 Before I get started I want to thank you all for getting my channel to 500 subscribers. I know I'm basically cheating by already having an instagram following but I really appreciate the fact that this many people want to take the time out of their days to actually listen to me talk. So once again thank you greatly. Now what could I possibly be alluding to with a title such as My Own Thoughts on Anarchy? Those who know me know that I am an anarchist and might be worried that I'm about to come out and disavow it but fear not. What I've come to realise a lot more in recent months is that it doesn't matter how close to perfection the philosophy and theory seems to me and those who think like me because strict fanatical adherence to its end goal will not actually get us any closer to it. What I mean by this is that our societies have shown great propensity to further government policies in the exact opposite direction and then cherish them undyingly. The example I have in mind is the NHS our in quotes free public healthcare service. No matter how much you may or may not like it 99% of the people in this country would scorn anybody who would even criticise the legitimacy of such a service existing. So much so that when you question the absurd length that government authority reaches and abuses nine times out of ten the first response you get is either going to be but what about the roads or but what about the NHS? To illustrate my point this exact thing happened recently when Count Dankula debated somebody along the lines of a typical left-wing voter so take a look. So what characterises your ideal society? Reducing the government by reducing the government's power by 90% having a constitution that protects us from any kind of you know authoritarian government control basically just absolute individual liberty everyone's free to do whatever they want provided they're not violating on the recognised rights of others that's my ideal society. So what do you mean by producing the besides of the government by 98% do you mean get rid of the NHS, get rid of the social safety net, get rid of services? Like you're immediately like I just said reduce the government's power reduce the government's power by 90% and that is what you mean when you decrease government power that's the type of power that you tend to take away from the government. No I'm talking about the government's ability to arrest you for so many fucking things I'm talking about laws I'm talking about oversight I'm talking about regulation that's what I mean. So government power isn't laws, government power is stuff like NHS social safety net. So the government's power is not laws. That's what government power is. Right so laws are not government power but they are made by the government. Okay but just to clarify what your position is you say that laws are not government power but the NHS is. Yeah I am fucking fuming. See what I'm talking about? Even conservatives act in a similar manner in the UK and of course it's a fucking stupid response but unfortunately these are the cards that we're dealt. Most people are so entrenched in the status quo that they could never possibly imagine how things would work if anything was different but these are the people that we have to convince the ideals of libertarianism towards and going straight after their most prized possessions won't help them with that whatsoever. It doesn't matter a bit how pure your interpretation of libertarianism is if there are no other libertarians of any kind around. What old daddy dank did there was perfect. You don't know where he actually stands on the NHS from this because you don't need to in the context that he was talking about. It's such a side issue but if you let the person you're arguing with drag you into their moral trap then the validity of whatever you say on the matter will be discarded. You're not going to get anywhere when your first arguments in a discussion get twisted into you just hate the poor. We need to make sure that the argument starts at the most agreeable point and then carries on from there. Start talking about the cost of perpetual wars of aggression as both the destroyer of human life for both sides and the absolute money pit that it is for our taxes. Talk about how the war on drugs creates a cycle of poverty and crime that destroys countless families by outright making gang violence the most profitable path to choose for someone growing up in the poverty that it self creates and again completely waste our tax money. Don't start talking to people by announcing yes I am an anarchist and I want to destroy your NHS because you're not going to get what you want. Seek the change that is most desperately needed and can be agreed upon by most people. There is a brilliant way of talking to just about anybody and unpacking their views and principles to make them realise that deep down they agree with the fundamental points of libertarianism and that the status quo might not actually be what it seems. Disconnecting yourself from the matrix in this way is such a gradual process and it's far too easy for us to forget that once we've done it. Being a libertarian is not the default state you are most likely born into a family with mainstream left or right political views. To become a libertarian you need to first of all discover what the hell it even means, hear the basic arguments, wrestle with them in your head for as long as it takes, finally realise it all makes sense and then keep on exploring. It's a long and confusing process and is essentially Plato's allegory of the cave. What we need to be doing is leading as many people out of the cave as possible not calling them statist bootlicking baby killers and then scratching our heads as we wonder why they won't listen to us. If your founding code is anarchy or bust then I'm sorry to disappoint you but you're probably going to die very unhappy. If we as anarchists are here on the political compass and the current status quo is around about here wouldn't you rather see it move to here and how could you take any issue with it moving here? What you have to realise is that that point is probably incredibly unlikely for us to see in our lifetimes because not enough people are hearing what we have to say partly because we make it so easy for everyone to choose not to listen by jumping straight to the extremes. You have to remember that we can only further our goals by appealing to the people at large and leading them further into the understandings of individual liberty and why it is the most sacrosanct of all propositions. The libertarian community's worst trait is our inability to read our audience. Everyone has a handful of guarded issues that keep them clinging on and these issues cannot be tackled head on. The way to make somebody a libertarian is to get them to agree with the points that are easy to agree on, let them come to terms with it and then gently apply their own newfound logic to their pillars whether that be a worship of police officers, healthcare, large national defence or whatever else the state provides. Truthfully, you cannot make somebody become a libertarian, you can only help them come to the conclusions by themselves. We have to do this, and we have to start with the everyday person. There is a time and a place for every libertarian subsection. If you have to be a bleeding heart and argue in favour of the NHS to make somebody understand the point of a free market for everything else, then do it. If you have to say that hard drugs should remain prohibited but reformed so that non-violent addicts aren't made criminals, then do that. If you have to acknowledge a need for a standing army to get the point across that military interventionism in the Middle East in fact creates terrorism rather than fights it, then do it. A person does not need to immediately agree with every single thing that you say in order to be a real libertarian. If somebody is interested about learning more, you should absolutely not berate them for not already knowing something. If you're an ANCAP and somebody wants to claim the superiority of a minicus state, then you can crack out all the hard, theoretical principles and overcome the mental roadblocks, but you are never going to convince somebody who worships the mainstream political parties to become an anarchist in a short amount of time. Assert the reasons why we are right in a moderate and considerate manner and do not attack their points as evil. That is so far beyond counterproductive to everything that you want. I believe in the principles of anarcho-capitalism, I do not expect anybody else to. I will discuss it with people who want to discuss it, but I won't discuss it with people who have never even heard the word libertarian used before in their whole life because then they will ignore the whole thing forever. If you want to see the cause of individual liberty advanced in your lifetime, then consider what I've said. If you want more freedom, then convince people of freedom. If you would rather remain pure in your own little circle and attack all outsiders and in doing so receive no more freedom, then carry on doing just that. But hey, at least you can call yourself a real libertarian and pat yourself on the back as fascism and socialism continue to grow all around you.