 eight hundred eight seven three one six two zero good evening ladies and gentlemen thanks for coming in thanks for coming back and tonight's show the Peter Mack Show I'm glad to be with you today is Wednesday May 12th and I have two guests with me tonight we'll find out shortly if they're on the line with me one is Stefan Kinsella he was been a guest with me before he's a patent attorney at Houston and another is a gentleman I haven't spoken with before but his name is Robert Wicks and glad to have both you gentlemen on the line with me tonight if you're there you might give me an acknowledgement if you hear me is this Robert okay I suspected that was you because your voice is different than Stefan so hopefully he's going to be with us shortly since I haven't had you on before Robert why don't you just give me and my listeners a little bit of your background perhaps how you know Stefan and what your interest is in political philosophy became a libertarian over time and he was one of the one of the people who I enjoyed reading in particular his articles on IP were very interesting to me I am a unique systems administrator so I do computer work pretty much for a living and and the whole IP thing kind of fascinated me because as part of what technical people do in building various things there's a lot of information sharing that's really the only way to accomplish a lot of things and it just always struck me as very strange that intellectual property seeks precisely to stop that or to at least impede it and make it more expensive than what otherwise would be right but and I've discussed the topic and we'll discuss it at length if you guys want to tonight also with Stefan but in a broader sense at least where I come from is as I've said last week I started out as a I guess a conservative and then I staunch a constitutionalist I did five six years of a show supporting the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and my theme through all that time was well if we can just get the government back limited to the Constitution the original meaning of the Constitution what the founders of this country sought then things would be pretty good in this country and then eventually I kind of became what's called an objectivist a follower of the philosophy I ran and then at some point I found inconsistencies with that and so I guess now I am a full-fledged anarchist but as I said last week that term has a very hostile or aggressive connotation to a lot of people and just wondered where where you sit on that issue and if you want to expound on on that connotation any well anarchist is actually rather interesting in that I have fewer issues with anarchist than a lot of people do I don't mind being called an anarchist and I think that that largely has to do with sort of the the the social expectation I mean I am a black male from the rural south and the typical person when they're thinking of an anarchist does not think of me so when I tell them that I am an anarchist it's sort of a critical look initially and then I can explain exactly what I mean by that but I don't think that it's quite as off-putting with the people that I speak to as it would be for a lot of other people who kind of would be associated with the sort of bomb throwing leftists. Right and and but that's exactly the connotation and I'll have Stefan comment on the same question here in a minute if you will but I was just watching the Larry King live show a few days ago at you know shortly after this attempted bombing in Times Square and Larry King had a couple terrorist experts on and one of the questions was well when did terrorism starter in particular car bombing and this one guy asserted that the first car bomb if I heard incorrectly actually took place near Wall Street in the 1930s and then the guy made the comment he goes I think it was some Italian anarchist and so immediately there you have well you know and I thought to myself really did they know the guy's political philosophy just because they tied him with a car bomb in the 1930s but you know I'm probably one of few people watching the show that that had that reaction so Stefan if you're there give us your experience when you tell people that you're an anarchist if you use that label or if you don't what you use and and so on glad to be here hey Rob you know I think mostly I use that around people that are already interested in talking about politics neighbor down the street I mean unless they drill down into it but we hardly ever get even up along where that you know it's radical enough to not vote you know what I mean right but I kind of get a lot of semantic debates among people and a lot of libertarians focus a lot on strategy and tactics and what what works and what persuades and a lot of them retreat to this idea about you know I don't like labels I don't want to pin myself you know down and I kind of don't have that approach and I actually don't agree with that approach I mean I have no problem with labels we're conceptual beings and we come up with words that denote these concepts it's just they're thinking I don't I don't really know what why people are opposed to labels inaccurate labels I could see being opposed to and then you have some libertarians who say well I don't want to say I'm an anarchist because I alienate people but you know to my mind the question is whether it's true or not okay and so you get that kind of strategic concern that's my poodle excuse me and and and then the other would be sort of the the debates among sort of libertarians and fellow travelers who want to fight over who's the real anarchist you know like the left libertarians or the anarcho-syndicalist and the libertarians who I view as the only true consistent anarchist but to distinguish you know I often say anarcho-libertarian just to make it clear okay what kind of libertarian we are we are libertarian we are anarchists you are opposed to the state because the state is seen as the institutionalized agency that invades property rights other people might be opposed to the state for other reasons but anarcho-libertarians are opposed to the state for that reason okay you know you brought up the term libertarian and boy that even has I think a wider connotation as I think you alluded to there some people call themselves libertarians who you and I and Robert might refer to as menarchist or people who want you know small government and some would use the term to refer to themselves as anarchists and and others I'm not quite sure maybe they're simply aligned with the the libertarian party and so I agree with you I think I think it's important if you're going to have any discussion to