Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 12, 2012 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

01:14:45

2122 Liberty Chat 2012 Hosted by Stefan Molyneux, Host of Freedomain Radio

Stefan Molyneux, host of Freedomain Radio, takes listener questions from http://www.libertychat.com.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	It's too darn fast.
	Okay, do I think a Draganian philosophy is worth the cost?
	And more specifically, what effects could the coming economic collapse have on the average student who is in debt with federal loans?
	The philosophy that I studied was very helpful to me because it's about clear thinking, it's about clear communication, it's about presentation, it's about organization of thought, so it's good.
	The problem, of course, is that in business, when profitability begins to shrink, when business timeframes begin to shrink, Then people are looking for you to hit the ground running and to make as much money for them as possible,
	as quickly as possible. And what happens then is that you You're not generally nurtured or mentored to apply your general abstract skills to specific abilities.
	So my concern would be that you'd be a really good employee, but it would take a while to groom you in a more specific position.
	So that would be, I think, the challenge.
	When the economy is good, I think an arts degree is really good.
	When the economy is bad, they're looking for people who can just hit the ground running.
	That doesn't get you so much with the arts degree, which kind of trains you for management a little bit more.
	So that would be my completely useless suggestion.
	Do I believe that an electronic currency is worse than a paper one, which will cause inflation faster than the other?
	Well, you see, you're kind of missing the key criteria for currency there, which is voluntarism.
	The important thing is that the currency is voluntary.
	If the currency is voluntary, then you will have a variety of people providing you currency.
	It's the same way that you have a variety of people providing you currency.
	Internet access or cell phone access and those people will really want to work with each other to make sure the currencies are translated invisibly behind the scenes to whatever you want.
	Once you have voluntarism, it really doesn't matter whether it's paper, gold, electronic or a bag full of badger nipples.
	It doesn't really matter. What matters is that it's voluntary and people are striving to provide quality In the provision of currency, you know, where you have a monopoly, particularly a monopoly of fiat currency, you get general social collapse.
	Always, always, always.
	Once you have a voluntary situation, then it doesn't really matter what form the currency takes.
	The people who provide the currency are going to want to give you two, count them, two things.
	The two things they're going to want to give you are number one.
	Stability in the value of the currency and number two, which is related, of course, is stability in interest rates.
	Imagine if you knew that a dollar now was going to be worth the same as a dollar in 20 years.
	Imagine you wouldn't have to have all these crazy defensive strategies for all of your money.
	You could actually just do something intelligent with your money rather than having to constantly hedge it and fend off the infinite termites of statist depredations and inflation.
	And stable interest rates.
	Imagine if you signed a mortgage and they said, well, we don't care if it's a one-year mortgage, fixed rate, variable rate.
	We know pretty much the mortgage rates are going to be 4% for the next 20 years.
	Imagine how amazingly efficient resource allocation would be in that kind of situation.
	So it doesn't matter the form it takes.
	What matters is whether there's a gun to your head to use it or not.
	Okay, sorry, what about the effects of the coming economic collapse could have on the average student who is in debt with federal loans?
	Well, look, the government is, when the government begins to run low on money, what it does is it attempts to get as much money from as many people as possible.
	So it goes after tax evaders, it may even go after its corporations, or at least those who donated to the alternate party.
	But they're going to, you know, the soft, of course, the soft default is the printing of money.
	I don't really believe that the printing of money is as acceptable a strategy as it used to be.
	Like, it used to be you just, you would print money and, you know, you'd pay off a bunch of debts with worthless paper and then your economy would implode.
	But I think people are kind of onto that trick now.
	So I don't think it's quite as easy to inflate your way out as it used to be.
	But that having been said, I think that interest rates will certainly go up as inflation begins to hit.
	And we've had, you know, massive increases in the money supply over the past few years.
	So I think that's going to be that's going to be important.
	So I would try to minimize debt.
	I mean, I don't know.
	I always sound like in my day, you know, young whippers.
	But in my day, I really tried to avoid debt in school.
	I came out without too much debt, although I was in school for quite some time.
	I did two years of English literature degree, two years of a theater school degree, two years of a history degree.
	And then somebody said, you know, if you don't do four years, you don't actually get the degree.
	I'm like, oh, man, I knew I should have gone to that first day of orientation.
	And then I did a year of a master's degree.
	I did manage to get out, but I mean, I worked jobs during school year.
	I worked very hard in the summers, and so I did manage to accumulate enough money to not...
	And of course, I was a gold panner for a year and a half before I started school, which gave me a lot of money in the bank.
	Ain't a lot to spend when all you can see are trees, caribou, and another tent.
	So I would definitely work as hard as I could to try and stay out of debt at the moment because there's quite a lot of uncertainty in the future about what's going to happen in terms of debt.
	Yeah, and the other thing too, start a business, don't go to school.
	I don't think there are many people who, if handed a resume from Bill Gates, would say, nah, Bill, I mean, you didn't even finish your degree.
	You barely even started. No, it'd be like, whoa, ka-ching, let's get that man in here and give us a mosquito net.
	Alright, so one question with regards to an anarchist system.
	I understand the benefits of the system in the long run, but what do you think the transition period would be like from our current system to an anarchist system?
	Oh, just the easiest questions ever.
	Best listeners, smartest listeners in the world.
	Oh, don't forget to check me out.
	I'm going to be hosting the Peter Schiff Radio Show tomorrow from 10am to noon.
	Schiffradio.com. Anyway. The transition period, you have to reduce the demand for the state and you have to reduce people's belief that the state is necessary.
	And the way that you do that is you create super functional, super functional, not just functional, but functional with a cape and tights.
	And the way that you do that is, of course, you raise your children peacefully and rationally and without using threats or aggression or ostracism or without using abandonment and, you know, hopefully not dumping them into the mental sewers of state prisons.
	Oh, sorry. I mean, public school.
	But I repeat myself.
