True News 57: Stop Defending Freedom! - Freedomain Radio

[blapgatify]

Stef, you are one sexy mofo. Do you know that?

[laxelk]

public school?

come to germany - there is 99% of public schools and still germans are playing in top league of engineering, car building etc....

you would dream of health care standards and the system of the payment by an almost total public health insurance system! you have to have a health insurance in germany.

and despite of reunion with the gdr germany can still afford it!

"true news"?

"freedom radio"?

do us a favour - GET LOST!!!

[laxelk]

public school?

come to germany - there is 99% of public schools and still germans are playing in top league of engineering, car building etc....

you would dream of health care standards and the system of almost public health insurance system!

"true news"?

"freedom radio"?

do us a favour - GET LOST!!!

[dteselle]

"We have a huge implicit mortgage on every household in America- except, unlike a real mortgage, it's not backed up by a house," said David Walker, former U.S. comptroller general, the government's chief auditor.

This is why debt is immoral and we should weep for the burden we have put on our children... the countless hours of labor we have stolen from generations to come is unforgivable!

[alistairproductions]

Believe it or not I've had people just deny the debt is a big issue. I had a person say "Well it's not really that big an issue. A debt doesn't mean what it once did. We're expected to have debt."

It's shocking.

[Stinkemon]

Statism doesn't work anywhere. Not in Scandinavia atleast. You need to look at the direction where the state is now heading in different parts to understand also the true nature and how it's going to solve problems opposed to other solutions. Book called Quasi-Democracy has some insights on Finland.

[vspqbd]

Status Quo?

More leik Statist Quo, amirite?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[murf69]

@vspqbd I don't think this is your audience mate. lol

[vspqbd]

@murf69

Yeah, I know.

Like I said, I just couldn't resist. :P

[ubernerd35]

It's so funny watching this video now. It's 2011 and our federal debt just topped 14 TRILLION dollars. Soon any attempt to rescue America from this debt will be futile because the interest on the 14 trillion will put this goal out of reach, even with a 100 percent tax rate and across the board cuts.

[MagnesiumAlloy]

The sad fact is.. we need less people in the world...

[MagnesiumAlloy]

de-criminalizing drugs would really help the budget... I dunno..maybe Bill Gates can throws us a bone here... along with the other 300 billionairs...

[casinobeachbum]

I'm homeless now. I was hired in 2003, at the same pay rate I had in 1985 - $6 hour as a Land Surveyor (rodman). Now the housing market collapsed, and there is no work. I get Food Stamps, and eat free & get my clothes at churches. Maybe this Comic Strip I am working to create will be syndicated. I can't fall any lower, just be starved to death.

[HubertCumberdale22]

Let's say we have an atheist who believes:

1.) the theist's god-claim to be invalid and

2.) that 2 + 2 = blurgh

Now a theist comes along and says: Atheism doesn't work, because 2 + 2 doesn't equal blurgh!

The theist wins the argument and claims that now atheism is destroyed. ...which is bullshit

That's exactly what you do! You attempt to destroy statism by showing that one particular version of statism, the "USA-Statism", doesn't work. What about switzerland? this kind of statism works!

[MrNarchya]

That kind of statism is a more moderate version of statism with way more implementations of anti-statism structures. Relative freedom concerning owning weapons, decentralised defense, etc.

That is not an argument to defend statism, because there is still a lot of immoral coercion by the government.

Another point that devalues your argument is the fact that Switserland is working towards joining political unions that destroy sovereignty even more. It is a downwards spiral.

[Audiofalcon7]

Letting you know right now - countries like Switzerland, Sweden, and Scandinavian countries as a whole "works" because their government trades triangular intervention (regulation, etc. - their bus systems and typical monopolies are privatized) for binary (national healthcare, etc. - ruin healthcare)

It only "works" by comparison. Not by reality. Comparing it to us - oh, it works, but only because they have less statism than us.

[Individualism101]

2 + 2 = a pink unicorn.

That's all they are arguing to begin with. 'The state' is a drop in replacement for god, as you have pointed out before. God can do anything, the state can do anything, laws of economics do not apply in the minds of statists. They will ride the titanic to the ocean floor.

[silverhandorder]

You know since I seen this video the several arguments I had since then ended up in me demanding proof that government can do a better job.

[Gromitdog1]

Proof given the track record of the gov't, you won't find it other than empty promises. The only thing i see is increasing government control and 'ownership' of every aspect of our lives ie communism. Not that its a solution, but an inevitability.

[1schwererziehbar1]

if he would have widened the "dept-GDP" graphic to before 1970 (as wikipedia does) one would see that the ratio of dept to GDP was more than double as high in the 50's.

therefore i don't see how that means that the united states government is not able to get rid of the dept.

[kingofthebrittains]

I didnt find the graph you refer to on WP but If you look at what GDP includes you'll understand why the ratio appears this way. GDP includes the COST of wars, prisons, cops, courts, emergency spending, basically everything the guv spends on is calculated as + GDP. "The Real Wealth of Nations" PG 63 by Eisler lays this out. Stats are not a good source of true information, they are manipulated to support their producers bias. Find out who Payed for the info 2B produced and you'll find the bias.