make sure you're clear on the definition of the terms you're using there's few things are more frustrating than arguing with somebody over a point and then finding you know 15 minutes into the conversation that you're using the terms about what you're arguing differently so I agree with you in that sense another term that comes up is capitalism that you know laws say fear capitalism and and are you a capitalist and that sort of thing and and I think you mentioned when we were talking about preparing for the show here that there's some debate even among libertarians not using that word precisely perhaps yet about what capitalism is you what do you you know go ahead either one of you what your thoughts are on that can give his thoughts and one reason I thought we could speak about this was the blog Rob Witt and I are co-bloggers on the libertarian standard and when we were forming it a couple of months ago we were describing what you know what our basic philosophy is and most of the bloggers they're sort of Austrian economics influence anarchist libertarians and you know the word capitalist in the last say 30 40 50 years has been fairly widely used at least by economists and conservatives and libertarian theorists is more or less a synonym for libertarianism like iron rand and mesas and even Milton Freeman these guys or at least it's been used to describe an economic aspect of a free market order that is consistent with a part of a libertarian society but in recent years some of the left libertarians have been raising an increasing sort of a fight about this and they're trying to basically argue that we shouldn't use the word capitalist to describe us in fact some go so far as I say that we should call ourselves social which part of their argument for rejecting and jettisoning capitalism is that the word has been uh has a has an origin and has so much baggage that that's associated with crony capitalism or corporatism right capitalism that we shouldn't use it and yet they want to use socialism which has even more anti-libertarian baggage if nothing else so it makes us right to do that um so you know I think they have some point the the origin of the term might have been used as a as a smear but words change their meanings over time even the word liberal used to mean something roughly libertarian and no longer does the question is what is the current meaning of capitalism and the dictionary says it's the private ownership of the means of production and I agree that that is not all of libertarianism but it does describe the an aspect of the free market or the economy of a libertarian society although I agree there are some still some baggage people associate capitalism with sort of the way things are done now in the west right which is corporations in bed with the state and so it does have some unfortunate associations but I think the same argument can be made for even free market or lessee fair I mean opponents of of of property rights and free enterprise can say well under free enterprise the government fails out corporations you know so I think we just have to fight these misconceptions and make it clear that we're if we say we're for capitalism we're for lessee fair free market capitalism not crony capitalism not corporatism that said I have begun to call myself in the last several years or anarcho-libertarian instead of anarcho-capital just to just to have a clearer communication very good robert what are your thoughts on that well I I agree with stephan um I typically if I'm going to describe myself I describe myself as an anarchist or a libertarian or I have adopted this term anarcho-libertarian as well capitalist has never meant crony capitalism to me typically the people with whom I've associated that's not really what they explicitly mean by it if we um you know if you think about when you hear a politician saying something about a market failure they talk about the dangers of unrestrained capitalism and the need to rein things in they don't say that we need to make the system more capitalist meaning more crony capitalism they talk about the cat the capitalism being the cause of some problem that they're supposedly there to fix so I've always thought of capitalism as being sort of the antithesis of government regulation yeah and you know I would agree that we could you know we can define whatever terms we want in fact um I found in one of Henry Hazlett's books that he he tried to put forth the word cooperatism as a description of what we all favor and I think that's actually not a bad term we're in favor of cooperation which which implies a whole host of things which imply property rights and peacefulness and civilization and things like that but as long as we define our terms carefully that's fine but what concerns me is I think there is a little slot of hand among some of the more vocal uh left libertarian and mutualist opponents of the word capitalism you know on the one hand they act like it's just semantic they say we shouldn't use the word because it was it was originated as a as a pejorative for for free markets we shouldn't use it because it's associated nowadays with crony capitalism and yet it's like as soon as they get you to agree to that they really are in opposition to the free market that we envision and that we call capitalist in other words they are opposed to the substance underlying the term they don't think that a free market libertarian order would would would have a mass employment and hierarchies and institutions and division of labor and international trade as much as we all think we would have you see I think more standard libertarians believe that when the state gets out of the way you would have even more trade you would have even more division of labor you would have more productivity maybe even mass production not less all right so these guys either think it's unjust to have the institution of employment they believe there's some kind of labor stealing going on or they think it rests upon some kind of property rights are invalid like distant ownership by the by the landlord or by the employer owning something from afar and they think that some kind of theft of the property rights of the workers and the tenants who have some kind of natural right to the property because they're currently in possession of it so they basically have a different conception of property rights and they actually oppose not the word capitalism but they oppose the capitalist order that that regular libertarians think would flourish under a free society and I think it's fine to disagree on that but I don't think they should mask it by trying to say that we should just drop the word