	So once we create this super smart, super peaceful, super functional generation, then the idea that we need the state when we have like 95 percent fewer criminals, we have 95 percent less drug use, we have 95 percent less teen pregnancy and promiscuity and, you know, even smoking and people make smarter health choices because making these kinds of bad choices all associated with a bad childhood statistically, not exclusively, but it's associated with it.
	And so this is why I'm constantly urging people in the freedom movement, be great parents.
	Promote great parenting. That is going to reduce the number of criminals.
	It's going to reduce the number of people who wanted to cut into politics.
	But again, I repeat myself.
	And then it will simply...
	This is why I say it's a multi-generational change.
	And then the state will just seem kind of like, well, why do we have this thing again?
	I mean, I'm not scared of any criminals.
	And I don't know any drug addicts.
	And I don't...
	I just don't know these people who are so...
	Non-functional that they need the state in welfare and Medicare and Medicaid and they can't conceivably save for their own retirement and so on.
	We just need to create a super functional group of human beings and we simply will outgrow the state.
	Steph, I haven't read your book, Practical Anarchy, so I thought I'd ask you this question now.
	How will our future market society take care of children?
	I know you advocate the use of peaceful parenting, and I agree without any doubt, but could you give me a more realistic, action-based example?
	All right. Well, there is a chapter in Practical Anarchy on the Protection of Children.
	It is the number one priority, I think, of any movement that wants to bring peace and reason to the world is to work hard for the protection of children.
	There are a number of ways that this can be achieved, of course, going forward.
	But in a free society, what will happen is if you want to put your kids in a school, then the school will be much cheaper to put your kid in a school if you're a great parent.
	Right? Because your kids will be more self-sufficient and so on, if they even need school.
	I don't know. Let's just pretend that they will.
	Maybe they'll be unschooled or self-schooled or whatever.
	But if you raise your children well, they're much cheaper for you.
	They're much cheaper for society as a whole.
	I mean, child abuse costs like $140 billion a year at the most conservative estimate just in the US alone.
	So who pays for that?
	Is it the parents who are treating their children badly, who lose these Mess is on society where society has to pick up the tab for the rest of their lives?
	Well, no. The parents don't pay.
	It's the general taxpayer who pays.
	Whereas in a free society, if you are doing wrong by your kids, you're going to be the one who has to pay because you will have to pay.
	There won't be sort of the welfare state to take care of illegitimate children.
	They'll just accrue to the parents.
	And if your kid goes and steals from someone, then the restitution will have to come from the parents.
	And if your kid beats someone up and, you know, I mean, there's some of this in place now, but it's pretty catch-as-catch-can.
	We simply want the economic benefits of good parenting to accrue to the parents and the economic disincentives for bad parenting to accrue to the bad parents.
	And where you have a cost, there are agencies that will be there, companies and experts who will be there who will say, you know, let me help you with three weekends of parenting advice and I guarantee you it will cut.
	The insurance you'll have to buy for your children by 50%.
	It will cut your school costs by 70%.
	So for $500, you can save $5,000 or $10,000 a year.
	So even parents who aren't motivated by a desire to be the greatest parents out of the goodness of their hearts will have a very strong financial incentive to be better parents.
	And I think that will be the case.
	And of course, you know, MRIs and fMRIs can detect the effects of harsh or punitive or destructive parenting on the brains of children as they develop.
	And we want to intervene really early.
	And so this stuff is very easy to see.
	it's just that right now there's not any particular incentive for people to go looking.
	Oh right, I'm an anarchist myself but have a bit of cognitive dissonance with the poor not being able to receive justice through a private court system because they might not have the means to do so.
	I'm tempted to say that charity might...
	Ah! Lost it!
	Hang on, let me do it. That charity might take care of it or people don't get justice out of the present system.
	Yeah, I mean, look, of course the poor don't have any access to justice under the present system.
	In fact, nobody has access to justice under the present system.
	And so let's make sure that we're not comparing anarchy to some imagined system that works at the moment.
	If you're talking about dispute resolution, then the best thing that the poor should do is to keep their word, right?
	I mean, because what happens is in a free society, if you enter into a contract, this is my guess, it could be any way it works, but my guess would be, in a free society, when you enter into a contract with another human being, you buy contract insurance.
	Right? So, if you and I, you know, I buy a car from you for $20,000, we have contract insurance.
	And so, you have a warranty and if the warranty, if you won't honor the warranty or whatever, then somebody else is going to honor it and be paid by the insurance.
	Now, the cost of insuring any contract is going to be Higher or lower depending on the prior trustworthiness of the people involved in whatever contracts they've done before.
	So if I've screwed people out of the cars, the last 20 that I've sold, nobody's going to insure me and that's going to be a clear signal to people that I'm not trustworthy.
	If it's like here's $20,000 and it costs me $3 to insure this, then everybody knows as a clear price signal that I'm reliable.
	And you can sort of compare this to eBay or whatever.
	There's no justice in eBay.
	There's no courts in a sense.
	There's no government justice to coin an oxymoronic phrase.
	But what there is on eBay, of course, is a rating system, and you will get goods hopefully for less without somebody's good rating, if somebody has a lower rating, or if they have no rating, if they're new.
	But if somebody has accumulated a good rating over time, then it'll be cheaper to do business with them because they've got more trust.
	And so the key thing in a free society is not cure, but prevention.
	In a state of society, we're so used to just throwing Cures, so to speak, rather than working on prevention.
	So like in California, I read only 4% of the government's health care budget is devoted to prevention.
	The rest of it is devoted to, I believe, drugging children.
	It's just, you know, it's just all cures.
	And so when you think about the poor and how they're going to get access to justice, the thing to look at is it's much cheaper to prevent than it is to cure.
	In the state, it's much more profitable to the state to cure than it is to prevent.
	In a free society, it's much cheaper to prevent than it is to cure.
	And so the important thing is to prevent the poor from getting into situations where they need arbitration that they would have to pay for out of their own pocket.
	And there's tons and tons of ways to do that.
	Lots of signals that can go out.
	Market signals, price signals about the cost of insuring contracts that can tell people whether they're reliable or not.
	and that's going to prevent things.
	All right.
	Did I miss a question? Let me just have a look here.
