that can be owned by the workers but should not be aimed at the over taking of a business or theft of property the aim should be to put them out of business with competition.
@AkaiShizuku Great, I look forward to it. What I would like to hear is how the DoP can avoid what has happened in the past. Or perhaps explain the course that should be taken to avoid totalitarianism. As I said in my PM, I'm no expert in this subject and I'm not really familiar with the current thought. I would also like to hear why you think DoP is a better means to an end.
@AnarchoConsciousness I read For A New Liberty about a year ago and I just finished Defending the Undefendable. Just take a look at the chapters. They justify things like blackmail, child labor, etc. because they are voluntary.I think an-caps have a narrow concept of liberty. I also think that an an-cap society would breakdown into statism. While I do agree with many an-cap position, overall, I think it's too basic. There are other things but I can't really justify them in a comments section.
@LeftLibetyAppendix Thanks for that. Good to know you have considered Rothbard's position. I do not like the term "Anarcho-Capitalism" and I don't recall him ever specifically using it. "Free-Market Anarchy" sounds better to me, but labels do not eliminate the risk of "breaking down into [another form] of statism. this is one of the reasons I'm taking the time to understand what your position on "non-market libertarianism" and studying the Venus Project which also is a non-market system.
@Mystic1Knight You even got the first comment. lol. Thanks for the nice words. I should be kicking these out on a regular basis. Hopefully, I'll post 2 or 3 times a week. At least, that is the goal.
@organdva No. In fact, I think the CNT might have been much closer to the platformist position. There is a pretty good discussion on Libcomdotcom about this very subject. I'll send you the link.
quote 3:21 "Freedom as the highest human objective".
Thats is the big difference between christians and anarchists. I think God, happiness, love, respect are more important than freedom.
fundie2008 2 weeks ago
capitalism = private property and do whatever you want with ur money
sorry, but i dont see anything wrong with capitalism, is not good or evil, its just useful like the money. If some people are corrupt and violent in the capitalist system or some people do bad thing for money, do not blame capitalism or money
antinazicholos5 3 weeks ago
@antinazicholos5
That's not capitalism. Capitalism as an economic system is "private ownership and control of the means of production", and what's wrong with it is it concentrates and centralizes economic power in the hands of a small elite who hold almost all decision-making authority; effectively making every capitalist economy an economic oligopoly.
And the ability to "do whatever you want with ur money" is NOT a good thing when you can use it to coerce or control others.
MsSexySocialist 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from LeftLibetyAppendix 4
@MsSexySocialist Yes it does, concentrates and centralizes economic power. Sorry but the human race can not have progress with small business. Advances in technology, health, education, etc, can not be done without money and rich people. I dont like rich people, but we need those bastards
antinazicholos5 2 weeks ago
How do you abolish capitalism without abolishing private property rights? How can you protect individual liberty and abolish private property rights?
jwalter88888888 3 weeks ago
@jwalter88888888
Libertarian socialists make an important distinction between the two kinds of individually-held property.
They see personal ownership of any land or property as legitimate as long as it meets two criteria:
1. Personal use.
2. Occupancy.
This is in fact the only kind of property that can be claimed without the use of external force (a state) to maintain it.
LS however rejects private ownership of the *means of production* as unjust, coercive, and authoritarian.
MsSexySocialist 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from LeftLibetyAppendix
voluntary actions should never be controlled by groups of people or government so long as the 2 or 3 party's are all in agreement and the contract is excepted by all party's
libertarianwarbook 1 month ago
there is no "voluntaryist" solution to land ownership, it's a raw claim by force and nothing else.
etzel33 2 months ago
Oh, so you do regard contractual agreements in which someone sells their labor as not really agreements at all. This seems quite odd. Many socialists seem to regard this employer-employee relationship as unjust for some reason, but there really is nothing wrong with it. Employers are necessary so that workers can be paid as they work instead of having to wait until they finishing producing a product before finally getting paid when they sell the product.
PeacefulCooperation 4 months ago
@PeacefulCooperation
That's a very obvious red herring.
Self-managed cooperatives wherever they are set up cope just fine without any kind of minority-rule or hierarchy; just look at the film available on my channel "The Take" for evidence.
And the employer-employee relationship IS unjust in most cases for precisely the reasons stated in this video; no voluntary agreement between two parties is truly voluntary unless both parties possess equal bargaining power.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
1:30-3:00 Voluntary=without coercion. If you voluntarily exchange your output for a return that is voluntary. So-called 'Anarcho-Syndicalism' is mob rule Statism.
3:15 Mob rule Statism.
4:38, 5:36, 5:44, 7:00 Mob rule Statism. If I grow a pineapple tree and you promote a coercive mob to steal my pineapple tree that is Statism.
qwertypoiu4321 6 months ago
*Facepal* Do look up public choice.
GoingGoingGalt 1 year ago
Excellent video!
Question: what do you think of mutualism?
QuatFax 1 year ago
Isn't this Panarchy?
CuntryDriver 1 year ago
So glad to have found your channel. Excellent and educational.
dendryite 1 year ago
Are you against the U.S Constitution?
