- 8 months ago
Stefan Molyneux examines criticisms of anarcho-capitalism, focusing on the relationship between property rights and state power. He challenges concerns about privatization, arguing it can improve public goods access and maintenance. Molyneux addresses the moral implications of coercively funded public resources and argues for voluntary resolution of social issues. He dismisses fears of mini-tyranny in property rights enforcement and advocates for governance based on consent and personal responsibility, encouraging a reexamination of societal structures.
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!
You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025
GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!
https://peacefulparenting.com/
Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!
Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!
You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!
See you soon!
https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:00All righty, righty, this is Devin Molyneux from Freedomain, and this is an old Reddit,
00:06Arsk Philosophy, Arsk, Arsk Philosophy from 10 years ago.
00:11Interesting to see these criticisms, I appreciate them.
00:15One of the main criticisms of ANCAPS, this is anarcho-capitalism, this is a private property
00:20stateless society.
00:21One of the main criticisms of ANCAPS from a standard anarchist perspective is simply
00:25their views on property.
00:26Getting rid of the state apparatus without getting rid of property, simply speaking,
00:31is privatizing the state.
00:33Yeah, so we hear this a lot.
00:35Privatizing the state is a contradiction in terms.
00:40It's like turning rape into lovemaking, right?
00:48It doesn't make any sense.
00:50Privatizing the state.
00:51The state initiates the use of force and controls your property pretty much at will
00:56and at whim.
00:57So privatizing the state is, privatizing is one of these things where, you know, it's
01:03public versus private goods.
01:04So when people talk about private goods, they think that it's inaccessible to them.
01:11When they talk about public goods, they think that those goods are accessible to them.
01:15And that's not really the case.
01:22So we say privatize.
01:24Oh, the road is going to be privatized.
01:25Well, formally, I could just go on the road and use the road and everything would be fine.
01:33Now, if it's privatized, I cannot get on the road.
01:36I cannot have access to the road.
01:37I cannot use the road.
01:39So when the word privatizing comes in, what most people perceive or experience or fantasize
01:49is that something will now be inaccessible to them.
01:53Formerly, it was free and available.
01:55And now it is inaccessible to them.
01:58So privatizing the state, the state initiates the use of force, private property respects
02:06the non-aggression principle, and of course, the principle of property rights.
02:11So I sort of want to push back on this idea that if something's privatized, you lose access
02:18to it.
02:18If it's a public good, you have access to it.
02:19Like a park, right?
02:21You lose access to a park if it's privatized, because now you have to pay to access the park.
02:33Before, you could just go into the park, you go to the park, and now you see it's privatized
02:39and therefore you don't have access to the park.
02:43Now, I don't see that as true except as a snapshot, as a...
02:51So this is what happens when people want to oppose a particular moral standard or moral
02:57progress or moral argument or idea.
02:59They just freeze it in time.
03:01It's the easiest thing in the world.
03:03Well, first, they avoid principles.
03:06Number one, they avoid principles.
03:07And number two, they freeze the moral situation in time.
03:15So when we talk about a public park being privatized, what people do is they avoid principles.
03:22In other words, a public park is funded by coercion, right?
03:29A public park is funded by coercion.
03:32So they don't talk about the coercion, right?
03:34Don't talk about any of that.
03:35They don't talk about the coercion.
03:38They simply say it is no longer available to the public.
03:41It's been privatized.
03:43So they avoid the principles, the morality.
03:48Is it funded by coercion or not?
03:51And they also freeze the situation in time.
03:58They freeze the situation in time.
03:59And what that means is there's no progress or process by which things develop over time.
04:10So if the government assigned husbands and wives to each other and forced people to get married,
04:17and then we said, well, we're not going to do that.
04:19We're going to let people choose themselves.
04:20Would people say, I no longer have access to husbands or wives?
04:27Well, first of all, you want access to love, not just to husbands and wives, right?
04:34And you're not going to get that with assigned marriages as much.
04:37And secondly, you will still have access.
04:44You'll just have to earn it.
04:47So with parks, let's just say a park in the city, right?
04:51It's a public park, which means it's funded through coercion,
04:54and it gets privatized and people feel, oh, my gosh, I'm losing access to it.
04:58It's not true at all.
04:59Because if people use the park, then they care about having access to it.
05:07Let's say you go and have your picnic at the park, you go play baseball at the park,
05:10you walk around at the park, you have your dates at the park,
05:13you go feed the ducks at the pond, whatever.
05:16So if you want to have access to the park, then you're going to have to pay for it directly.
05:23And what's going to happen is, well, of course, you no longer have all the people
05:30who don't go to the park subsidizing it, right?
05:33So let's say the park costs $5 million a year to run and maintain and groom or whatever it is, right?
05:37So all of the people in the city, let's say it's a city, a million people paying their taxes.
05:44So you have everybody paying $5.
05:47So you have a heavily subsidized park.
05:50So if you are going to go and use that park, then you'll actually have to pay for it yourself.
05:57You actually have to pay for the park yourself.
05:59And you find out whether it's actually valuable.
06:01Now, the problem, of course, is that when the government pays for things,
06:08those things tend to get enormously expensive.
06:11Because there's padding, there's corruption, there's all kinds of nonsense that goes on.
06:16Grift, theft, even sometimes.
06:20So if the government's going to pay for the park, the park is going to be ridiculously expensive.
06:25And the cost is going to be borne by the taxpayers in the city.
06:32And if you go to the park, it's, quote, free.
06:34But it's not, of course, because you're paying far more in taxes than you would a mere park entrance fee.
06:42So that's number one.
06:46It's only accessible to you because you're being taxed.
06:49And with taxation comes the inevitable problem of debt, right?
06:54Because the government wants to give people the illusion that it's providing value.
06:58And the only way it does that is to borrow or print money.
07:02Local governments can't print money, but they can sure issue bonds and they can borrow.
07:06So if you look at the total cost of the park, including the borrowing, the debt, then it's much more expensive.
07:14So you have the illusion of access to the park that's, quote, free because the government is forcing everyone to pay for it in a horribly inefficient manner.
07:23So you're losing far more money than you would be gaining.
07:27I mean, there's an old joke about Toronto.
07:30There are two seasons, winter and construction.
07:32And, I mean, there's an area not too far from me where the construction has now been going on at a fairly major intersection for five years or so.
07:48And who knows?
07:49Who knows when it's going to be done?
07:51It'll be done.
07:52I don't know where the money runs out or they run out of excuses or something like that.
07:57So the privatized aspect of things shows up in direct cost that is far less than the cost of taxation and debt and corruption.
08:10Now, so they remove the principles and they freeze things in time.
08:14Now, what happens to parks in the long run?
08:17Well, parks in the long run get progressively worse.
08:23Homeless people show up, drug dealers show up, people having sex in the bushes, you've got condoms, needles, drug addicts.
08:31Like, they just get progressively worse.
08:34And then you have to chase people out of the park.
08:41This is the case with public toilets.
08:44There used to be, you'd have to, there was an old joke, because you used to have to put a dime into the stall in order to get into the bathroom, right?
08:55And there was an old joke or an old little poem.
08:59Here I sit, brokenhearted, paid a dime and only farted.
09:03Yesterday I took a chance, saved my dime and crapped my pants.
09:06And, of course, this was considered disparate impact on the poor, and therefore all of the washrooms were made free, which meant you had people like George Michael in them, right?
09:16And drug addicts and all that.
09:18So, it's not.
09:21It's not that you get endless free access to parks if they're public.
09:26You violate moral principles.
09:28Because it costs you far more in the long run.
09:31And, of course, then what happens is you have to police the parks.
09:38You have to chase away all of the problematic people who you don't necessarily want your kids playing around.
09:46So, an entrance fee is automatic security.
09:51That doesn't mean you don't need any security, but you need much less security.
09:54If anyone can wander in and use the park, and everyone's been to parks with a bunch of homeless people, right?
09:59And it can be unsettling, dangerous, right?
10:03I mean, especially if they're drinking or using drugs and so on, which often they are.
10:07So, privatizing the state.