	Oh yeah, I won't be able to make it, but don't forget, for anyone who's listening to this from my show, Liberty Fest 3, New York City, 13th of October 2012.
	Peter Schiff, Tom Woods, Adam Kokesh, Kevin Goodsman, Jordan Page, and more.
	T-B-A. You can go to lfnyc.com.
	I went last year, it was a lot of fun.
	I unfortunately will be out at Libertopia this year, but go for it.
	Alright, let me just type in here.
	Imagine that we live in an anarchist world.
	There is a meteor headed for the earth.
	How would we deal with that meteor?
	Well, the way that I view it...
	Okay, this is the way that I would view it.
	The Capitol will be preserved as a testament to an ancient dysfunctional civilization.
	We light massive anarchy rockets under the Capitol.
	We launch it into space.
	Past the orbiting space bars and it pushes it straight off.
	And the reason that it's going to push it straight off is we take every law that was ever printed in the Western world and we print them and we put them underneath that dome.
	That creates such a massive bulk of economic inefficiency that really I think it would actually be a black hole.
	In the same way that it is a black hole, economically speaking, right now, it's going to pull that sucker off course and it's going to send it straight into the sun.
	Steph, your thoughts on free education sites?
	Since I sort of think I have one then, I think they're very good.
	Let's see. Imagine we live in an anarchist world.
	Sorry, we did that one. I'm working on a book to be published in print by chance.
	Well, all my books are available in print, not even by chance, but by design.
	But I've written a book which I'm still sort of reviewing, but my major The thing right now is working on a documentary.
	I think that the liberty movement, we need our zeitgeist.
	We need our popularization.
	A short, punchy, entertaining, enjoyable documentary that explains Voluntarism versus violence.
	Statism versus the markets.
	Why it is that we take the approach that we do to solving human problems.
	In other words, put down the gun.
	Let's reason this out. And I have finished draft seven of the script.
	We have a project manager.
	Actually, we have celebrity talent on the musical department.
	We have a production company that is donating time and effort and energy.
	We have video people.
	We have animators.
	We have Editors, we have just the whole hog and a fantastic project manager who's just doing a great job.
	So if you're interested, just shoot me an email at host at freedomradio.com if you'd like to help out.
	But we're aiming to get the first five minutes done and then we're going to throw it up on jumpstart.com or whatever to raise money to finish it.
	But I'm very, very excited about that.
	And I think that we...
	I want to create something that we can send to someone who knows nothing about anything to do with Austrian economics or voluntarism or libertarianism or anything like that.
	And just blow their mind wide open.
	You know, just like two little Roadrunner-style TNT philosophy in each year.
	And then, woo, the dome opens and the sun comes in.
	That's the big deal.
	I hope to get the documentary out by sort of mid to late summer.
	Let's see, someone up above has asked about animal rights.
	Do I think that the natural rights, self-ownership, and the non-aggression principle of humans extends to animals?
	Well, this is a tough question.
	I mean, my whole family is a vegetarian.
	We're all vegetarians.
	And I was never much of a meat-eater, but after doing some of my video...
	Clip culling for my videos.
	I did some on slaughterhouses and that sort of pushed it over the edge for me.
	So I don't think it's particularly great to eat animals.
	I don't think it's a violation of ethics.
	It's not like cannibalism.
	So I think that we should treat animals as well as possible.
	I think that it's better for us and more efficient for the world as a whole if we eat fruits and vegetables and other things rather than animals.
	That having been said, I'm not going to shoot someone who's got a hamburger.
	I think for the non-aggression principle to extend, for morality to extend, you need to have creatures with free will.
	And free will, in my definition, is the ability To compare contemplated actions to some sort of perfect standard, some sort of universal standard.
	And animals don't have, as far as I've ever read, they don't have the capacity to do that.
	So I don't believe that we can enter into a moral contract with animals.
	We can't trade with a lion if it's hungry.
	It's just going to take a bite at us.
	We can't reason with a shark.
	We can't and so on. And...
	That, to me, seems a clear enough distinction and difference.
	Because otherwise, if it's against all life, I can't take antibiotics if I get an infection or whatever because that's killing life and so on.
	So I haven't been able to find a way to extend ethics to all...
	All creatures. I think that right now what we need to do, and this is again not to harp on the same thing, but if we raise children peacefully and well, they won't be cruel to animals.
	Animal cruelty is a sure sign of child abuse in the past.
	And so we want to raise children as well as possible, and that will lead to a world where animals are respected and protected.
	And once we have sorted out Basic ethics among human beings once we've eliminated statism and unjust imprisonment and war and child abuse and rape and assault and murder.
	Once we solve most, if not all, of those issues, then we can start mulling about the social contract available to a silverback gorilla.
	But I think that we can't really go the other way.
	I don't think we can get kindness towards animals until we have kindness towards human beings.
	And that's going to take a lot of work in the extension of rational ethics.
	All right.
	Steph, I've heard you state in a past video that you think it would be bad for Ron Paul to be elected due to the coming collapse.
	With that statement, you believe that there is nothing that can be done now to avert collapse.
	I do not believe that there is anything that can be done now to avert collapse.
	I think that we're far too late in the curve.
	If it's any consolation, if you're under 120 years old, I don't think that you are around to help anyway.
	I don't think there's much you could have done to change things anyway.
	I think the last Look, if the world had been able to intellectually stop the spread of communism in the 1860s, if the world had been able to fight against public school education in the 19th century, if the world had been able,
	through those actions, right, because it was the twin, I think, the sort of scylla and charybdis of government indoctrination schools and communism, the great brain viruses of the 19th century, that led directly to World War I. Once you had World War I, I mean, Freedom was toast. I mean, before World War I, astounding.
	You could travel anywhere you wanted.
	You could work anywhere you wanted.
	There was no such thing as a passport or a green card or a social security card or a driver's license.
	The world was free in a way that we really can't conceive of anymore.
	World War I destroyed most of the wealth that had been generated from the Industrial Revolution.
	And so after that...