capitalism because what they're really disagreeing with in some cases is the underlying substance uh I agree and I think one of the ways what what okay you got it now I'm sorry am I back yeah you're back okay okay it's accidentally muted uh skype here anyway one of the things I I tried to do gentlemen is cut to the chase early on in one of these debates whether uh one begins to get entangled in you know semantic arguments and say to somebody look my position is any two actions between individuals are one of two kinds it's either voluntary or it's based on coercion which do you favor and and almost everybody will say well of course people should interact voluntary that you know somebody shouldn't use force to compel somebody to do something he he or she doesn't want to do as long as they're you know not harming somebody else and anyway and they agree with that and then and then you start talking about the logical consequences of that and you and you know either quickly or after a while you say well how could you have government then and they're like well wait a minute you want to get rid of government government you know they don't see the um I'll call it the logical schism between claiming that all interactions between people should be voluntary and the very existence of government they don't see a logical problem with that and and to me as we try to advance a discussion in the wider society about this about this political philosophy we have to get people to engage that and look at that and you know and however long it takes point out the inconsistency between the one claim on the one hand and um the thing that we should have government in addition to that or with that or to support that but by the way nosy described what you first described as how we should commit capitalists acts between thinking itself okay let's let's clarify that when we come back we're right it we're up against the break uh steffen we'll be back here in just a couple minutes folks stay with us the time is now as the walls are closing in on america republic magazine is a beacon of light guiding those that fight for freedom and the restoration of america republic magazine is the ultimate activist tool republic magazine digs indeed to expose the lies and offers real solutions from the experts no other publication in america offers the real news like republic magazine get copies to give to friends family and neighbors or simply order a subscription for yourself at republic magazine dot tv get informed and stay informed with republic magazine the ultimate resource for your fight against the new world order claim your free digital copy now or order a print subscription online at www dot republic magazine dot tv that's republic magazine dot tv or call them toll free at 800 873 1620 that's 1 800 873 1620 you can feel that squeaky clean sensation like none other with vitamir toothpaste and mouthwash vitamir toothpaste and mouthwash is a unique natural formula not found in any other oral care products with a gentle combination of zinc folic acid myrrh and clove oil vitamir effectively whitens teeth removes plaque and freshens breath and it does it naturally without any harmful chemicals visit us online at vitamir dot com that's v i t a m y r dot com or call us today to place your order at 1 888 558 8482 that's 1 888 558 8482 keep your teeth and gums healthy with vitamir toothpaste and mouthwash vitamir nature's answer to healthy teeth and gums and remember it's all completely natural available at participating health food stores nationwide okay we're back ladies and gentlemen i special guest with me today and stephen cancella and we're discussing anarchism libertarianism trying to define those terms with sufficient precision so that we can go forward and uh just at the break there i had to cut you off sorry uh stephen uh you were refining or are correcting something i'd said just before about you know the voluntary the nature of voluntary interaction between people i think right i was just making the comment that one of the famous sort of saying by robert nosik who was a famous libertarian philosopher was that we should be in favor of capitalist acts between consenting adults and i'm just pointing out that even he used the word capitalist and clearly libertarian with liberty clearly libertarian connotation um as as did rand and ross bard and mesas and freedmen and and all the libertarian greats of the last 40 years um not that we should not uh take into account some of the the baggage of the claim now but to argue that it clearly means crony capitalism is just wrong right and that's what i guess i would have a hard i i would not be in favor of using that description of voluntary transactions just because of the as you put it the baggage associated with capitalism uh that i think is inherent in almost any conversation with people particularly those outside of our sort of right i think it was fear i think he was addressing the fact that most people would sort of at that time that he was addressing would already agree with personal liberty so he would say well do you believe in personal liberty what about other consenting acts so that was his point but uh right robert any thoughts on that or are your experience in talking to people about you know voluntary interaction between people and and the logical consequences of that well i find that uh people typically if you just casually ask them do understand uh and do appreciate voluntary interaction and they believe generally that is the correct way to go um there are some exceptions uh in particular you know one of the things that i encounter um you know kind of coming from my upbringing my parents uh both public school teachers and lifetime members of the n double acp they were very they are one of my words they are very typical um black liberals from the rural south meaning there are certain aspects which are conservative uh some of the social values but then there are certain other aspects particularly when it comes to anything that has to do with discrimination where they're extremely level and those sorts of people tend to be much more frightened of the quote unquote free market and i think that some of that has to do with the fact that a lot of the rhetoric that we hear commonly you know you start saying well we used to be more free in 1830 now for a black person from mississippi that just sounds completely ludicrous right right and um so so i think that a lot of it has to do with the fact that they that that when uh when they're talking to someone who's coming from that perspective neither one of them is really thinking of exactly the same thing that doesn't mean that either