10:11People think, oh, my gosh, it's free and I'm going to no longer have access to it.
10:15Or it's free and I'm going to have to pay for it.
10:17But you lose access to the parks in the long run anyway, because they get overrun, or the security requirements become so high that it becomes sort of prohibitively expensive.
10:28And, of course, in the long run, and this may not be in the lifetime of the boomers, tragically, but the government runs out of money, and then they can't maintain the park.
10:38The government runs out of money, too much debt, and they have to cut the non-essential services and park maintenance and security is a non-essential service.
10:47So, the park gets, there's no longer any profit in maintaining the park.
10:53It's just a cost.
10:55So, people simply, the park gets abandoned, right?
11:01And then it gets overrun with problems, and so you're going to lose access to the park anyway.
11:07The only way to maintain access to things in the long run is to privatize them.
11:10So, I just want to mention that.
11:11All right.
11:12So, to go on and say, how is a large property owner going to protect their property?
11:19Hire some type of defense force that works as the police.
11:22The property owner also owns his own court and jail, so they can punish you swiftly.
11:32All right.
11:33I think that means listening to Taylor Swift.
11:35Essentially, a mini-tyrannical state or even a monarch if you own property.
11:39Right.
11:39So, it's just real leap, right?
11:40Why would you want a tyrant?
11:44Right.
11:44So, I mentioned this, of course, in my book, Practical Anarchy.
11:48But, of course, the first thing the property owners are going to be concerned about is that whatever agency they use to protect their property is going to become tyrannical and steal their property.
12:01Right.
12:01That's their first concern.
12:04And whoever is going to sell property protection services to the population is going to have to deal with that issue, that concern.
12:15Right.
12:15That concern.
12:16I mean, people are concerned when you have, if you have cameras in your house or something like that, people are concerned that the company that's managing the cameras or whatever or gives you web access to the cameras is going to be spying on you.
12:33So, there has to be all sorts of privacy standards and independent audits to make sure they're not spying on you and so on, right?
12:39So, it's a funny kind of mindset to think that you as a customer are helpless.
12:44Maybe this is because people feel helpless with regards to their parents or their teachers or something like that, right?
12:50Okay.
12:50So, basically, say the property owner also owns his own court in jail.
12:55No, the property owner would not own his own court in jail any more than most people don't own their own email service or internet routing stations or something like that.
13:04That would be outsourced.
13:05All right.
13:08You really wouldn't have much freedom, rights, et cetera, if you didn't own property.
13:12Maybe if you had a benevolent landlord.
13:14But a landlord, as a renter, let's say you're renting, right?
13:22As a renter, you own property.
13:25Sure you do.
13:26Of course you do.
13:27Yeah, you own property.
13:29I mean, you have to have some property to have something to exchange with the landlord as rent, right?
13:36So, you have to have some kind of income, you have to have some kind of coin or money or crypto or something like that, which you can then give to the landlord so that you can pay your rent, right?
13:51So, owning property is a wide variety of things, right?
13:58I mean, obviously, there's self-ownership.
13:59You own yourself.
14:00You own the effects of your actions.
14:03And you own your paycheck.
14:05And you own the labor that you sell in return for a paycheck.
14:08And you own the money you get for that.
14:10So, lots of levels of property doesn't mean owning a building.
14:15It just means having the right to use the apartment, right?
14:18So, the idea that property is only the means of production.
14:23Property is only owning the house, not renting the house.
14:28You can end up with far more property renting a house than buying a house.
14:32I mean, if, say, 2012, you had decided to take your down payment on a house and invest it into Bitcoin, well, you'd be pretty wealthy by now, right?
14:45And you'd be able to buy, I don't know, 10 houses or something, right?
14:49So, the deferral of gratification has a lot to do with owning property, right?
14:59So, the idea that property is only the means of production is not true.
15:06All right.
15:06So, from here, a typical anarchist would argue that they don't want to get rid of the state, but they want to get rid of public government and do their own governing, whether fair or not.
15:16Their idea of consent and such has already been thoroughly criticized here.
15:22Ultimately, it fails to address, really, any hierarchical relations such as sexism, racism, classism, etc.
15:27As well, mostly because the idea of absolute property rights is axiomatic to the ideology.
15:32Well, I mean, a free market is realistic with regards to the strengths and weaknesses, let's just say, of men and women.
15:46So, one of the problems, of course, that happens, which I've mentioned before, is if you aim for equality of outcomes between men and women,
15:56then you run out of people in about a century.
16:03And we're sort of on track for that.
16:05Certainly, Japan is pretty close to on track for that, right?
16:07So, if you say, well, women have to be paid the same as men, even though, in general, women go into less financially remunerative fields,
16:20and they work a little less hard, and they take time off to have kids, and so I say, well, no, no, no, it's got to be equal.
16:25Then you end up vastly overpaying women to be in the workforce relative to what would happen in the free market.
16:31And because you're vastly overpaying women, which means taking money from men and giving money to women as a whole, right?
16:38Because you're vastly overpaying women at the expense of men, then men become broke, and women are paid to stay in the workforce.
16:47If men are broke, and women are paid to stay in the workforce, then men can't provide for their families.
16:54Women can't get the kind of financial security that they need in order to stay home with their children.
17:00And as a result, the birth rate collapses.
17:09Gender egalitarianism in economics is a warfare depopulation agenda.
17:17So, I mean, what should happen in a free market is if there's a decline in the birth rate, then wages go up, and property becomes dirt cheap.
17:32I mean, I mentioned this in the show the other day, that during the Black Death, there was a lot of deaths in Scotland, say,
17:38which resulted in a tripling of the wages of the workers, because there were fewer workers, you had to pay them more.
17:47You also had to give more concessions to the workers, because they had a strong bargaining position.
17:53And because workers became so expensive, people started looking at labor-saving devices and so on, right?
17:59The shortage of workers also cracked the hold that the incredibly economically efficient and violent and immoral surf system,
18:09where you were sort of tied to the land as a surf.
18:11So you could break free of that, because there weren't enough workers.
18:15Now, of course, we're not talking about the plus side of that many people dying of a horrible plague.
18:22But what I am saying is that there should be a natural heartbeat recycle.
18:26That when there is a baby boom, then wages decline, and the price of housing goes up.
18:34When there's a baby bust, which causes people to have fewer children.
18:38When there's a baby bust, then wages go up, and the price of housing goes down, and other things.
18:44And so people have more incentive to have more children.
18:46So, yeah, the idea that you can have egalitarianism between the genders, equality of outcome coercively generated, coercively enforced,
19:02the idea that you can have egalitarianism coercively enforced between men and women and not end your civilization is a delusion.
19:13It's a delusion.
19:14All right.
19:16Somebody else says, I assume, I assume, we're talking about a stateless capitalist society, not a minarchism, i.e. a minimal state.
19:24That's a different beast.
19:25It's not entirely clear to me, and someone maybe can explain this to me, how an anarcho-capitalist society is supposed to deal with dissent.
19:35In a stateless society, we have instances of mandatory conflict resolution, the judicial system,
19:39and we have armed forces that deal with the enforcing of these mandatory conflict resolutions, police,
19:46and we're defending us from outside aggression, military.
19:49All right.
19:49In general, as a whole, most people who talk about the conflict resolution aspect of the judicial system
19:58have never tried to enforce conflict resolution through the judicial system.
20:07It's a theory.
20:09They've maybe seen a bunch of stuff on TV.
20:11TV, of course, gives you a completely deranged, fantastical view of the judicial system.
20:19I mean, there's a murder, and they have intense conversations with lawyers, and next thing you know, there's a courtroom trial,
20:30and next thing you know, there's a verdict, without the reality being that it's usually years, years and years.
20:40Incredibly slow process, as you would imagine, right, because lawyers make money when the process is slower.
20:46So, when people say, well, we have a dispute resolution system called the courts,
20:54you know, the first question to ask is, well, have you ever tried to use them?
21:01And inevitably, it's no.
21:02It's like, well, then you've got a bunch of, I mean, the Dungeons and Dragons movie is more realistic about the Middle Ages
21:09than courtroom dramas are about the legal system.