[dingerness]

Stef, are you going to do a follow up video examining other statist systems? People might make the argument that OUR system has failed, but if we could only change it to another we'd be fine.

[Fetchdafish]

Couldn't the American government become an abject dictatorship and simple renounce its debt? Yeah it'd make China and much of the world very angry, but they wouldn't... go to war over that would they? I guess maybe they'd impose sanctions or something?

[DCLugi]

Could I then become an abject citizen and renounce my tax debt?

[Freemarketeer81]

Will the guys with the guns allow you to do that?

[DCLugi]

Perhaps if I word it just right and put it on legal letterhead and....no, probably not:)

[Fetchdafish]

I don't think that's how it works. And they'd just find you and beat you anyway.

[Baabaloux]

..but with no house to back it up...rofl

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

Another point worth noting:

"Shifting the burden" is the name of a logical fallacy.

Technically putting on the others isn't a fallacy.

They're the ones making the positive claim (or claims) that force (the State) should be used/present, so the burden of proof is automatically on them, end of story.

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

(PS: I'm not defending the State, I'm just pointing out an error in your reasoning in that part.)

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

Don't forget about the ~$101 trillion in unfunded Medicare and SS liabilities

As for the Note on cuts, remember Hazlitt's broken window fallacy and the Laffur Curve.

I don't have time (or space to get into detail).

If tax rates are lowered, and the military people are put into the market, people have more money to spend (assuming a laffur curve effect, the revenue might not be too effected), and they could get supped like.

Kinda like after WWII.

[KASPLARFO]

★★★★★

Amazing!

[dkleitsch]

Everybody, please send a message to all the CLOWNS in Washington:

Vote for Healthcare, vote for EVERY spending bill.

The sooner the system dies, the sooner we can start to pick up the pieces.

In the end, Ayn Rand may have been right (other than I see no hope for a happy ending).

[Mocoso7]

The economy, US gov't, debt and deficit will all grow decade by decade, at a mathematical rate that is generally predictable. Abolish that and you will have a lot more pressure for a sustainable economy and proper size of gov't, whatever we the people determine that size to be.

[IVoteNone]

"Abolish that and you will have a lot more pressure for a sustainable economy and proper size of gov't, whatever we the people determine that size to be."

Why don't you just decide what the size of government ought to be now? You are proposing a historically unprecedented scenario where a government is created and then does not systematically expand and consume society whole. All the evidence is stacked up against you. It's a very naive and utopian idea that has been proven wrong.

[Mahoivlich]

How can an anarchist society exist in a world full of aggressive states?

[lukeev]

It already does.

[TDawg2002]

For an example check out Afghanistan. The fighters there are not part of a top-down government organized military force. They are pockets of various, loosely organized fighters self-motivated and keeping the worlds most technically advanced and well-funded army at a stand-still. I suspect a modern society such as ours would be capable of defending itself quite well without a big government. Think about it this way. With no central command who has power to surrender? The defenders never rest.

[stratvic]

Increase the cost of aggression through individual self defence.

Reduce the benefit of aggression by removing the spoils... tax system, government controlled/ owned resources. Removing the levers of control ... police, reporting, monitoring systems.

[specialkornflake]

Stef, the chart at 3:13 shows a massive spike in Japanese debt I think, not US debt. I don't think this was intended? Great video!

[Knr911]

SPOT ON.

Keep up the GREAT work Stefan.

Speak out loud.

Thx.

[sniffsnarff]

cool video. I dig your idea about turning the argument around. I'm definitely going to have to try it.

thanks! 5/5*

[tra789]

Video is bang on.

[REXMARX003]

I have not watched one of your videos in quite a while. I picked the right one. 5 Stars. Thought provoking and informative.

[zerk54]

Stefbot, I have a question. As someone who would like to see a stateless society I have questions on how it would work. I've only known a world where the gov. have taken care of military, roads, education, ect. How would this stuff work? I understand your point of making them try to prove stateism works, which they can't. But what then? I can't vouch for an alternative unless I understand how that alternative would take care of things.

Thanks for your efforts.

[DrDoubleplusungood]

A complete answer to this question is impossible. However, if you want a gist of how things could work, read Stefan's book "Practical Anarchy", available for free on the FDR site.

[stefbot]

yeah, what he said... :)

[zerk54]

Thanks. I was hoping someone would point me towards a book or video.

[HymerSchmidt]

"Statism is the greatest" haha

[logicChemist]

Superb my man! I have been talking about this recently to people and it really is the critical point in the whole discussion. The response to this point has been somber. Everyone I have said this to has responded with "they will never cut anything"...followed by a 1000 yard stare......

[modelmark]

print, print, print, print, print

[DeeperBlueX16]

Great points. Seeing the numbers really puts things in perspective.

Of course, what if they say, "Screw the deficit. We'll just keep borrowing money and never, ever pay it back."

What do you say to that?

[JoeyBatz]

Just ask them what happens when the rest of the world refuses to loan us anymore money and buy up are debt, or even do business with us until we pay back our debts.

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

Point out the historical examples of currency monopolies. Hint: they all failed.