one of them is attempting to gloss something over to think anything wrong but they're just not thinking of the same things and until you get that meaning of the mind's what you're actually realizing and kind of understanding things the same way you have a you have a communication problem um one of the things i like to uh comment on stuff and talking about people opposing the term capitalism is that uh a lot of people who oppose that term seems to me are very they they're very much uh consequentialist they they believe that the free market will have a certain characteristics and they concentrate their efforts on those characteristics rather than on the freedom itself and there's always a great danger in doing that sort of thing it's difficult enough for us to predict the behavior of people who are heavily regulated and controlled as we have now how much more difficult is it to predict what a bunch of free people would do right so so the idea that you really think that the free market would definitely look this particular way which is radically different from everything that has come before sure it'll be radically different but to say that you actually know exactly where that radical difference is just seems to me to be kind of pointless and never yeah i would um i would say that i agree with that it seems like a lot of the the capitalist opponents libertarians who are they are principled and they are anti-state and they're they're pro-right but they seem so wrapped up in this sort of leftist program this whole Marxist idea that there's exploitation there's alienation from a hierarchy that they you know that they kind of they speak in sort of less rigorous terms about oppression we're all against oppression right we're against authority and authoritarianism and the oppression of women and you know they speak all this kind of leftist language about workers and things like this and you know i try to i try to pin them down and say listen if you just have a prediction that's different than mine that's okay we can have different predictions because we can all agree we could have a free market order a private property order and we could see what happened and if i'm wrong so what if you're wrong so what but sometimes you see when you push them they will say yes i predicted but it's more than that they some of them actually believe that there's an unjustness in defending and assigning property rights along more or less walking in lines which i believe is the sort of proto-difficult libertarian idea and so you know if you could just get clarity i think that helps it helps them communicate better about it exactly where the differences are robert it's interesting what you point what you mentioned about your parents so i i'm going to put a question to you and then both of you can chime in and talk about it and we're probably two minutes away from the break at the bottom so i'm sure we won't have time to totally hash this out but in a totally free market society there would be no laws telling a business owner who has employees who he can hire so that person could discriminate against black people if he wanted to now my feeling is the free market would take care of that and and certainly people could criticize that publicly and so forth but there would not be a law saying you cannot you know you have to hire so many black people or whatever now i suspect just based on what you said about your parents your parents would be adhorrent at that they would say we can't that's exactly what we need government for so that people won't do that so employers won't be discriminating against blacks or whoever people with red hair or what have you you know absent government laws that what's i'm curious about what your thoughts are on that and what kind of conversation you would have with your parents about that topic well yeah my dad and i have conversations like that on a fairly irregular basis and to some degree he has actually come around to some of my ways of thinking in particular when he had several thousands of dollars that he quote unquote owed to the irs but yeah i mean you definitely get that that's sort of an attitude and the thing that i always look to point out is unlike what maybe some people have been saying there was not some sort of free market utopia then and i start pointing out all of these areas of incredible state interference that that that the state always sought to cut off various aspects of the free market typically with some measure of proper popular support by a threatened group any group which sees itself now open to any sort of competition be it socially or economically that it was never open to before people within that group will will react negatively to it and try to have whatever it is that raises them bad and right and well i'm sorry to cut you off but well hold that thought we'll continue as soon as we get back well i did but now let it do i'm not so sure sir johnson i got a mission for you that could change your life oh good sir it involves traveling halfway around the world but that's so much as half a clue of where you're going or what you're gonna do when you get there situation normal sir yeah right i'll be leading this mission johnson so i'll be telling you what to do you sir that's right johnson and i say first things first oh good plan sir and when i say as first as food always remember that johnson food is a big deal sir my brother larkin gives a really good deal on some surplus mre's johnson if you've got half a brain and that empty head of yours you'll call the free to dry guy like i did that food is better for you it rehydrates faster and it's good johnson and it keeps for up to 30 years will we be gone that long sir well i hope not now get your supplies organized and meet me down to the pier at dawn on sunday if we sail the sunrise yes sir this adventure is brought to you by the freeze dry guy call 866-404-3663 or visit freeze dry guy dot com own firearm you build confidence kt ordinance offers the best atf approved 80 percent kits that can be made into firearms and when you build your own firearm you know it inside and out you know how it fires you take pride in ownership head to kt ordinance dot com for a great father son or father daughter firearm built like a 45 caliber kt 1911 or choose the 50 caliber ktp 50 that fires a 275 grain bullet for pure stopping power kt ordinances kids are fully legal atf approved 80 fire arm kits with no serial numbers no background check and no government 44 73 forms to fill out go to kt ordinance dot com and get yours today that's kt or dnan ce dot com kt ordinance dot com building your own firearm is fun and you acquire useful skills