21:12Armed forces to prevent outside aggressors?
21:21Well, aggressors are those who come into your country and take resources, and how's that going, right?
21:27It's not clear to me how an ANCAP society is to deal with these issues.
21:31Say that John builds an irrigation system for his lawn that makes my lawn flood.
21:35John doesn't want to halt his system.
21:36I want him to halt it.
21:38What do?
21:40Well, you would contract to make sure that this would be dealt with.
21:47You'd have a contract with a dispute resolution system that would work with other dispute resolution systems
21:53in order to make sure that you wouldn't get flooded, right?
21:58And it would be efficient, and it would be preventive, and so on, right?
22:03Because you can't have efficiency without morality.
22:06You can't have efficiency without voluntarism, right?
22:11It's either lovemaking or it's rape.
22:12So, even if you establish the notion of a private court in which both me and John accept,
22:20a priori to accept the decision of a third-party arbiter,
22:22who exactly and how is supposed to coerce John or me into accepting the third-party decision
22:27that doesn't favor them without an armed force to enforce it?
22:29If John doesn't like the resolution, he can just stop recognizing the court.
22:33He agreed to respect in the first place.
22:35It's this unethical, sure, but who cares?
22:36People will do it anyway, right?
22:38Right.
22:38So, this is the insight that I had many years ago,
22:44which I wrote about in Practical Anarchy and Everyday Anarchy and so on,
22:47which is that the enforcement mechanism is ostracism.
22:51Ostracism.
22:52And it's funny because I think that we have had a great falling back
22:59and falling down and collapse in liberty concepts over the last generation or so,
23:06generation and a half probably.
23:09So, one of the reasons why I accept voluntarism as a moral and practical system
23:16is because that's how things worked for me as a kid.
23:20We did not have...
23:22Because I grew up in a high-trust society,
23:25I could roam around the neighborhood
23:28and I could go out of my apartment and my flat.
23:33I could go out of my apartment and I could play with any one of a dozen kids or more
23:43who were roaming around looking for stuff to do.
23:45And we did not have a central authority.
23:48We did not have an umpire.
23:50We didn't have any of that stuff at all.
23:51And we enforced our own rules.
23:57And how did we enforce our own rules?
23:59Ostracism.
24:01Which is if a kid didn't obey the rules,
24:03you know, we'd talk to him and say,
24:04man, you've got to obey the rules.
24:05If the kid still continued to cheat,
24:08we would break up the game
24:10and we would all whisper to meet somewhere else
24:11and then we would go and play without that kid.
24:17And if the kid apologized,
24:18whatever, I was having a bad day, I'm sorry,
24:21we'd give him another try.
24:22But in general, we would just work through ostracism.
24:26And if we were playing and that kid came along,
24:29we'd break up the game
24:30and whisper meet somewhere else,
24:32just ostracize.
24:35It's not super complicated.
24:39But because kids now are in these
24:41heavily structured environments, right?
24:43Like I remember, gosh, this has got to be
24:45like a quarter century ago.
24:47I remember one of my old bosses complaining
24:49that like when he was a kid,
24:51he just roamed around.
24:52But now his kids always have to go to an arcade.
24:55They've got to go to Chuck E. Cheese.
24:56They've got to go to a mall.
24:57They've got to go to a food court.
24:58They've got to go someplace
25:00where it's always 50 to 100 bucks,
25:03like everywhere they go.
25:05And in those places,
25:07the rules are enforced by machines or people.
25:13Right?
25:14I mean, if you've ever played the game Grounders,
25:16then you're supposed to not look.
25:19Right?
25:20Or Marco Polo in the pool.
25:22It was a great favorite of my daughters and I's
25:24when we were swimming when she was younger.
25:26So we get a game going of Marco Polo.
25:27Now, Marco Polo, the person who's it,
25:30says Marco and everyone else says Polo.
25:32And you're supposed to try and catch them without looking.
25:36Right?
25:37And if people looked, you'd see it.
25:40And if you're playing Grounders,
25:44where you're supposed to not look
25:47when you're chasing people,
25:50if you see someone looking,
25:52you say, hey, you're looking.
25:54And if they say, sorry,
25:55I was afraid I was going to run into the fence
25:56or something like that.
25:57Right?
25:57You have to have sort of a,
25:58if someone's running towards something dangerous,
26:00you say, whoa, stop, turn around.
26:01Right?
26:01But I clearly remember my daughter
26:05playing with some kids.
26:09Some kids we'd just met.
26:10We didn't, we never met them again.
26:12But I remember her trying to play Grounders
26:15and the person who was there was cheating.
26:20And so she stopped playing.
26:23And so this is how ostracism is,
26:28how rules get enforced.
26:32So, of course,
26:35because kids' activities now are so structured,
26:37centrally managed and controlled.
26:39So when I was a kid,
26:39and I write about this in my novel,
26:41Almost,
26:41which you should definitely check out
26:42at freedomain.com slash books,
26:44but I wrote about playing war.
26:49Or we'd have little made-up guns
26:53and maybe an old tennis ball and so on.
26:55But, you know,
26:56you'd shoot at someone and say,
26:57I got you.
26:58And they'd say, no, you missed.
26:59Right?
26:59And we'd have to find a way to resolve that.
27:02Now, that's very different
27:03than if you're playing Fortnite.
27:06Right?
27:06In Fortnite,
27:07you shoot someone
27:08and the computer controls
27:10whether you've hit them or not.
27:11They can't cheat.
27:13I mean, I know that there are cheats in the games,
27:15but in general,
27:16in the structure of programming of the game.
27:19It is not enforced
27:20by the participants.
27:23It's enforced by the server
27:25and the clients, right?
27:26The programming.
27:29That's how you determine
27:30whether or not somebody got hit
27:33in a game.
27:35Whereas when I was a kid,
27:36we had to enforce it verbally.
27:37Now,
27:38it's the same thing.
27:39We've always had this in tag, right?
27:41In tag,
27:42the question is,
27:43did you touch just the hair?
27:45Or did you touch
27:47just a scrap of clothing
27:48that was flying free?
27:49Or did you touch the actual person?
27:51These were all very important
27:52and interesting questions
27:54that we had to figure out
27:56how to answer, right?
28:00Whereas now, of course,
28:01everything's centrally enforced
28:02and kids have lost the idea
28:04that you can enforce rules
28:05without a central coercive authority
28:07through debate,
28:10argumentation,
28:11and ostracism.
28:12It was very effective.
28:13We had almost no cheating
28:15whatsoever
28:16when I was a kid.
28:21When we would go
28:22and play baseball,
28:24I played baseball
28:25and soccer
28:26on Saturdays and Sundays
28:28for years
28:29as a teenager
28:30that my friends and I
28:31would meet
28:31until we were no longer
28:33allowed to meet
28:33because they closed down
28:35the school
28:35soccer field.
28:37It's just terrible.
28:38Anyway,
28:38so we would meet
28:41and we would play
28:42soccer
28:44and we would play baseball.
28:46Saturdays was soccer,
28:48Sundays was baseball.
28:49It was great fun.
28:50Now,
28:51we didn't have any umpires.
28:54So,
28:54was somebody in?
28:56Did they slide in?
28:57Were they in?
28:58Right?
29:00Was it a foul ball?
29:01Right?
29:02Did somebody
29:04tackle unfairly?
29:05Did somebody pull?
29:06Did somebody hit them?
29:07Touch the ball
29:07with their hand
29:08like Maradona Hand
29:09of God style?
29:10We enforced
29:11all of this
29:11ourselves
29:13and it was not
29:15a problem.
29:17It was not a problem.
29:19Occasionally,
29:20we'd have arguments
29:20but it was not
29:23a problem.
29:25Right?
29:25So,
29:26we didn't have
29:26goals
29:28in soccer.
29:30We would just
29:31put two shoes
29:33a certain width
29:35apart.
29:35Now,
29:36did it go over
29:37the shoe?
29:37Was it in?
29:38I mean,
29:38we just
29:38would debate
29:39these things.