	And the other thing, too, is once you get 10 million people killed, It's such a horrifying passage in human affairs that everyone afterwards, they just try and find some way to justify it.
	Well, 10 million people and the destruction of France and Belgium, I mean, it had to be for something.
	And so then it's, okay, well, we all died to make the world free for democracy.
	And then you've got massive interventions, foreign policy, and you have the...
	You know, the Thor Hammer ridiculous vengeance injustice of the Treaty of Versailles.
	You have, I mean, the Russian Revolution started by America coming into World War I. And once all of that happened, then people have no longer any capacity to reason when they're grieving so fundamentally and absolutely for such widespread carnage.
	You can't really say to people who've lost two sons in World War I that it was a predatory nonsense and a European...
	Closed-clan-infighting soap opera from hell that has been going on for about a thousand years.
	You just can't get... So I think once those balls started rolling, there really wasn't much that we could do to prevent it.
	The logic then becomes inescapable as you begin to require more and more armaments than you get a military-industrial complex Which begins to harm the economy and once you harm the economy you create the vacuum desire or requirement for the welfare state and then you have to start printing money like crazy.
	The logic of democracy means that voters have to get more or particularly donators to campaigns have to get much more out than they're putting in which means Printing money because you can't just shuffle money around.
	It's too obviously a zero-sum game minus the overhead of those in charge.
	So I don't think that there's much that can be done now.
	I think that the only thing that is so necessary for us to do is to remind people that it is not freedom that is failing.
	It is force that is failing.
	It is not the handshake But the punch that is bringing down humanity, and that is something that we really need to focus on and help people to understand.
	I think the logic of the system is going to play its way out.
	But as long as we can tell people why the body is rolling down the hill He didn't trip, he was pushed Then I think we will have done some pretty good deeds by the light of the day Alright, what have we got here?
	Did you hear about Ben Bernanke warning Congress that we're very close to complete destruction?
	Oh my god.
	Oh, man. You know, I just got an image.
	There's a horrifying scene in a movie called Saving Private Ryan where...
	One of the soldiers is slowly pushing a knife into the chest of a German soldier and he's whispering to him the whole time.
	And he's pushing this knife in and killing him.
	And I get the image of Bernanke leaning over Congress as he's shoving the knife in saying, You know, you might feel a bit of a tug here, and I think that this may not go well for you, but I'm here to advise you that we may be close to the end of your life.
	It's like, well, if you'd stopped putting the knife in and pushing on it, maybe we wouldn't be in such a bad position.
	Let's see. How can an anarchist society be successful without an objective standard of law?
	If my neighbour wants to hang rapists by their testicles, and I don't, how do we avoid conflict?
	By the way, there were passports in 19th century France, thanks to Napoleon.
	The Constitution of 1791 had abolished them, as well as tariffs.
	Ah, is there any nitpicker as joyful as a libertarian nitpicker?
	Oh, I'm just enjoying that one.
	No, I'm kidding. That was great.
	Thanks. It's a good question. Okay. Look, I've done a podcast on this about the free society and Sharia law or whatever stuff you want to do.
	The reality is that People want the administration of justice to be as cheap as possible.
	Like everyone. Our desires are infinite.
	Resources are limited. We want the best we can for the smallest amount of money.
	And so...
	If it's the case that my neighbor wants some sort of vigilante hanging thing...
	Then he'll have to wait for someone to provide that.
	And there's going to have to be enough people into...
	You know, Charles Bronston style Vengeance with an Axe...
	That there's going to be enough of a demand for that service that people are going to be investing and willing to provide it.
	Plus, they have to be willing to accept the risk that if they go hang the wrong guy, because remember, the reason why justice is such a challenge is it's really hard to know who's guilty and who's not.
	If they hang the wrong guy, then the company is going to get sued and I will bet you in a free society that shareholders will be able to be sued and maybe even customers will be able to be sued.
	Those who enabled the murder of an innocent supposed rapist will be sued.
	Now, if it's really expensive to sign up for this, if there are not a lot of other people willing to do it, and if you're personally liable for any mistakes that company makes, Do you think you might find it in your heart to be a little bit more compassionate to someone who is accused and only accused of rape and it's not proved yet and find some other thing than...
	You know, you want it to be reversible because mistakes always happen in the realm of prosecution and law and imprisonment.
	So... So I don't think it's going to happen where people are going to want this very expensive and personally risky form of vengeance.
	I think that people are going to gravitate towards that which is cheapest, that which is most efficient, that which is most effective.
	And I think they're going to, you know, historically we've seen this, they're going to focus on If you do something wrong to someone, then you're going to face economic ostracism unless you make restitution.
	And I think the restitution is going to be a variety of things.
	It could be financial recompense.
	It could be working in a confined area for a certain amount of time until maybe the rapist is going to go out there and tell people why you shouldn't be a rapist for two years at a dollar a day.
	I mean, I don't know. Whoever is going to come up with these things much more creative and imaginative than I would be.
	But it's going to have to be something that's cheap.
	It's going to have to be something that's effective.
	It's going to have to be something that is not expensive to society as a whole.
	And whatever you can do to reduce the recurrence of these things.
	Because it's a state, as I said, profits from these supposed cures, which are actually more diseases being planted.
	And so in the future, you're going to want to make sure that recidivism is at a minimum, that people recommitting crimes is at a minimum.
	whereas right now that's not really the issue so what is more dangerous religious religion or statism Well, that's hard to say.
	I mean, statism by definition is the initiation of force, and religion by definition does not fall into that category of the initiation of force.
	So it's tricky.
	It's tricky. I mean, certainly morally, statism is immoral, is evil by definition, because it is the initiation of force.
	Religion is not evil by definition.
	And so I would say that statism is something...
	Like, you can argue against religion through philosophy.
	You can make the case for...
	A godless guy.
	But you really can't make a philosophical argument against the state because they kind of got guns and laws and prisons and lots of people in costumes who are willing to drag you away to the very pits of hell.
	So I think that I have much more tolerance for religion than I do for statism.
	Is there a podcast going on somewhere?