especially times like these remember when you build your own firearm you know it inside and out kt ordinance also accepts gold and sober payments visit kt ordinance dot com today the time is now as the walls are closing in on america republic magazine is a beacon of light guiding those that fight for freedom and the restoration of america republic magazine is the ultimate activist tool republic magazine digs in deep to expose the lies and offers real solutions from the experts no other publication in america offers the real news like republic magazine get copies to give to friends family and neighbors or simply order a subscription for yourself at republic magazine dot tv get informed and stay informed with republic magazine the ultimate resource for your fight against the new world order claim your free digital copy now or order a print subscription online at w w w dot republic magazine dot tv that's republic magazine dot tv or call them toll free at 800 873 1620 that's 1800 873 1620 question for you do you know what is in the area you're breathing do you know what chemicals are placed in the water you drink would you like to combat these intrusions and not just talking toxins i'm talking about chemicals that are harmful maybe now you understand why you feel tired so much change your life with life change tea cleanse from toxins and chemicals and lose weight receive energy there is no better investment than your body log on to get the t dot com that's get the t dot com or you can call us at 928 308 0408 that's 928 308 0408 friendly operators will take your order and answer your questions be set free and live better get the t dot com micro effect broadcasting network welcome back ladies and gentlemen you're listening to the peter mack show on this wednesday may 12th my special guest are robert wicks and seven cancella and we are discussing really what it would be to like to live in a voluntary society where all interactions between people are voluntary there's no coercion used against anybody as long as he or she is not you know harming someone else violating somebody else's rights and and just prior to break i was asking robert how his parents would react to me described as liberal wax if i understood incorrectly if if we were to go to a system in which there were no laws that prevent discrimination and and i think you were just starting to launch into robert your discussion about protected groups and their efforts you know often to to use the power of the government to protect them and yeah and you know the thing i always try to point out is that that you know people attempted to use the government to protect themselves from what was other uh criminal aggression now and then you know the thing i always try to point out is that this was by no means some sort of a free market that we had in the past uh that it was anything but free in fact there were all kinds of restrictions and possible limitations and the thing is that uh and sometimes it seems like people kind of skip this over but when you start having a lot of regulations and forceful government not only do you have the direct effect of the state's action on human beings but you also have the human beings reactions and they're internalizing of some of these ideas that they that they end up having forced upon them so the state warps the culture itself so essentially that the more stages that you have uh these things kind of go hand in hand but the more the more status a particular society is then the more morally corrupted it becomes and the more morally corrupt in the criminal sense that the people are then the more status they go uh society they're going they're going to establish so even if you had fewer laws on the books say in um 1830 in Mississippi what you had was a a a society filled with people who largely uh who i wouldn't say large i wouldn't say there was a majority but a a number of those people in particular the more wealthy people and the people who could who could help to uh who could popularize certain ideas and give coaches educated defenses to certain ideas those people were largely a criminal class so when you have a sort of a criminal class as as the leaders of society then yeah you are going to have some you're going to have some some weirdness where you're going to have widespread criminality even in the absence of extensive numbers of laws okay um but and and Stefan's timing here you know at any point if you want but i'm still trying to get a sense of i mean it do you not think that your parents like most quote unquote liberal blacks would would find it a huge step backwards if we were to get rid of the so-called civil rights legislation that that prohibits discrimination uh by employers against blacks and and and quotas and and and that sort of thing uh most of them i think believe that that was unnecessary for blacks and you know other oppressed people to find some upward mobility in society yes that that's a very common sort of attitude it's actually a bit more of a mixed bag than i think some people might realize my dad actually has has changed his attitude toward things like affirmative action and even forced desegregation considerably than what he was when he was a young man he sees that he sees how some of these things have had some very unintentionally destructive sorts of effects so i think there is the ability to make progress there now i would definitely say that overwhelmingly the vast majority of blacks uh at least the politically active types would would agree that that these things are necessary in order to promote some sort of fair society but that that sort of that that regime is is sort of crumbling and um you know i i told my father that uh that some things probably will not change honestly until his generation dies off because when you go through some very stressful sorts of situations it changes how you think about everything and there are certain things that you can really never get past because the because you associate so many painful memories with them and so i think that to some degree some of this stuff we just don't have to wait it out that uh some of the people who are in their 60s and 70s they just have to go and once once and once you have people who don't have some of that baggage then you can start to look at some of these things much more soberly and just actually see well what are these things doing now you know uh that's what robert said i was uh mentioning something similar to on another show just two days ago uh that's the idea of you know coons the structure of scientific revolutions right the idea that it's not like everyone sees a light for a new idea it's just that the