29:42And honestly,
29:44I mean,
29:44I played
29:45hundreds and
29:45hundreds of times
29:46both soccer
29:47and
29:48baseball
29:50with no umpires,
29:53no referees
29:55and I do not
29:58remember
29:59a single time
30:01when we
30:05couldn't resolve
30:07a dispute
30:07and I barely
30:08remember any
30:09disputes.
30:12Because generally,
30:14it sort of went
30:14like if one team
30:15was up,
30:16you know,
30:165-3
30:17and then there was a,
30:18the losing team
30:19had a sketchy goal,
30:20you just give it to them
30:21to make it more fun,
30:22make it more interesting.
30:23If the team that was up
30:245-3 or 5-2
30:25had a sketchy goal,
30:26they probably
30:27wouldn't take it
30:27because then it's
30:28like 6-2 or 6-3
30:29and it's less fun.
30:31Right, so,
30:31and it was the same
30:32thing with Dungeons
30:32and Dragons,
30:33right?
30:34Dungeons and Dragons
30:35is the ultimate
30:36open source
30:37do anything
30:37kind of game.
30:39You're not constricted
30:40really by anything
30:40and what's possible
30:42and what's allowable.
30:43We would have
30:43sometimes debates
30:44and arguments,
30:45but for the most part,
30:47I mean,
30:47I mentioned this once
30:49before,
30:49a friend of mine
30:49who was a ranger
30:50who was chaotic good
30:51hired an assassin
30:53to kill someone
30:56who was bothering,
30:57another player
30:57who was bothering him
30:58in the game
30:58and I was the dungeon master
31:00and I said,
31:00you lost your ranger abilities
31:01because hiring an assassin
31:02is immoral
31:04and so you can't be
31:07chaotic good,
31:07you've gone to chaotic neutral
31:08and maybe you can
31:10earn your way back
31:10and, you know,
31:11we had this big debate
31:12and this was one
31:13that was really,
31:14this one that we
31:15couldn't resolve
31:16and we ended up
31:16marching to
31:17a local library
31:18where a Gandalf-style
31:20elder player
31:21was supposed to
31:22help us resolve
31:23this dispute
31:24but I don't remember
31:26really what happened.
31:26Of course,
31:27it's like,
31:27gosh almighty,
31:28it's like almost
31:2940 years ago
31:30but other than
31:32that one time
31:33where I just
31:34wasn't going to
31:36back down,
31:36like that's just
31:37to me,
31:37hiring an assassin
31:38to kill someone
31:40who's not threatening
31:40you directly
31:41is evil
31:42and you lose
31:44your special abilities
31:48based upon you
31:49being good
31:50because rangers
31:50have to be good.
31:51So,
31:54other than that
31:54one time,
31:55one time in my
31:56whole childhood,
31:57I just,
31:57I wasn't going to
31:58back down,
31:58he didn't want to
31:58back down
31:59and I can't even
32:01remember what
32:01happened
32:01but I think
32:03we gave him,
32:04I think I ended up
32:05giving him the chance
32:05to rewind,
32:07to undo his action
32:08because we just
32:09couldn't continue
32:10forward otherwise
32:10I wasn't going to
32:11give up,
32:12he wasn't going to
32:12give up
32:12and I was the
32:16dungeon master
32:17so I wasn't going
32:17to give him his
32:18special abilities
32:19based upon being good
32:20and he didn't
32:21want to
32:21so I think
32:22I gave,
32:23I think finally
32:23after a week or
32:24two of not
32:25moving forward
32:26and everybody
32:27wanting to
32:27continue playing
32:28we ended up
32:29just having to
32:29undo that action
32:30if I remember
32:31rightly
32:31which,
32:32you know,
32:32whatever,
32:33not the end
32:33of the world.
32:34I mean,
32:34the point is
32:35to have fun,
32:35right?
32:35so I think
32:37because so many
32:39young people
32:41these days
32:41do not
32:42enforce their
32:43own rules
32:43they become
32:44quite delicate
32:45they're not
32:45very good
32:45at negotiating
32:47rules and
32:48how to enforce
32:49them
32:49and they're
32:52bad at
32:52ostracizing
32:53and so,
32:58I mean,
32:59bad at ostracizing
32:59means they
33:00either don't
33:01ostracize
33:01or they ostracize
33:02for the wrong
33:02reasons.
33:03I just wanted
33:04to sort of
33:05mention that
33:05there's a
33:06problem.
33:07Once you
33:08keep kids
33:09inside,
33:10once you
33:10don't let them
33:11roam the
33:11neighborhoods,
33:11once you
33:12don't let
33:12themselves
33:12organize
33:13their own
33:13games,
33:14they become
33:15less accepting
33:17of the concept
33:17of freedom
33:18because they
33:18just haven't
33:19lived it.
33:20How are we
33:20going to
33:20enforce rules
33:21in the absence
33:23of a centralized
33:24coercive authority?
33:26How are we
33:27possibly going
33:27to enforce rules
33:28in the absence
33:29of a centralized
33:29coercive authority?
33:31Well,
33:32if you've
33:33done it
33:34for years
33:34as a kid,
33:35it's not
33:36even really
33:36a question.
33:37If kids
33:39can do it
33:39at the age
33:39of six
33:40or seven
33:40or eight,
33:41if kids
33:42can enforce
33:42their rules
33:43in the absence
33:43of a centralized
33:44coercive authority
33:44without
33:45umpires
33:51and referees
33:53and adults
33:54enforcing things
33:55and so on,
33:57then it's fine.
34:01Now,
34:02the other thing
34:03of course
34:03is that
34:03if you've
34:04ever been
34:04around fist
34:05fights,
34:06that's another
34:06way in which
34:07rules tend
34:08to get
34:08pretty robustly
34:10enforced.
34:10I've only seen
34:11one or two
34:11of these
34:12over the course
34:12of my life
34:12and I've never
34:13been in a fist
34:14fight myself,
34:14but how
34:19do the rules
34:19get enforced?
34:19What are the
34:20rules?
34:20Well,
34:20no eye
34:21gouging,
34:21no biting,
34:23no punching
34:25in the groin
34:25or kicking
34:26in the groin
34:26and no
34:30continuing
34:31to attack
34:32when the
34:33other kid
34:34is not
34:35fighting back
34:35or is
34:36surrendered
34:36or cried
34:36uncle
34:37or whatever.
34:38So those
34:39are the
34:39general rules
34:40and how
34:41are they
34:41enforced?
34:42Well,
34:42there's not
34:43a referee
34:44in the way
34:45that there is
34:45in a boxing
34:45match.
34:46So how
34:47are the rules
34:47enforced?
34:48Well,
34:49the rules
34:51are enforced
34:51by the other
34:52kids,
34:52by a sense
34:52of honor,
34:53by a sense
34:53of you
34:54don't want
34:54it,
34:54like mutualism,
34:55right?
34:56So the
34:56reason why
34:56you say
34:57we're not
34:57going to
34:59punch in
35:00the groin
35:00is because
35:01nobody wants
35:02to get
35:02punched in
35:02the groin.
35:02So you
35:03just keep
35:03that eye
35:04gouged.
35:04And generally
35:05you avoid
35:06permanent
35:06damage,
35:07right?
35:07Because
35:07permanent
35:07damage
35:08involves
35:09parents and
35:10doctors and
35:11police and
35:13like,
35:13so you
35:13have a
35:14fight and
35:14covered in
35:15dust and
35:16glory,
35:17as the
35:17old statement
35:18from Mark
35:19Twain goes.
35:20So yeah,
35:21there's those
35:21kinds of
35:21fights that
35:22happen and
35:24so on,
35:25right?
35:25so the
35:29bro code is
35:30another thing
35:31that gets
35:31enforced.
35:32If I talk
35:32about I
35:33really like
35:34this girl,
35:34then it
35:35probably is
35:35not particularly
35:36nice for my
35:37friend to
35:38go and make
35:38a play for
35:38her and
35:38try and get
35:39her to date
35:41him or go
35:41out with
35:41him instead,
35:42right?
35:42That's not
35:43considered nice
35:50or good,
35:51right?