	Do you know, it's funny. I don't know when it was.
	It was a couple of years ago because I first started doing this podcasting thing five or six years ago.
	It was a couple of years ago.
	I sort of realized just based on the emails and I also did an analysis of who was listening to me around the world.
	But I think it was sometime around 2008 that I never shut up.
	That I was always being played somewhere in the world.
	The sun never set on the big chatty forehead.
	So I just wanted to mention that.
	So yes, there is a podcast going on somewhere, I guarantee it.
	Come on, feed me with your questions, baby.
	Feed me, Seymour.
	Can you guys still see the video?
	Can you see the video?
	Oh, it is good.
	Cool.
	Yeah, Lackenrose does have a good book called The Most Dangerous Superstition.
	You skipped my question on Woodrow Wilson being the worst president ever.
	I don't know. I mean, do you really want to measure the moral difference between various mafia heads?
	You know, they're all...
	evil scumbaggery in a bag full of more evil.
	And so...
	They're all pretty nasty and horrific, and so I just...
	Which one is more evil, which one is less evil?
	Eh, let's see.
	I don't know. This knife which stabbed me in the back is three inches...
	three millimeters deeper than the other one, so that's bad.
	Eh, they're all bad. Does anyone else feel like the world is just slightly less threatened by insanity now that Centorum has dropped out?
	Well, don't forget, we still have the lone ranger Mr.
	Magic Underpants riding the Mormon crazy horse over the horizon, so I'm not entirely sure that we're OUT OF THE WORDS OF CRAZY just yet.
	You know, just because he will look fairly good on a postage stamp someday doesn't mean that he ain't mailing the future of the country to a big bag of crazy called Nutty Town.
	Discuss your thoughts on unschooling.
	No! Talk amongst yourselves about that.
	Just kidding. I don't know.
	Unschooling is something I'm still trying to wrap my head around.
	Maybe I'll do another show with Loretta Lynn about that.
	She's got a book coming out, by the way, at UnpluggedMom.com.
	It's going to be out soon. You might want to check it out.
	Well, you know, the thing that...
	I mean, oh God, do I really want to be dragged into the bottomless moor of American political discussions?
	Or any political discussions?
	Look, I feel it is my professional obligation to read up on American politics, and I like having my serial with The Daily Show.
	So, what's interesting to me, and it just shows you the degree to which ethics doesn't have anything to do with integrity in the modern world, or maybe any time in the past, but I mean, Romney is a Mormon, and Mormon is considered to be pretty Celtic by even evangelicals.
	If the fundamentalist evangelicals are calling you Celtic, you may be a little Celtic.
	And, uh, yes, you know, he's getting tons of support and I don't see a lot of people speaking out against him.
	That was a little bit of a while back, but that's because, you know, obviously he's going to be going up against, uh, Obama.
	And, um, yeah, I mean, my prediction is he's going to lose.
	He's going to lose against Obama because, I mean, he's even whiter than Obama is.
	Which means that they got the same socialist lefty policies.
	I mean, how do you run against Obamacare having pretty much instituted it in the state of Massachusetts?
	I mean, it's a ridiculous thing.
	It's like a joke. And he's going to lose because the public sector unions are receiving a fair amount of negative press these days.
	And they are just going to take all of their war chest and throw it straight at Obama.
	And of course Obama is going to get a huge amount, as he did in the last election, not something people talk about much, a massive amount.
	of money from the moneyed interests on Wall Street.
	The financial companies were the ones who donated the most to Obama, and he gave them exactly what they wanted, which was to round up all those smelly little Occupy Wall Street protesters who were actually out there on a bit of a moral crusade, lock up about 3,000 of them, and let all of the pigs at the bloody trough of the nation's, a soft underbelly of economic productivity, let those people off scot-free.
	And now they've just passed the JOBS Act, which Allows you to lie on a prospectus to potential investors and to not require any auditing for the first couple of years of a startup from any external accountants.
	Just all the usual scumbaggery.
	A wretched hive of scum and villainy.
	Let's see, you made a point in one of your videos about how national parks have done far more damage than good for the environment, but you left it at that.
	National parks are one of the few things that I think could be made positive from the state.
	Change my mind. Could you elaborate?
	Dear God, you are taking me way back in time.
	I think it was from Mises.org, and you can look this up, and it was about Yellowstone National Park.
	Just the vast amount of problems that they've had trying to stabilize the...
	I mean, there's a number of things that go wrong in parks, and I'm sorry to bore everyone who's not interested in this.
	I'll keep it short. First, of course, is that they never allow fires.
	And the whole point of forest is some of it's supposed to burn from time to time.
	It replenishes the soil and it creates natural breaks from bigger fires.
	So because they never allow fires, when you do get a fire, which is inevitable, you get these massive conflagrations.
	And they're trying to balance species in a park.
	I mean, species are designed to roam around.
	They want to move. It gets to move, baby.
	And they just keep confining them and then they get too much of this and then introduce some other animal to take some of those down and then another predator is needed and then, I mean, this infestation happens so they bring more insects in and then they...
	It's just a complete mess.
	It's an oscillation. I mean, I think parks are beautiful.
	I love the natural world myself.
	But, you know, you really kind of need this stuff, like everything, to be privatized.
	ANCAPs believe that a transaction in which a man comes to a boss and seeks a wage in exchange for labor is voluntary, but this is only true if wage slavery didn't exist, which ANCAPs never take into account.
	Wage slavery, the idea that social coercion is the basis for capitalism and why people go to capitalists in the first place is the center of the capitalist system and is an inevitable part of capitalism.
	If all the means of production are privately owned, people simply must work for a capitalist in order to, okay, provide food and services.
	I have a fair amount of sympathy for this Marxist argument.
	When I say Marxism, I don't mean to dismiss it.
	I mean, obviously, it does not only Marxism, but it does come from the Marxist camp.
	Sorry to paraphrase, you put it quite well, but to sort of make sure I understand it, the argument is something like this.