old generation dies off and makes room for the new generations to see the truth and i i agree with wick that's the only probably way we can have truth generational truth or generational change um and and rob knows that i'm uh i'm an oppressed minority too i'm an honorary i'm a hereditary cage and and we're we're even more oppressed than in the african country hereditary cage okay but actually i think there's i mean i think some of the things rob is describing about blacks about um you know they're buying into a primitive action it i think it's just the same old opportunism among the you know the jesse jackson types combined with just being brainwashed in school just like everyone else but in a way there's one advantage and that is that uh you know i think we do need to start exploding this myth that's grown up in libertarianism about sort of this innate idea that the original american founding was sort of a proto libertarian almost we almost got it right guys you know we were almost perfect right that was sort of rand mentality and all these constitution worshipers worshipers now in fact they use the liberty bill as they'll use the constitution as sort of a a metonymus stand-in for for liberty or libertarianism and you know you get someone like rob and he'll say what are you talking about we were slaying you know this wasn't a good old day so i think that the kind of breath of fresh air can help but um i think that maybe one strategy that can work with with uh with uh say minorities that overluck it to give up on the on the laws that that prevent discrimination is sort of what happened with me was like immigration i mean you know there are undoubtedly problems with immigration nowadays i mean arizona suffering a lot of problems right there's no doubt that the immigration policy of the states caused problems right but if you're a really consistent libertarian and you understand the nature of the state and you understand that the real enemy is the state then you you just rule out a court that the state is a solution to this problem the state causes the problem so you just know that you cannot turn to the state to solve this problem and you know likewise i think that like liberals in general and say blacks in terms of some of these minority protection programs you know they hate the government in some way they hate the lynchings that were permitted they hate the the jim crow laws the slavery and yet they want to trust the government to defend their rights i mean i think if you just let them know you cannot trust these people to defend your rights you can't trust them um and on a related topic i mean i was just talking today with someone about this a similar thing happened with the FCC for example i listen and wicks does to all these uh sort of tech pundit shows like twit and these guys are sort of kind of happy liberals they're fairly thoughtful they're decent on technology punditry issues but you know they kind of they tend to the california new generation tolerance but you know we should balance everything out kind of ideas and a few weeks ago they were they were debating the FCC's um attempted net neutrality regulations which which they were struck down in court temporarily anyway and you know they were at least grappling with the issue they're saying well on the one hand you have comcast and these guys tackling imposing a tiered pricing and doing bit sniffing and all that stuff that's bad and on the other hand the FCC do we really want to give them the authority to do this but they were sort of contemplating with this kind of giddy liberal glassy eyedness that you know maybe it's a good idea maybe it's not and then just a couple days ago on twit they're talking with outrage about the FCC's authorization or attempted authorization of the hollywood movie industry the ability to reach in over the internet and turn off the analog output of people's audio visual equipment their media equipment in their houses to stop them from possibly tiltering things and i think i even one of them say someone said well i suppose i buy a blu-ray disc and i try to play it on my blu-ray player and i can't even play it because sony has turned off the analog output remotely without my permission and someone and sony's answer was well write a letter to the FCC now imagine on a sunday night you're trying to watch avatar on blu-ray and it won't work even though you bought it so the point is these guys are outraged at the FCC and yet they want to trust the FCC possibly you know on on the issue of net neutrality i think if you point it out to people yeah so let's i'm serious i go go ahead i was just saying you point these things out to people tell people look you cannot trust this government the one that you hate justifiably for other things they've done to you you can't trust them to be a defender of your right well of course but also it seems to me and i think this is perhaps the hardest part or the greatest challenge that i face when confronting people with these ideas is is to is to point out their inconsistencies and that's what as you were speaking about these uh these liberals these california types if i understood you right stuff on there you know on the one hand and they they want freedom on the other hand they want some control by the FCC because they don't like certain things they see going on and if you try to point out inconsistencies with people my experience is people don't like to have inconsistencies in their philosophical position point pointed out they get very defensive and they start being evasive and aggressive and you know you say look i'm just trying to point out you know i mean you can't be right about something if you're not consistent i mean that's the bottom line logically so i'm just trying to point out you know maybe some of your ideas are correct but if they're inconsistent with something else logically then you can't be 100 correct and if our goal is to have a coherent philosophy you know at the bottom line it has to be consistent but it's just you know i'm probably the same way you guys but you know i don't think somebody likes having somebody else point out to them that they're inconsistent on anything and yet it seems to me at the heart of the battle that we're fighting and trying to get people to think philosophically about what the the complete logical ramifications of a completely voluntary society are you necessarily are going to have to confront people with that well i think the problem is that um you know most people this seems obvious to you but because you think deeply about these things but most people don't have the the interest or the equipment to sort of you know that