35:52Swooping in
35:53and taking
35:53away,
35:54right?
35:54And again,
35:54how are
35:54these enforced,
35:55right?
35:55There's no
35:56dating police
35:57that throw
35:57people in
35:58jail and
35:58so on,
35:58right?
35:59So
35:59unfortunately
36:00because
36:01children are
36:03kind of,
36:03you know,
36:04cocooning,
36:05right?
36:05Locked in
36:05home because
36:06of low
36:07trust society,
36:07right?
36:07So because
36:08kids are
36:09cocooned and
36:11with their
36:11video games and
36:12so on,
36:14they don't know
36:15how to resolve
36:15disputes and
36:17they don't know
36:17how to enforce
36:18rules in the
36:19absence of
36:19centralized
36:20authority.
36:22And so
36:23when I see
36:24people,
36:25and it's just
36:26my particular
36:26way of looking
36:27at it,
36:27right?
36:28I think there's
36:28value in it.
36:29I just sort of
36:29made the case.
36:30But when I see
36:31people who say
36:31I have no
36:33idea how
36:35rules can be
36:35enforced without
36:37centralized
36:38coercive
36:38authority,
36:40well,
36:41I simply,
36:42I know for a
36:43fact that they
36:44didn't get out
36:44much as kids.
36:47But they didn't
36:47roam a
36:48neighborhood and
36:48they,
36:49and they
36:50didn't figure
36:51out how to
36:52enforce rules
36:53without parents
36:54or gym
36:55teachers or
36:56referees or
36:57whatever around.
36:58So that's
37:03what I know.
37:06Because I
37:06myself,
37:07as have
37:07others who
37:08grew up in
37:09my generation
37:09or particularly
37:10in sort of
37:11where I grew
37:12up,
37:12we all knew
37:12how to enforce
37:13rules without
37:15centralized
37:16authority.
37:16and it's
37:19sort of like
37:20it's the
37:20education
37:21question.
37:22Like,
37:22why,
37:23why,
37:24you know,
37:25without the
37:25government
37:26forcing kids
37:26to do
37:27X,
37:28Y,
37:28and Z,
37:28you know,
37:29nobody will
37:29be educated.
37:30But the
37:31problem is,
37:32of course,
37:32that the
37:33government forces
37:34kids to do
37:35stuff that the
37:35kids don't want
37:36to do,
37:36that they're not
37:37interested in,
37:37that they're not
37:38good at,
37:38that they'll never
37:39be good at,
37:39that they'll never
37:40be interested in,
37:41and that they
37:41never want to do
37:42for a living.
37:44Right?
37:44I said this before,
37:45but I remember
37:46my guidance
37:48counselor when I
37:50was a kid,
37:50right?
37:52It was very funny
37:52because my
37:53guidance counselor
37:54was,
37:57well,
37:58first of all,
37:58he had this
37:58tiny little office
37:59with no windows
38:00back behind the
38:01main office,
38:02and it's like,
38:03why would I take
38:03guidance advice,
38:05like,
38:05why would I take
38:05career advice from
38:06somebody who ended
38:07up as a guidance
38:07counselor in this
38:08little shelf closet,
38:10like utility closet,
38:11with a tiny desk,
38:12like,
38:13you're back here,
38:14but I also remember
38:15talking to him,
38:18and he had a
38:20poster behind his
38:22desk,
38:22which was like,
38:23here are all the
38:24things,
38:24if you drop math,
38:25here are all the
38:25professions you
38:26can't do,
38:28accountant,
38:30mathematician,
38:31and it was like,
38:31there was a whole
38:32list of all of the
38:33jobs you couldn't do
38:34if you drop math,
38:34and I'm like,
38:35yeah,
38:35I'm good with that,
38:35I don't want to be
38:37any of those things.
38:39And of course,
38:40I think that was
38:40computer scientist
38:41up there,
38:42computer programmer,
38:43which,
38:43you know,
38:43was a total lie,
38:45like,
38:45that's not,
38:46that wasn't an issue
38:48or a problem at all,
38:49I became a computer
38:50programmer,
38:51quite an expert one,
38:52without a lot of
38:54math stuff,
38:55because computer
38:56programming is much
38:57more about logic
38:57than it is about
38:58math.
39:00So,
39:01when it comes to
39:06school,
39:07they make you do
39:08a whole bunch of
39:08stuff that you
39:09don't want to do.
39:10I mean,
39:11I remember,
39:11of course,
39:11I had to learn
39:12French in school,
39:15and I didn't
39:18want to learn
39:18French.
39:19And the reason I
39:20didn't want to
39:20learn French is
39:21because I'd much
39:22rather get better
39:22at English,
39:24because I knew,
39:24I mean,
39:25I knew how good
39:26I was at English,
39:27and I had some
39:28sense of how long
39:29it was going to
39:29take me to get
39:29good at French,
39:30right?
39:31And it was a long
39:32time,
39:32right?
39:32so I didn't
39:35want to learn
39:37to speak French
39:37because I also
39:38knew that I
39:39wasn't going to
39:40have much of
39:40an opportunity
39:41to speak French.
39:45And what's the
39:46point of learning
39:46something if you
39:47can't practice it?
39:49Right?
39:49It doesn't make
39:50any sense.
39:51I mean,
39:52when I was taught
39:53how to play
39:54tennis well,
39:54I went and
39:55practiced,
39:56right?
39:57Of course,
39:58of course I did,
39:58right?
39:58And so what's
40:01the point of
40:01someone teaching
40:02you how to
40:03play tennis and
40:04then you don't
40:04pick up a racket
40:05for 10 years?
40:06You just forget
40:06it all.
40:07And it's even
40:07more true with
40:09language memory
40:10than it is with
40:10muscle memory,
40:11like the riding
40:11the bike thing.
40:12I still remember
40:12how to ride a
40:13bike.
40:15So all of that
40:17stuff drove me
40:18kind of nuts.
40:19And so saying,
40:20well, kids don't
40:21want to be educated,
40:22therefore we have
40:23to have the
40:23government force
40:23them to be
40:24educated,
40:24it's like,
40:25no, no, no,
40:25the kids don't
40:26want to be educated
40:27because government
40:28education sucks
40:30vacuum and blows
40:30into galactic
40:31chunks.
40:32It sucks.
40:35What was there,
40:35some study,
40:36some study like
40:37over 95% of the
40:39stuff you learn
40:40in school you've
40:41forgotten and
40:41never use again?
40:42I mean,
40:43outside of reading,
40:44writing, and
40:44arithmetic,
40:44sort of the basics,
40:45it's wretched.
40:47It's even worse
40:48now that it's
40:49like psychological
40:51abuse,
40:52woke garbage.
40:53It's even worse.
40:55So saying,
40:56well, you know,
40:56we have to have
40:57the government
40:57force kids to
40:58be educated
40:59because kids
40:59don't want to
40:59be educated.
41:00It's like,
41:00well, of course
41:01they don't want
41:01to be educated
41:01because government
41:02education sucks.
41:04All right.
41:05Should we do
41:06one more?
41:07Yeah, I think
41:08we'll do.
41:09We'll do one more.
41:09What have we got
41:10here?
41:12All right,
41:14so what have we
41:15got here?
41:17One of the
41:18key problems
41:18anarcho-capitalists
41:19fail to address
41:20is the problem
41:21of consent,
41:21so you don't
41:21have to address
41:22it.
41:23You just have
41:23to say the
41:24initiation of the
41:24use of force
41:25is immoral
41:25and we own
41:26ourself
41:26and the
41:26effects of
41:27our actions.
41:29All right,
41:29they tend to
41:30have an
41:30extremely narrow
41:30definition of
41:31what constitutes
41:31consent,
41:32and I find
41:33that they
41:33often show
41:34double standards
41:34when it comes
41:35to the
41:35application of
41:35their definition
41:36of consent.
41:37Excellent.
41:37All right.
41:38A very lazy
41:39critique of the
41:39NCAP position
41:40is that they
41:41don't like
41:41taxation in the
41:42state,
41:42then maybe
41:43they should
41:43just leave
41:43and go to
41:44Somalia.
