Voluntarist Roundtable Part 3 - 2009 Liberty Forum

At the 2009 Liberty Forum OTN sat down with Ian Freeman, Stefan Molyneux, and Marc Stevens for a roundtable on evolving the voluntary society. We discuss our personal journey towards a stateless society, the common misconceptions, and the path forward.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• OTN
• police
• government
• voluntary
• society
• philosophy
• anarchy
• consentualist
• voluntaryist

[MillionthUsername]

What the one guy meant by "paper thin" is the state's ability to deal with massive civil disobedience. Not that they can't come down hard on selected individuals, but against a large united front they are ultimately powerless since they rely on "consent" (acquiescence) for their legitimacy to act.

If enough people refused, in solidarity, to pay federal taxes for example, the IRS would not know what to do.

[rflosi]

This table isn't even round. I'm not listening anymore. :) j/k This is a good discussion. Great group of people. Thanks for sharing.

[libertarianjury]

Politics is effective, but not in NH, where you cannot find 201 electable libertarians. In that regard, you limited yourself by choosing the wrong state (WY has only 47 necessary or AK has only 22 necessary). The political process is vastly preferable to you all being taken out by long range rifles, which is what you are now courting. (Actually, not so. The state now has vastly better ways of perpetrating untraceable violence against innocents.) You need to listen more to G. Edward Griffin

[libertarianjury]

I disagree that politics brings out the nastiness in people. I think direct violence would be much worse (and that's what politics is designed to avoid). I agree that noncooperation and civil disobedience are excellent, but the state always initiates force after that. Do you advocate civil disobedience? Ed and Elaine Browne engaged in civil disobedience. Stefan is realistic. The bureaucracy that can drag the Brownes off to jail is not "paper thin".

[libertarianjury]

@1:00 WTF?! It's "a little bit violent in nature" to prepare for self-defense against open aggression? No, it's not. It might be foolish, or clearly on the losing side, but it's not at all "a little bit violent in nature". It's confrontational, but in no way un-libertarian or non-voluntaryist.

[cowcidile]

That table doesn't look very round.

[lukeev]

Fantastic videos.

[libertarianjury]

I can see however, that you have not considered the full implications of long term jury rights activism...

[libertarianjury]

Next time chant "jury rights now!". or  "Down with judges!" It's less ambiguous...

[libertarianjury]

You spell it "voluntarist"? I've always seen it "voluntaryist" ie: Carl Watner, Robert LeFevre... G. Edward Griffin wrote a reply to Stefan Molyneux, where he stated that Molyneux was a "volunteerist", (As in Jefferson Airplane's "Volunteers") Can we all just agree to call it "voluntaryism"?