	Ten families own most of the means of production, then of course you can say everyone's free to compete, but they own the means of production, they have a tight relationship with the banks, they've got tons of savings, tons of capital, tons of investments, lots of business experience, so of course you have to go work for them.
	Of course you do. And so you're not really free to not be a wage slave because these people have blah blah blah.
	Okay. Well, look, you can't just take snapshots and think that you've explained anything.
	And I'm not talking about you.
	I'm just talking about this theory as a whole.
	The question is, let's say somebody's 18.
	And what have they been educated in since they were five, right?
	They've had, what, 15,000 hours of education from five to 18.
	So in a free society...
	I think that it would be very valuable to teach people how to be entrepreneurs.
	And that all should be part of the education of the poor.
	Of course, as John Taylor Gatto and other people have pointed out, the whole point of the government education system was based on the Prussian model, which was to breed pretty dominant, competent workers and soldiers.
	And that's what it did, and it's been very effective doing that.
	Public schools are designed, not consciously and not currently, but this is their origin.
	They're designed to make you stupid, to make you bored, to make you unambitious, to make you unenergetic, to make you depressed, to make you distracted, to not allow you to compete with the managers that exist within society.
	Being an entrepreneur is a very exciting thing to do, but it takes a fair amount of emotional strength.
	My history did not exactly prime me to be an entrepreneur.
	I didn't come from any history of entrepreneurs and my childhood was so chaotic that I didn't come out of it with a lot of confidence in that area.
	But I worked really hard to try and increase my confidence in this area and read as much as I could on business and economics and so on.
	But if I had been taught, like coming from a stable background and be taught a lot about economics and entrepreneurship and business and all that, I think that I would have given a lot of people a run for their money.
	People who are at the top, they want talent.
	They want talent. They don't care if you come from the wrong side of the tracks as long as you can produce the goods.
	And so I think that...
	There are ways of encouraging greater competition between the classes.
	And remember, this is very, very important to remember.
	Just because you are the king of the carriage makers doesn't mean that no one's going to invent the car.
	Just because you are the king of book printers doesn't mean that no one's going to invent the e-book.
	Right? Do you understand? So it's really, really important to remember that no matter how much investment you have in some business or some venture or some market, some area, some jerk is going to come along who's going to invent some paradigm that's just going to render the value of your 100-year investment kind of pointless.
	And that's really, really important to understand.
	You may think that, you know, you're just all that great at manufacturing and then some jerk over in China pulls the free market lever and catapults the Chinese economy into massive competition with you and whoops!
	You know, everything's turned over.
	The top 100 companies from 100 years ago, of those, only three of them are still in business.
	Right now, and that's with all of the advantages that they could get from manipulating the state and selling weapons to the military and all that kind of junk and getting tariff walls and whatever, blowing up unions that were helping to increase the demands of the workers and so on.
	So even with all the protection that the state could provide and offer over the last 100 years, you have a 3% survival rate for the top 100 companies.
	It would be far lower.
	In a free society, I mean, almost no companies would be around for 20, 30, 40 years, let alone 100.
	Because it turns over.
	The creative destruction always turns over.
	But it only is going to turn over most effectively if the people who are poor either get, you know, work-study if they can't afford it or get really good education in terms of being an entrepreneur.
	And, of course, if they're raised better and raised more happily.
	Especially with things, you know, there's lots you can do as an entrepreneur now.
	You don't need $100 billion or a million dollars even.
	You can get these Micro loans, these micro grants, and set up shop on your own, and then it's just a matter of how hard you want to hit the gas before you get out.
	So anyway, I think that there's a lot to be said for a better education, but let's not mistake the current system, where the rich and powerful have access to all the guns and control of the government, where the rich and powerful have ways of repressing the poor and the middle class through these terrible, terrible schools, and this is not how things will be in a free society.
	I think there will be much more fluidity between the classes.
	What will the California Democrats do with the $9 billion deficit?
	Cut welfare benefits or cut public employee pensions?
	I don't know. I don't know.
	It's... It's a tough call.
	You know, the things which are eating up the American system, and in fact, the Western system, including Europe, what is eating up the Western system is all the promises that were made two or three decades ago, right?
	Remember, unfortunately, in our system, as Michelle Rhee, the former superintendent of schools in Washington who was in the Waiting for Superman movie, Bee Eater is the name of her biography.
	I read that when I was flying down to Odessa for a conference.
	Really, really good book. You can get it as an e-book.
	She basically said that children are being sacrificed so that adults can avoid conflicts.
	So, adult politicians don't have to take on the public sector unions, so the teachers don't have conflicts with the school boards.
	Everybody's just pacifying each other at the expense of the children.
	That is the sickest, the most immoral, demoralizing, hideous, repulsive aspect to our current system is the degree to which children are sacrificed to reduce or avoid conflicts between and among adults.
	This is why children get drugged rather than the system getting reformed.
	I mean, remember with kids, the free market is satisfying their leisure hours, right?
	With Xboxes, with Netflix, with the most amazing toys and games that are out there that go beepy-burpy-boopy, you know, as long as the day is high.
	And so their outside of school stimulation is being taken care of by the free market.
	Their inside of school stimulation or lack of stimulation is still on this 19th century communist model of lining them up like a row of sardines and staring at a squeaky chalkboard with a bored and alienated teacher.
	And so what happened in the past was the public sector unions wanted more and more money.
	And the politicians didn't want to raise taxes.
	And so they basically said, well, we're not going to give you more money.
	But what we are going to do, my friends, is we are going to give you really, really, really big ass pensions when you retire.
	And that pushes, you see, that pushes off the conflict that people are having in the moment.
	and it sacrifices the children because these decisions were made two or three or four decades ago and the children who are going to end up having to pay for it they weren't even gleams in their granddaddy's eye at the time and so again it's just this natural pattern when you have this central agency of coercion in society you screw the children for the sake of keeping peace among the adults in the moment and now the bill is due and I hope that the young remember how well they were treated when they weren't even born and that might give them a clue as to how well they should treat their elders who led them to this cliff edge and,
	frankly, are busy pushing them over.
	What is my view on euthanasia, suicide, and do you believe that a business could develop just focused on that?