41:44Isn't that
41:44the definition
41:45of paradise?
41:46They rightly
41:46point out that
41:47this is a
41:47ridiculous ask
41:48and that the
41:49onus should not
41:49be on them
41:50to leave,
41:50given how costly
41:51that would
41:51be.
41:53What they're
41:54doing here,
41:55often without
41:55realizing,
41:56is approaching
41:56John Simmons
41:57conditions for
41:58voluntary consent.
41:59The important
41:59conditions Simmons
42:00highlights are
42:02that for consent
42:02to be voluntary,
42:04and surely
42:04that's inherent
42:05in the concept
42:05of consent,
42:07dissent must be
42:07possible and the
42:08cost of that
42:09dissent must not
42:09be prohibitively
42:10high.
42:11The way in which
42:12NCAPs can use
42:13this as a defense
42:14is that you
42:14cannot refuse,
42:15for example,
42:15to pay taxes
42:15without being
42:16incarcerated,
42:17and nor can
42:18you realistically
42:18opt out of
42:19the state by
42:19leaving,
42:20given attachments
42:20such as
42:21family,
42:21job,
42:22friends,
42:22property,
42:22etc.,
42:23and exit
42:24taxes.
42:25Thus it is
42:26inaccurate to
42:26say that
42:27existing within
42:27a state
42:27constitutes
42:28consent,
42:29and that
42:29there are
42:29viable
42:29options for
42:30dissent.
42:32Now,
42:32so far,
42:32we've seen
42:33how NCAPs
42:34can defend
42:34their use
42:34of state
42:35infrastructure
42:35and benefits
42:35while maintaining
42:37their opposition
42:37to the existence
42:38of the state,
42:38but how do
42:39these same
42:39arguments work
42:41against NCAPs?
42:42According to
42:42NCAPs,
42:43a stateless
42:43and archocapital
42:44society would
42:44be a society
42:45based on free
42:46transactions and
42:47relations between
42:47consenting
42:48individuals.
42:49there would
42:51be no state
42:51to coerce
42:51people through
42:52taxation or
42:52whatever,
42:53and economic
42:53relations would
42:55essentially be
42:55equal relations
42:56between buyer
42:56and seller.
42:57The reality is
42:58that this is
42:58nonsense.
43:00Okay.
43:01All right.
43:01Oh, yes.
43:02Nonsense.
43:02That's a great
43:03argument.
43:05In an
43:05NCAP society,
43:07there would
43:08exist still
43:08the class
43:08divide between
43:09those who
43:09own and
43:10control the
43:10means of
43:10production
43:11and those
43:11who don't,
43:12the bourgeoisie
43:13and the
43:14workers.
43:14Nope.
43:15Absolutely
43:16artificial
43:16distinction.
43:17Total
43:17bullshit.
43:19Absolutely
43:19artificial
43:21distinction.
43:22So,
43:23I own
43:24the means
43:25of production
43:25in that
43:26I own
43:27myself,
43:28I own
43:28my voice,
43:28I own
43:29my mind,
43:29and I own
43:30the arguments
43:31that I put
43:32forward.
43:32I am responsible
43:33for the arguments
43:33that I put
43:34forward,
43:35which is why
43:35when people
43:35didn't like
43:36my arguments,
43:36they canceled
43:37me,
43:37because they
43:37recognized that
43:38I was responsible
43:39for my
43:40arguments,
43:41therefore I
43:41should be
43:41canceled,
43:42right?
43:43So,
43:44the means
43:45of production
43:46is your
43:46own body,
43:48right?
43:49Your own
43:50body is the
43:51means of
43:51production,
43:52and that's
43:52foundational.
43:54So,
43:54everybody owns
43:55the means of
43:55production,
43:56everybody owns
43:57their own body,
43:58everybody owns
43:58the effects of
43:59their actions,
43:59is responsible
44:00for what
44:00they create
44:01or don't
44:01create in the
44:02world.
44:03So,
44:05the idea
44:06that there's
44:07this massive
44:07divide between
44:08the workers
44:08and those
44:09who owns
44:10the means
44:10of production,
44:10nope,
44:11not at all,
44:13not at all.
44:16Everybody owns
44:16the means of
44:17production,
44:18which is
44:18their own
44:19bodies.
44:20Okay,
44:20so,
44:21let's see here.
44:24The bourgeoisie
44:25and the workers.
44:26Now,
44:26according to
44:27the anarcho-capitalist
44:28account,
44:28this wouldn't
44:29matter because
44:29the relationship
44:30between buyer
44:31and seller,
44:31bourgeois and
44:31worker,
44:32would be equal.
44:33If a worker
44:34does not like
44:34the terms of
44:35recompense
44:35offered to her
44:38by her potential
44:39employer,
44:39she needn't
44:39take the job.
44:40However,
44:41we know that
44:41there is a
44:42massive difference
44:42in negotiating
44:43power and
44:43option between
44:44the worker
44:44and the
44:44capitalist.
44:47The worker
44:47in a stateless
44:48society has no
44:48choice but to
44:49accept the
44:49terms offered
44:49by potential
44:50employers.
44:50Why?
44:53Why?
44:56The worker
44:57in a stateless
44:57society has no
44:58choice but to
44:59accept the
44:59terms offered
45:00by potential
45:00employers.
45:01Now,
45:01these are just
45:02doofus,
45:05spotty behind
45:05city dwellers,
45:06frankly.
45:07It's all
45:08foolish nonsense.
45:09So,
45:11again,
45:13one of the
45:13great benefits
45:14I had when I
45:15was working up
45:15north was
45:16seeing just
45:17how much
45:17unowned land
45:18there is.
45:18It's crazy.
45:20I mean,
45:20I know it's
45:20sort of controlled
45:21by the government
45:21and this,
45:22that,
45:22and the other,
45:22but the
45:23unowned land
45:24situation is
45:25wild.
45:26Wild.
45:29I mean,
45:2990% of
45:30Canadians are
45:31huddled along
45:31the US-Canada
45:32border,
45:33right?
45:33So,
45:34there are
45:35absolutely
45:36staggering amounts
45:37of unowned
45:37land.
45:38Now,
45:38of course,
45:38in a
45:39stateless
45:40society,
45:41you can just
45:41hightail it
45:42out of there
45:42and you
45:44can get
45:46your own
45:46land going,
45:48right?
45:48I mean,
45:49people will
45:49lend you,
45:50they'll lend
45:50money to you
45:51if you needed
45:51money to get
45:51started,
45:52but a lot
45:52of people,
45:52most people
45:53didn't in the
45:53past,
45:54right?
45:54And so,
45:55those people
45:56would go
46:00and start
46:01their own
46:01land,
46:02right?
46:04So,
46:05that's a
46:05possibility.
46:06Of course,
46:07you can start
46:07your own
46:08side hustle,
46:08right?
46:09So,
46:10when I
46:12was a
46:12kid,
46:12I did
46:13typing for
46:14people,
46:14or I put
46:14that up.
46:15I remember
46:15I would go
46:16and wallpaper
46:17because I had
46:17an electric
46:18typewriter and
46:18I wanted to
46:19practice my
46:19typing.
46:20So,
46:20I put up,
46:21I will type
46:22your stuff,
46:23right?
46:23and I
46:25remember I
46:25ended up
46:26typing out
46:26somebody's
46:27entire
46:27PhD thesis
46:29and made
46:30a good
46:30deal of
46:31money for
46:31that,
46:31right?
46:32So,
46:32you can
46:33put yourself
46:34out as,
46:35you can
46:35shovel
46:36sidewalks
46:37and driveways
46:38of snow,
46:39you can
46:39mow lawns,
46:40right?
46:41And all
46:41of that,
46:42right?
46:42So,
46:43I mean,
46:43with regards
46:44to the
46:44shoveling,
46:44you need
46:45a $20
46:46shovel and
46:47that's it,
46:47right?
46:49So,
46:50the idea
46:50that if
46:51you're not
46:52offered a
46:55job,
46:55you can't
46:55make any
46:56money,
46:57it's crazy.