they realize they sense that it they sense that if they want to challenge these inconsistencies they're going to have to develop a pretty coherent rigorous worldview and they know that they're not equipped to do that so i think you sort of give up in frustration either the nitpickers or they just take one side or the other and they say okay well then i'm going to be this one and that might explain in a way the left right divide you know the reason some people just choose to agglomerate these uh the leftist or the liberal side of the of the right and uh and some choose the conservative side they sort of accept the package deal that they're giving a society they don't know how to they don't know how to uh reconcile them but they take the one that kind of emulates one of the values most important to them and they stick with it yeah you know i mean i just to continue one more line on this and i was i was hit a movie with a friend of mine another professor when i was one a woman who i would describe as pretty liberal she's an english professor you know and i i think it's a fair generalization that most people in humanities are are pretty pretty liberal uh and one time we had a discussion like this and i said to her i said uh well you know all transactions between two people are they're either voluntary they're based on coercion and her her response was well i would have to think about that uh you know i'd have to get into political philosophy a little bit and and i didn't follow up i wanted to say what the hell are you talking about it's just it's an either or situation you don't have to you don't have to know anything about political philosophy or history or or marxism or anything it's just you know what what other kind of interaction can there be if it's not voluntary and it's not coerced what is it what's left i i didn't follow up because it was not that kind of situation to do so but you know i mean i guess i'm asking somewhat do you guys face the same frustration you're talking to people and it's like what else can it be you know choose your ground if you want to have coercion okay and we can talk about the ramifications of that but don't pretend like when you're advocating on just that you know i i will say one thing that i i've actually been pleasantly surprised that when i have this kind of conversation with people that are willing to have it if you point out a you know or something for example i had kind of quasi-neoconference and i'll point out you know they'll criticize obama and i'll say but but bush did x y and d which is very similar and they'll sort of put their head down they'll say true you have a good point and what i feel when i have somebody at that i've made a good point you know and i think and they're fairly honest and they admit it now the people that are not honest enough to admit those kind of things i don't know maybe they're not even worth talking to very much um or maybe someone who's strategically better than i can figure out a way to do it but i don't know what they do when you have someone who's stubbornly irrational rob you there i'm still here well i guess we've lost our host sounds like it well rob tell me more about your upbringing in the cell it was wonderful you know no shoes and uh cow patties as far as the eye could see have you ever milked a cow only once my uncle mean but it's like i didn't milk the cow like ready to count a long time just touch the feet mean by the time i came around nobody did that for any kind of real purpose so my uncle just kept some stuff around just to play around with i was going to tell peter did you find a way to turn any issue into ip and so like you know if you get home late for work one night because of the jam you'll say your wife say what happened to you my home is late because of ip you know yeah well that's that i do see a lot of that going on i think that's probably you know i'd say that ip and drugs are the most pervasive domestic rights violations that the government engages in i mean they just agree and they're in ip is even in a way more insidious because at least the drug war people sort of know that a lot of people know that there's nothing wrong with smoking in marijuana they know that there's something wrong with this but ip is just totally confused by this whole morality yes it is it is much more dangerous from the standpoint of intellectual dishonesty and more corruption uh people buy into that it really is kind of amazing how people people buy into it well you know over the years i've tried to i've tried to grapple with this in my mind and uh and when i finally settled on what i thought was the right solution and i you know i think i did um but i've been i've tried to grapple with ways of explaining different aspects of it and i sort of settled on i mean basically it's about learning basically if you're in favor of ip you're opposed to the idea of learning it very much is true you know it seems to me that only an advanced civilization could actually have ip but a civilization really can't become very advanced um they have ip at the beginning you know it's i think that's true and so it's a very strange sort of thing because you start looking at what the deal is your civilization and it's just the opposite of what ip is trying to do well you have the problems you have these simple minded patent lawyers like um to defend the system for obvious um reasons and you know they'll say well america is the most prosperous country in all history and they started in 17 you know say 91 or 89 or something and they had a patent act right around the time isn't that a coincidence you know and i'm like well that's a great argument there guys you know correlation is causation to these people right you know and you can make that argument with with anything i mean you know a massive uh slavery that the cognizant hold on hold on a second i've got to call myself that might be the hello this is stephen joseph hey peter wicks and i are talking on the radio show right now and uh we're going so let me hang up okay oh wick that was peter he said he called me on my cell phone he said he's trying to get back on so he keeps on so uh this is the wish radio show go ahead take it yeah but uh you know it it's really kind of amazing that uh that that people really do buy into ip and the way that they do it to the extent that they do you know anytime you start to get to something which is so ridiculous that you're not even sure when you're breaking the law which is what some from the patent stuff officially ends up amounting to it i mean what could be more ludicrous than doing something in your own house and actually wondering whether or not