	Say an individual wanted to die and voluntarily went to this business to essentially relinquish his life.
	You know, it's interesting. A lot of doctors I just read an article.
	I think it was the New York Times about this.
	A lot of doctors actually don't take medicine.
	You know, they get cancer.
	They're like, well, I got four months.
	I'm not going to take six months with chemo.
	I'm just going to take four months without it.
	And I'm going to go and have fun, spend my money, see my friends, see the world, and then I'm going to check out.
	And there is a kind of funny thing at the moment where, and I say this as somebody who's not hopefully tilting on the edge of the basement door to nowhere, but there is a huge amount of money that's spent at the end of people's lives.
	There does seem to be a kind of selfishness to it.
	Like, 90% of the healthcare costs that you'll ever incur occur over the last six months of your life.
	Now, of course, you don't always know that it's the last six months, but we spend a lot of money keeping people alive who just aren't going to get better.
	And, of course, people should be free to spend their money however they want, and people should be able to donate and charity, and people want to stay alive forever.
	But I'm not sure that I would want to Implode my entire family's finances just to stay alive for another couple of months in pain.
	And so, I think that euthanasia is a perfectly valid moral option.
	Your life is your own.
	You know, I can buy a car and hit it, fender to fender with a ball-peen hammer if I want.
	It's my car! And I can buy a first edition Charles Dickens and set fire to it.
	It's kind of dickish, but I can still do it.
	And so it seems to me it's perfectly valid to say that if you own something, you can choose to destroy it.
	And since you obviously own your own life, of course you can choose to destroy it.
	I think that it's not something anyone should do lightly.
	I think that They should always discuss it with a psychologist or some sort of mental health professional.
	I think that they should really work it out, talk about it with their family, so that there's no sinister-ness about it.
	But this idea that we just, we have to hang on like grim death to a very grim death at a vast amount of expense is hugely problematic.
	And this is sort of related to...
	You know, the healthcare costs that, you know, people don't really talk about.
	This is not a very good segue, but I want to talk about this in two seconds anyway, so I hope you'll forgive me.
	But 70 to 80% of significant healthcare issues are entirely, entirely, not even partially, entirely the result of lifestyle choices.
	Lack of exercise, bad nutrition, no sleep, whatever it is.
	Overwork, hypertension, stress, whatever it is.
	They're all preventable.
	And this is something you don't get a lot of talking from the politicians.
	How are we going to control healthcare costs?
	Put down the KFC. I was watching this documentary the other day called...
	Fat, sick, and almost dead.
	And nearly dead, I think it is.
	An Australian filmmaker who was almost 300 pounds who went on a total juice diet.
	You know, just matched all the juices up and drank that and lost like a third of his body weight in a couple of months and has, you know, sort of kept it off.
	And then he met this trucker who was 430 pounds.
	Like, whoa! That's going to cost you in gas.
	430 pounds! And the guy just juiced and juiced and all that.
	Actually, it's quite interesting. I have to look into it some more.
	But... No American president is going to say, look, we've got ridiculous rates of obesity.
	And all the resulting issues that come out of that, joint issues, diabetes, hypertension, strokes, heart disease, all that kind of stuff.
	You know, we can sit there and say let's pass another law or we can just start trying to be more intelligent about what we eat because this stuff is not brain surgery.
	So anyway, I just sort of wanted to mention that because it was vaguely related to the health field and I was thinking about it anyway.
	Let's see. I'm curious to know your thoughts on repealing laws like the National Firearms Act, which bans anything larger than a 50 caliber firearm as well as silencers, fully automatic weapons and so on.
	Well, you know, coming to an anarchist about repealing a specific law is like going to an abolitionist and saying, I know a guy named Joe who's a slave.
	Should he be freed? And it's like, no, they should all be freed!
	The same thing is true with laws.
	I am a full fan of repealing that law.
	Why? Because it's a law.
	And unfortunately, the language has been co-opted by the status.
	When they say the word law...
	People think of that as order, and if you look around at the dying spasms of Western's experimentation with infinite scaled violence, I think we can see that the word law really does not mean order.
	It means a drugged temporary cessation of conflict for the sake of selling off the youth to the highest foreign bidder you can find, followed by collapse.
	Steph, being a resident of Canada, do you believe that the Canadian healthcare system is good?
	I have Canadian friends who argue both sides.
	I'm curious as to your perspective.
	Well, no, it's not good.
	It's not morally good, of course, because it's the initiation of force.
	Look, Canada is like those Nordic countries.
	You know, everybody has this, I don't know, what is it?
	They have this wet dream that there's some place out there where force somehow works.
	Danish people are happy?
	Why? Because they've got danishes everywhere.
	Everyone thinks there's some place out there where force really, really works.
	And the healthcare system is one of those.
	Look, Canada's per capita debt is only slightly lower than Greece's.
	Only slightly lower than Greece's.
	And the only reason that we're not going the way of Greece is that we have Greece in the form of oil and other natural resources.
	Remember, this is all fun and games until the bill comes due, right?
	I mean, so I think it's important to remember the Canadian system is unbelievably indebted.
	About a third of Canadians can't find A doctor.
	The wait times are huge and have been of course the government made a commitment about 20 years ago to bring down wait times that has infused massive amounts of cash into the system and it takes a libertarian to know with inevitability that wait times have increased as a result of that so inevitable.
	But I will say this if you are in an emergency if you have some massive catastrophic problem that's not a bad place to be right so A friend of mine, her son, you know, had headaches. She took him to the doctor and the doctor said, go for a scan.
	They went for a scan. They found a brain tumor.
	Bang! You know, he's in that afternoon and he's getting operated on in two days and he's fine now.
	So if you do have an emergency, it's not a bad system to be in.
	But it's completely unsustainable.
	The telling thing, too, is that it seems like every time a Canadian politician gets cancer, the first thing they do is hop a flight to America because they can't get the machines that they need up here.
	But again, not to beat the point up too much, but healthcare is something that people need to take responsibility for themselves.
	You know, you've got to watch what you eat.