Nawledge1 1 year ago
@Nawledge1 Well, I'm certainly not against everything in it. It does have some protections that are important. But overall, any constitution that can't protect blacks, Native Americans, children, employees being beat by their bosses, women's right to vote, etc. is a pretty filthy piece of paper. (A) are also against being born into a contract that was never signed - especially when most of the writers were slave owners.
LeftLibetyAppendix 1 year ago 3
@LeftLibetyAppendix
They do have amendments to the Constitutions to protect those things you said, but do you think it would be better that when people become of age (18-21), that they should have the opportunity to either sign an agreement with the Constitution or leave the country if they like? Or should there simply be no constitution?
Nawledge1 1 year ago
@Nawledge1 They do have amendments but the damage has already been done. Plus crimes continue in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and I can go on and on. I don't think a constitution is needed but this creates all new problems. So (A) have always created their own constitutions/contracts that are libertarian in nature. It also depend on what type of libertarian society you are talking about. Thanks for the question. I wrote this down for a future video where I can explain this in more detail.
LeftLibetyAppendix 1 year ago
@Nawledge1 I'm sorry, but by what authority does one group assume a monopolistic control over a geographical region? Why is that person stuck with the cost of having to re-locate, when they're only there in the first place through an accident of geographical birth local? How about allowing people the dignity not to participate in this club if they wish, without running them from their homes? The Con. is just four pieces of paper with ink on it, not a magical talisman.
JaceJohanson 3 weeks ago
@JaceJohanson Win.
jeffsandychelsea 2 weeks ago
@LeftLibetyAppendix you need to understand that , at that time,....slave was 'normal' for that era,...all nation been using slaves ,....and we still ahve slaves today, but they are paid to get what they need for work and to live, poorly ,.....so you have to understand that ,...secondly,..where blacks are from ? Africa ? ,..if so ,..is Africa better that usa on freedom and human rights ? ,....so no, the constitution is not perfect, and no, the authority dont follow the constitution neither, ....
ragnarush 1 year ago
Well the constitution is supposed to protect all people. So to put people in categories is part of the problem. I dont think the constitution says anything about white people can only have the right to vote. Even though through out our history most white people interpreted it as such. That doesnt mean the constitution gave them that right. IT SAYS ALL PEOPLE. so when something says all people I believe its meant for everyone.
scienceatheism 2 months ago
@LeftLibetyAppendix the constitution should protect human rights not the rights of a group but the rights of every individual and their rights to freely and voluntarily trade exchange communicate it should empower the individuals to make coalitions to create a business that can be owned by the workers but should not be aimed at the over taking of a business or theft of property the aim should be to put them out of business with competition.
libertarianwarbook 1 month ago
This is a great video. I do have a couple criticisms to make, as well as general commentary, which I will convey via a video response.
AkaiShizuku 1 year ago
@AkaiShizuku Great, I look forward to it. What I would like to hear is how the DoP can avoid what has happened in the past. Or perhaps explain the course that should be taken to avoid totalitarianism. As I said in my PM, I'm no expert in this subject and I'm not really familiar with the current thought. I would also like to hear why you think DoP is a better means to an end.
LeftLibetyAppendix 1 year ago
kropotkin rocks!
greenhell666 1 year ago
What is your oppinion of Murray Rothbard's "For A New Liberty" and Anarcho-Capitalism (Laissez-faire)?
AnarchoConsciousness 1 year ago
@AnarchoConsciousness I read For A New Liberty about a year ago and I just finished Defending the Undefendable. Just take a look at the chapters. They justify things like blackmail, child labor, etc. because they are voluntary.I think an-caps have a narrow concept of liberty. I also think that an an-cap society would breakdown into statism. While I do agree with many an-cap position, overall, I think it's too basic. There are other things but I can't really justify them in a comments section.
LeftLibetyAppendix 1 year ago
@LeftLibetyAppendix what do you think of mutualism then?
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
@LeftLibetyAppendix Thanks for that. Good to know you have considered Rothbard's position. I do not like the term "Anarcho-Capitalism" and I don't recall him ever specifically using it. "Free-Market Anarchy" sounds better to me, but labels do not eliminate the risk of "breaking down into [another form] of statism. this is one of the reasons I'm taking the time to understand what your position on "non-market libertarianism" and studying the Venus Project which also is a non-market system.
AnarchoConsciousness 1 year ago
watched within an hour of it being posted :)
Good series so far.
Mystic1Knight 1 year ago
@Mystic1Knight You even got the first comment. lol. Thanks for the nice words. I should be kicking these out on a regular basis. Hopefully, I'll post 2 or 3 times a week. At least, that is the goal.
LeftLibetyAppendix 1 year ago
Do you think FAI is a ''platformist'' organization?
organdva 1 year ago
@organdva No. In fact, I think the CNT might have been much closer to the platformist position. There is a pretty good discussion on Libcomdotcom about this very subject. I'll send you the link.
LeftLibetyAppendix 1 year ago