46:58I've never
46:58understood that
46:59at all.
46:59My first
47:00job was
47:00painting plaques
47:01for the
47:01Queen's
47:02Silver Jubilee
47:02in 1977
47:03when I was
47:0410 years
47:05old and
47:06we needed
47:08some paint
47:09and some
47:10paintbrushes,
47:12some paint
47:12and we
47:12painted it
47:13and we
47:13made that,
47:13right?
47:14So,
47:14I don't
47:14know,
47:15like,
47:15why would
47:15you,
47:15why?
47:16This is
47:16just people
47:16who've
47:17never,
47:17they have
47:17no
47:17entrepreneurial
47:18bone in
47:19their body
47:19so they
47:19can't imagine
47:20that there's
47:20anything other
47:21than being a
47:21worker and
47:22being an
47:23employer.
47:24I mean,
47:24my whole
47:25gig here
47:26has been,
47:27well,
47:27I got sick
47:28and tired
47:28of the
47:29business
47:29world for
47:29a variety
47:30of reasons
47:30and so I
47:31became my
47:32own boss,
47:33right?
47:34I was not
47:34happy,
47:35particularly happy
47:36as a
47:36COBOL programmer
47:37for a large
47:38Canadian
47:39financial
47:39institution
47:40so I
47:41co-founded
47:41a software
47:41company
47:42and did
47:42that.
47:44So,
47:44the idea
47:45that,
47:45well,
47:46if you
47:47can't get
47:47a job,
47:48you starve,
47:49I don't
47:50know,
47:50it's just,
47:51I don't,
47:51I'm just,
47:51like,
47:52have you never
47:53known anyone
47:53who's had a
47:54hustle as a
47:55kid,
47:56right?
47:56I mean,
47:57a friend of
47:57mine used
47:58to,
47:58well,
47:58I remember
47:59when I
48:00was in
48:01pretty young,
48:03you know,
48:03in my,
48:03I don't know,
48:03early,
48:04mid-teens,
48:05I lined up
48:06overnight and
48:06I bought
48:0710 tickets
48:08to Michael
48:10Jackson
48:10and then
48:11I sold
48:12them
48:12and made
48:15some money.
48:16So,
48:17I don't know,
48:17I mean,
48:18it's just strange
48:19to me that,
48:21it's like,
48:22do you not know
48:22anyone who's an
48:23entrepreneur?
48:23Do you not know
48:24any kids who
48:24have a side
48:25hustle?
48:25Like,
48:26that's totally
48:26nerdy,
48:27right?
48:27All right,
48:28I mean,
48:31I weeded
48:31gardens for
48:32people,
48:33for money,
48:34right?
48:34There are job
48:35boards,
48:35you can just
48:35go and get
48:36temporary jobs,
48:37you don't,
48:37right?
48:38All right,
48:38the worker
48:40in a state
48:40of society
48:40has no
48:41choice but
48:41to accept
48:42the terms
48:42offered by
48:42potential
48:43employers.
48:44They have
48:44the choice
48:45between
48:45employment
48:45and
48:45starvation.
48:46And this
48:47is also
48:47sad because
48:48what it
48:48tells me
48:48is that
48:49they have
48:49parents
48:50who have
48:51no imagination
48:52whatsoever,
48:53right?
48:53So that
48:54means,
48:54I would
48:54imagine
48:54for the
48:55most part
48:56these are
48:56parents
48:56who complain
48:57about their
48:58bosses
48:58and are
48:59too lazy
49:00or dumb
49:01or indifferent
49:02or whatever
49:04to start
49:05their own
49:05jobs,
49:06to get
49:06their own
49:06hustle going,
49:07right?
49:07So,
49:09I mean,
49:10if you
49:11make this
49:11case,
49:12which,
49:12you know,
49:12it's a very
49:13sort of low
49:14rent,
49:14limited thought
49:16case,
49:16right?
49:16So if you
49:17make this
49:17case,
49:19your parents
49:19should say,
49:20no,
49:21no,
49:21of course,
49:21you can start
49:23your own
49:24business,
49:24you can farm
49:25your own
49:25land,
49:25you can
49:26get together
49:28with a bunch
49:29of people
49:29and start up
49:30something,
49:31you can,
49:33you know,
49:33I mean,
49:33there's a guy
49:34who started
49:34with a paperclip
49:35and ended
49:35up buying
49:35a house,
49:36right?
49:37You can
49:37take,
49:38you can,
49:38I mean,
49:39I,
49:40when I was
49:41in my early
49:42teens,
49:42I had a paper
49:43route and I
49:45would hustle to
49:46get more
49:46people to
49:47order the
49:48newspaper so
49:49that I could
49:49make more
49:50money,
49:50right?
49:50I didn't
49:52need to put
49:52out any
49:52money for
49:53that.
49:55Okay.
49:56They have
49:57the choice
49:57between
49:58employment
49:58and starvation,
50:00right?
50:00I mean,
50:01it's sad.
50:02I mean,
50:02have you never,
50:03I mean,
50:04have you never
50:04heard of any
50:05entrepreneurs or
50:05any kids with
50:06side hustles?
50:06That just tells
50:07me that you
50:07move in a
50:07very dull,
50:09witted circle.
50:10The objection
50:11to this is
50:12that starvation
50:13is a natural
50:13risk not imposed
50:14by the
50:14capitalists,
50:14but that's
50:15irrelevant.
50:15What is
50:15relevant is
50:16that on
50:17Simmons'
50:17account,
50:17there is no
50:17possibility for
50:18dissent on
50:19the workers'
50:19part as the
50:19cost is death
50:20or destitution.
50:22Yeah.
50:23I mean,
50:24I would go
50:25around offering
50:26as a kid.
50:27I was like,
50:28I don't know,
50:29seven or eight.
50:29I would go
50:29around to
50:31people's houses
50:31and ask them
50:33if they had
50:34any recycles
50:34or stuff to
50:35take back
50:36and all of
50:36that.
50:37There's tons
50:38of stuff you
50:38can do.
50:39My gosh.
50:41It is perverse
50:42then to say
50:43that an
50:43anarcho-capital
50:44society would
50:44be a free
50:45society.
50:45It would be
50:46a society in
50:46which those
50:46lucky enough
50:48to own capital
50:48and property
50:49would be free.
50:50Well,
50:51the vast majority
50:52of people
50:52would be
50:52the most
50:53of the
50:53property
50:53classes.
50:55For me,
50:55personally,
50:56that's one
50:56of the
50:56more compelling
50:57criticisms
50:57of anarcho-capitalism.
50:59If you want
50:59more erudite,
51:00blah,
51:00blah,
51:00blah,
51:01G.A.
51:01Cohen.
51:01All right.
51:03So,
51:04that's wild.
51:06You're just lucky.
51:07You're just lucky
51:07to own capital.
51:08You just happen
51:10to be fortunate
51:12to have that.
51:14It's just pure luck.
51:15It's like winning
51:15the lottery.
51:16That's crazy.
51:17Now,
51:18what he's saying
51:19is that
51:21those who have
51:22more power
51:23exploit those
51:24who have less
51:24power.
51:26Right?
51:26So,
51:26the big problem
51:27here,
51:27you see,
51:28is those evil
51:30capitalists who
51:31just happened
51:32to luckily
51:33have a factory
51:34fall in their
51:35lap.
51:35They didn't work
51:36for it.
51:36They didn't earn
51:36for it.
51:37They didn't
51:37sacrifice anything
51:38for it.
51:39Right?
51:39I mean,
51:39I built two
51:42major businesses
51:43in my life
51:45and I've
51:47participated
51:47in the sale
51:48of three
51:49corporations
51:49and I can tell
51:51you that the
51:52people who start
51:52these corporations,
51:53I know this
51:54from personally,
51:54they work very
51:55hard.
51:55They take a huge
51:56amount of risks
51:56and,
51:58you know,
51:58I've said this
51:59before but I
52:00remember having
52:00to sign
52:01for payroll,
52:03having to sign
52:04payroll that I
52:05would be
52:05personally liable,
52:06not the corporation,
52:07I would be
52:07personally liable
52:08for payroll.