Explain that a value built upon coercive force and creative bookkeeping cannot be sustained indefinitely, but can merely be prolonged by successively greater force and deception.

Ask them how far they are willing to go, to sustain the falling dollar for another week. No matter what they answer, point out that, even then, it will not be long before it fails.

[DeeperBlueX16]

Right, but you're average guy isn't going to have this kinda knowledge.

I need a vivid and emotional example that's quite believable.

"How do you know that a federal deficit is going to sink the titanic for sure?!"

[drew335533]

This was a pretty good video indeed Stef. I've never actually tried this approach, I'm always jumping to defending freedom. Well done stef, keep up the good work.

[navtel]

well said.. i like your short videos as i don't have time to listen to a one hour one..

[drew335533]

Freedom r for n00bz.

[MonkeyBusiness233]

I like the Titanic metaphor, I'm gonna use that :S

[joshv89]

I still just dont get why you think that trying to get a goverment as small as possible is useless,i mean if you are going to choose between a communist goverment and a 'small' goverment im sure that one would choose the latter ya?

[IndividualAutonomy]

It depends what you mean by small government because most "small government" advocates are for the worst part of the government, ie the police and military. A small government also protects illegitimate wealth like land monopolies (untransformed land) and cartel industries. Our current system in small ways returns stolen possible income but it too is just scrabs (not to mention unattainable) and should be abolished.

[DreadLaw2]

As the government can do nothing but create monopolies, I don't see how a small government with few of them can possibly worse than the current system with thousands of them. Personally I don't advocate police, military, legislature, executive or centralised court planning, but better a small system with a single monopoly than our current unimaginable number monopoly. I'd like to see just a single area of the market that's even slightly free. Just the trade of a single good, and i'll die happy.

[IndividualAutonomy]

Well the government can also break up monopolies (monopolies are not always terrible it is dependent on the conditions of how they became a monopoly). It itself is a cocercive monopoly. I agree that it can be better for most involved to have a smaller government but that is dependant on what the small government enforces. It could be worse depending on what is props up and what types of property it defends.

[DreadLaw2]

That depends on whether you're using a useful, or government defined term. A bad monopoly is only ever a government sponsored entity, because competition is impossible because of violent barriers to entry. I have no problem with a benign and useful monopoly that can't possibly do anything wrong because competition will immediately pop up to crush it (like ICANN on the international stage, ignoring it's homeland monopoly). A Real life, non-violent monopoly is next to impossible.

[IndividualAutonomy]

agreed

[DrDoubleplusungood]

It's not useless, but there are a few reasons not to focus on decreasing the size of government:

1) It's better to pursue whatever you want most. Why pursue something you "kind of" want when you can get what you really want?

2) Voluntaryism is logically consistent from a moral standpoint, but minarchism is not.

3) Minarchy is not politically feasible. Governments do not voluntarily shrink; they grow until they reach ridiculous proportions, then collapse in a chaotic, uncontrollable manner.

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

Imagine a parliament of "voluntarist minus one" politicos: every one of them openly proclaims loyalty to the ideas of liberty, and understands liberty from a pragmatic standpoint. However, because they take no moral stand on liberty, each one of them has a pet issue or two, which he wants to see solved politically. They were all elected, so we know that they have a history of predictably corruptible behaviour.

How will these men respond to the imbalance of incentives that is statism?

[odigity]

They won't. Don't try to talk sense to politicians. Ignore them. Talk to actual people.

[LatinYoung20]

excellent, but you said you were going to talk about other countries. Could you touch on that also? I said it because not all the countries have the same financial situation as the US does.

[IndividualAutonomy]

Yeah that would be great. The US is obviously in trouble. Sweden would be a good one. It is the favorite of state socialists.

[AntiCapitalistPig]

I apply the same logic to my anti-capitalism. When pro-capitalists demand that I present them with a detailed blueprint of my ideal post-capitalist society (never mind that nascent capitalists didn't present such a blueprint for post-feudalism, but were nonetheless adamant that it be abolished), I instead ask them to justify the capitalist mode of production without engaging in reification. Since this is impossible, they're forced to fall back on false utilitarianism, which is easily refutable.

[bwelkk]

To the dumbasses it may concern.

Free and voluntary interaction is the default. It is one of the negative freedoms that everyone is endowed naturally.

Just like the default belief of magical creatures and wise old men in the sky is disbelief, the default economic system is capitalism (ie. a system characterized by free and voluntary exchange).

Just so happens it's also tremendously utilitarian as well.

[IndividualAutonomy]

That is dependant on how one defines capitalism and what that system entails.

[LiberalofLiberty]

What do you mean 'Capitalist mode of production'

Do you mean Capitalism = Voluntaryist or Capitalism = Capital is in the hands of people you have a distaste for.

[DreadLaw2]

AntiCapitalistPig: That's the opposite logic. Capitalism is the lack of a system of enforcement, pro-capitalists have nothing to prove except that they don't want you to force yourself upon them. I don't know what a mode of production is I am afraid, as in a truly capitalistic society, the mode of production is a matter of choice and different across all areas to the point where groups can choose to voluntarily take part in Stateless communism.