you're breaking the law i mean it just sounds nuts yeah and there's also this disconnect between you know i mean it makes some sense to have um territories of governments around the world i mean you know america america's jurisdiction governs the american territory because that covers all the real objects within it so at least theoretically you could have that done that way but the ip idea sort of inextricably leads not only to a one a one world government but to a one universe government right in other words by the idea of ip there might be some guy on another planet on another solar system doing um you know using an ipod right now and he invented after steve jobs right yeah or apple and so he's violating apple's ip right and yet apple doesn't know this so maybe someday we'll have to have a big arbitration at the end of the universe and everyone's not a lot yeah that is true i had not thought about it from that standpoint but you're right it uh it it does kind of force this sort of one universe idea if you're actually going to have to be consistent because otherwise you end up having to say where he couldn't have known but that's no different than what we have now well not only that it's sort of it brings in the idea of a right that can be violated without the victim even knowing about it i mean you know the whole idea of rights that we're used to in familiar terms involves a victim who is pissed off about you know being raped or killed or trespassed or whatever and they want to do something about it they want to stop it or get redressed for it or get a law passed to to to minimize its occurrence but the idea that right now there's someone out there violating my rights and i don't know about it is sort of nonsense i mean or forget the universal example of the transition i mean there could be a guy right now in cuba right and he he saw on television the dyson vacuum cleaner and he might have made one and he's using it well according to iran and gallumbos and these ip advocates he's stealing their ideas and yes they don't even know it and they're not being harmed yeah that that is that is correct um you know it's like we always end up having this this competition between adams and ideas and you know that you can own adams or you can own ideas but if you but they are they are inherently sort of in conflict because if you claim that you can own ideas then obviously you you have the right over someone else's adams yeah and you know one of the things which uh you know anytime i think of a crime a crime involves either damage to to a person to that person's property or at least or it's the forceful deprivation of that person's time right i mean you deal with one of those sorts of things and ip is one of the things that it does none of those i know i agree and and it's it's um it's one of these things that you know it's it's it's almost like the positive rights that are created by liberals right and the idea that what's wrong with adding a right a right to food and right education and they don't realize or they don't care that these come at the expense of people's liberty and people's other property but the famous truth of ip rights i mean these ip rights are not enforced in this imaginary idealistic ip realm they're enforced in the real world they're enforced against real property so you know you get a court order taking your real money or telling you you can't use your real property in this way so really it's a it's an infringement or or it's an incursion into the territory of property rights and tangible things that people already own so it's almost it's it necessarily comes at the expense of real property rights yeah and you know i think i think that we're one of the reasons why it's so interesting is because it does appeal to people's ideas of fairness because i could easily visualize some small something that sort of resembles in a very small way copyright in a free market i mean if a guy wrote a book and there's a big bookseller and he goes to sell his book i could easily see that a bookseller as part of just their corporate policy would buy the book from him rather than just going to someone else uh who was who was simply copying the book and that's a lot to do with the pr i mean it's the same sort of influence behind fair trade coffee um you know that that this is appealing to the people's sense of fairness and and i could easily see authors being able to make money off of appeal to people's sense of fairness but they want to then take that and actually turn it into a real right which we have the right to aggressor against people and they're in that's where we have to hear the music i think i better close for peter it's been nice having you on the all right and we'll do this again i'll talk to you percent firearm kits with no serial numbers no background check and no government 44 73 forms to fill out go to kt ordinance dot com and get yours today that's kt or d nan c e dot com kt ordinance dot com building your own firearm is fun and you acquire useful skills especially times like these remember when you build your own firearm you know what inside and out kt ordinance also accepts gold and sober payments visit kt ordinance dot com today the time is now as the walls are closing in on america republic magazine is a beacon of light guiding those that fight for freedom and the restoration of america republic magazine is the ultimate activist tool republic magazine digs in deep to expose the lies and offers real solutions from the experts no other publication in america offers the real news like republic magazine get copies to give to friends family and neighbors or simply order a subscription for yourself at republic magazine dot tv get informed and stay informed with republic magazine the ultimate resource for your fight against the new world order claim your free digital copy now or order a print subscription online at w w w dot republic magazine dot tv that's republic magazine dot tv or call them toll free at 800 873 1620 that's 1800 873 1620 question for you do you know what is in the area you're breathing do you know what chemicals are placed in the water you drink would you like to combat these intrusions and not just talking toxins i'm talking about chemicals that are harmful maybe now you understand why you feel tired so much change your life with life change t cleanse from toxins and chemicals and lose weight receive energy there is no better investment than your body log on to get the t com that's get the t dot com where you can call us at 928 308 0408 that's 928 308 0408 friendly operators will take your order and answer your questions be set free and live better get the t dot com