52:10And that was
52:10pretty alarming
52:11in my late 20s
52:12because it was
52:13a staggering
52:14amount of money
52:15that I would be
52:16and a few other
52:17people would be
52:17liable for if the
52:19business didn't
52:19make it.
52:20Then I would have
52:21spent years paying
52:22off, that sort of
52:23stuff.
52:23So, yeah,
52:24it's a lot of work,
52:26it's alarming,
52:26it's risky and
52:28also you get no
52:29money for the first,
52:30I think for the
52:31first two years of
52:33the business,
52:33I made almost
52:34nothing and it
52:35started to get
52:36better after that.
52:37So, yeah,
52:38and of course this
52:39business for whatever
52:40we want to call it,
52:42so he's saying
52:44that those who
52:46are in possession
52:47of the means
52:49of production,
52:50which is almost
52:51accidental,
52:52right,
52:53if people don't
52:54understand because
52:54they haven't
52:55started business,
52:55like why would I
52:56listen to the
52:56economy?
52:58Why would I
52:58listen to anything
52:59about the economy
53:00from people who've
53:00never started a
53:01business?
53:01I mean, it's all
53:04just theoretical
53:05nonsense, honestly.
53:08I mean, I
53:09remember, who
53:10was it, Tom
53:11Wolfe was
53:12complaining about,
53:14was it John
53:15Irving, son of a
53:16circus or something
53:17like that, John
53:17Irving wrote an
53:18entire novel set in
53:19India and he'd
53:20never been to
53:20India.
53:22Like, foundationally,
53:24why would I
53:24listen to dating
53:25advice from someone
53:26who's never asked a
53:26woman out on a
53:27date?
53:28Why would I
53:29listen to diet
53:30advice from a
53:30fat, unhealthy
53:31guy?
53:33Why would I
53:33listen to exercise
53:34advice from a
53:36skinny, fat guy
53:37with no muscles?
53:38Like, I just
53:38wouldn't.
53:40So, why would I
53:41listen to people
53:42talking about
53:42employers and
53:44employees and
53:45bourgeois and
53:45proletariat and
53:46like if they've
53:47never started a
53:47business, if they've
53:48never actually
53:48started a business?
53:51Because they're
53:52talking about
53:53things they've
53:53never experienced.
53:54It's all bullshit,
53:55nonsense, book
53:56learning.
53:57Dusty-brained
53:58idiocy, frankly.
54:01Like, why would
54:01I, I have no
54:03interest in
54:04listening to
54:05people about the
54:07relationships between
54:08workers and
54:09bosses and, you
54:10know, calling them
54:11the workers and
54:12then there's this
54:12bourgeoisie is
54:13itself a kind of
54:15slander, right?
54:16I mean, listen,
54:17man, this is the
54:19truth and if you
54:20don't know this or
54:21believe this, it's
54:21because you've
54:22never done it.
54:22Nobody works
54:23harder than an
54:23entrepreneur.
54:25Nobody works
54:26harder than an
54:27entrepreneur and
54:29so calling the
54:29entrepreneurs just
54:30accidental owners of
54:31the means of
54:32production, but
54:33they're workers.
54:34Like, that's just,
54:35I don't even know
54:36what to say about it.
54:37It was just
54:38completely insulting
54:39and full of
54:40resentment and
54:40sophistry, right?
54:42The, I mean, I
54:43can't even tell you
54:44the numbers of
54:45times I would work
54:46overnight, like I
54:48would work all
54:48night through the
54:49next morning alone
54:50because the
54:51employees, my
54:52employees had gone
54:53home.
54:53And I have no
54:55particular grudge
54:57about that, but
55:00that's what you
55:00do.
55:02I mean, that's
55:03what you have to
55:03do if you want to
55:04make it as an
55:05entrepreneur, for
55:06the most part.
55:06I mean, maybe
55:07there's some
55:07exceptions here and
55:08there, but, I
55:09mean, look at
55:09Elon Musk.
55:10Elon Musk works
55:11like seven days a
55:11week, 12 hours a
55:12day, God
55:12knows, right?
55:14Taking time off
55:15to impregnate
55:16randos from
55:18Twitter, but he's a
55:20crazy hard worker.
55:21Is it just luck?
55:23No.
55:23He's brilliant, and
55:25he's principled, and
55:26he's very hard
55:27working.
55:29And entrepreneurs
55:29have to be
55:30principled, otherwise
55:30they don't get the
55:31kind of social and
55:32economic trust that
55:33is very efficient.
55:36So, what this
55:37person is saying is
55:38a very common
55:38argument, is they're
55:39saying, hey, look,
55:40man, look, it's a
55:42fact that those who
55:44have more power
55:45exploit those who
55:46have less power.
55:47Okay, what about
55:48the state?
55:50What about
55:50politicians?
55:51What about the
55:52agents of the
55:52state?
55:53What about
55:54government as a
55:55whole?
55:56Does it have
55:57more power over
55:59you than your
56:01average entrepreneur?
56:02Who has more
56:03power over you?
56:04This is what drives
56:05me crazy about this
56:06stuff.
56:07It's just so, I
56:08don't know how
56:09people can't
56:09possibly see this.
56:10It's absolutely
56:11wild to me.
56:12Well, you know,
56:13your boss, you can
56:14work for him or
56:15not, you can start
56:15your own business,
56:16you can go and
56:16farm your own
56:17land, you can have
56:18a side hustle, you
56:19can do import,
56:21export, there's a
56:21bunch of stuff you
56:22can do.
56:23You don't need much
56:23capital, if any, to
56:24get started.
56:25But you see, your
56:26boss is exploiting you
56:28and the way that you
56:29stop your boss from
56:30exploiting you, even
56:31though you don't have
56:31to work for him, you
56:32can work for anyone,
56:33you can start your own
56:33business, or you can
56:36live with your parents
56:37and save up money or
56:39whatever it is, you
56:40can try and convince
56:40your parents' friends
56:41to invest in your big
56:44idea or whatever.
56:44So, your boss, who
56:46has no coercive power
56:48over you whatsoever,
56:50your boss is a really
56:51dangerous exploiter,
56:53because there's a power
56:55mismatch, right?
56:56But the state is
56:57totally safe.
56:59So, people who are
57:01potentially writing you
57:02a paycheck, incredibly
57:03dangerous.
57:04They will mess you up,
57:05man.
57:05They will just control
57:06and exploit and bully
57:07you.
57:08But the people with all
57:09the guns in the known
57:09universe and the power
57:10to create money at will
57:11and throw you in jail
57:12virtually at will,
57:13oh, they're totally
57:14safe.
57:14I mean, it's so
57:17bizarre.
57:18It's so bizarre.
57:19So, anyway, I hope
57:20this is helpful.
57:22freedomain.com slash
57:22donate.
57:23We're getting close to
57:23the end of the month,
57:24and if you could help
57:24out the show, I'd
57:25really appreciate it.
57:26I hope that you enjoy
57:28what it is that I'm
57:29doing, and if there's
57:29anything I can do
57:30better or differently,
57:31I would love to hear.
57:32You can email me,
57:33host at freedomain.com,
57:34and lots of love from
57:35up here.
57:36Talk to you soon.
57:36Bye.
57:37Bye.
57:37Bye.
57:37Bye.
57:37Bye.
57:38Bye.
57:38Bye.
57:38Bye.
57:39Bye.
57:39Bye.
57:39Bye.
57:39Bye.
57:40Bye.
57:40Bye.
57:40Bye.
57:40Bye.
57:40Bye.
57:41Bye.
57:41Bye.
57:41Bye.
57:42Bye.
57:42Bye.
57:42Bye.
57:42Bye.
57:42Bye.
57:42Bye.
57:43Bye.
57:43Bye.
57:43Bye.
57:43Bye.
57:44Bye.
57:44Bye.
57:44Bye.
57:45Bye.
57:45Bye.
57:45Bye.
57:45Bye.
57:46Bye.
57:46Bye.
Be the first to comment