	You've got to exercise. You know, I just dropped like 20-25 pounds a year ago because I was like, ooh...
	Daddy's getting a little rotund.
	The sympathy pregnancy seems to have diminished for my wife, but not for me.
	So you just got to take care of yourself and that will eliminate the vast majority, like three quarters of healthcare issues are just eliminated by that.
	And yeah, you should have insurance for the catastrophic weird stuff, but you shouldn't have insurance for birth control.
	You shouldn't have insurance for Going to see the doctor.
	I mean, it's like buying car insurance for an oil change.
	It's predictable. You know you got to do it.
	So, yeah, the healthcare system, I mean, there's worse things.
	It's really frustrating for a lot of people who...
	The wait times. I see you get diagnosed with something or something.
	Oh, there's a shadow. It might be cancer or whatever.
	I think it's an average of two to three months to go to get a referral to a specialist and it's another two to three months or four months to get treatment.
	So you'd be six, seven, eight months from there's a shadow on the x-ray to actually getting treatment for whatever it is.
	That's a long time for whatever it is you've got to get worse.
	And you're helpless. You're helpless.
	This is the thing. Anybody with any shred of pride would be entirely disgusted by this kind of system because you're helpless.
	You can't accelerate.
	You can't say, you know what, I care about this so much, I'm going to sell my house and get an operation.
	I guess you can fly to some other place and do it, but that scarcely seems fair.
	Anyway, healthcare is a lot about prevention and, of course, it's about bringing down the cost of things.
	I mean, if you want to compare the cost of a heart attack in the U.S., compare that to laser eye surgery, which is largely in the free market.
	Laser eye surgery has dropped 80-90% over the last 10-15 years, whereas it's gone quite the other way for everything the government touches.
	The UK has recently cut a lot of spending, and they're suffering huge unemployment directly Do you think that is part of the market correction?
	Or do you think that's a result of the lack of spending?
	Look, this is the war that we're facing.
	I mean, I don't use that term lightly, but the war that we're facing is, are the bankers going to pay, or are the people going to pay?
	Well, in Iceland, the bankers paid.
	And in Greece, they just wrote off $100 billion worth of loans the bankers are paying.
	Should the bankers pay or should the people pay?
	I personally think the bankers should pay because it's lender beware.
	If I lend a guy 500 bucks, it doesn't pay me back.
	I don't get to go after his friends.
	And a lot of the people who made a lot of money from the state, like the people who got all this pay and that, they're all dead or retired or whatever.
	The banker should pay. Because if the people pay, this stuff's just going to happen over and over again, right?
	Because the bankers are going to be like, okay, well, we made the people pay.
	You know, it's like the typical sort of Naomi Wolf shock doctrine stuff.
	Yeah. Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, I'll do one or two more. And so, yeah, if the bankers don't pay, then the bankers would just start lending money again.
	And it's not their money to lend because it's not based on anything real.
	It's money that's printed up by central banks.
	I mean, it's pure enslavement.
	And yet, of course, it's important to remember that none of this could happen without the greed of the people.
	But the greed of the people is influenced by propaganda.
	See, the bankers know that the money isn't real.
	Most people, most of the citizens, because they're miseducated in these ridiculous indoctrination camps called public schools, they don't know that the money isn't real.
	They don't know that it's all nonsense.
	They don't know about national debt.
	They don't know about the gold standard or fiat currency or Austrian economics or the business cycle or praxeology or any of these good things.
	So we do have the excuse of but ugly ignorance on the side of the people.
	The bankers, not so much.
	The bankers know about the Fed.
	The bankers know about the Federal Reserve.
	So to me, great knowledge means, you know, with great knowledge comes great finger pointing at the bankers.
	So, yeah, of course the bankers should pay.
	And we should reset the system.
	We should eliminate all debts that are public.
	And, you know, I'm sorry if this means that bankers got to eat their own yachts.
	but better they eat them than walk the plank off them.
	Do you think it's a conflict for libertarian anarcho-capitalists to pursue a law degree?
	you.
	No. I think that we spend a little bit too much time worrying about Should I take the student loan or I'm working with a company that works with a company that has a contract with the Department of Defense?
	Live your life and be happy.
	If you want to be a doctor in Canada, that means you've got to join the socialist system.
	Be a doctor. Be happy with that.
	If you want to be a lawyer, go be a lawyer.
	Let's keep our moral searchlights and lasers pointed directly at the people who have or cheer the guns and not worry about what we need to do to Find our way through the thickets of statism with all of the stripy predators surrounding us.
	So I think we've got to cut ourselves a huge amount of slack, not worry about our own moral choices so much, because I think that once you have a good understanding of morality, it's kind of impossible for you to do any significant wrong.
	And as long as you're speaking out against the system, I mean, I could care less what you do with it, because we all have to survive.
	And not just survive, but actually have fun, you know, like enjoy ourselves.
	I try to make my decisions as if there was no government.
	So if I really want to be a lawyer, if there was no government, would I be a lawyer?
	Yeah, I would be. So, screw it.
	Go be a lawyer. If you want to be a doctor, go be a doctor.
	If, you know, I don't know, Internal Revenue Service...
	Rothbard, I think, had a good argument that you can join any profession that would be there without the government.
	I think that's not a bad way of putting it.
	Although I've never actually met...
	A libertarian who wants to become a tax collector.
	And work from the inside, see?
	That's too deep inside.
	That's like working from the inside of a Tyrannosaurus rex and thinking you're going to take it down while being digested.
	I don't think that's a great plan.
	People talking about growing synthetic bacon in Petri dishes.
	That means I probably wasn't very interesting for a bit.
	and Do you think that by voting you are giving your permission to government, or do you agree with Lissander Spooner?
	Don't you hate pants? I think we should ban pants.
	No, just parachute pants.
	No, look, you can go and vote if you want.
	I just don't like to beg, that's all.
	I mean, call it a male testicular pride thing, but...
	I just, I can't go and beg.
	Please, please, give me a few little bits more freedom.
	Let me have a few crumbs from the master's table.
	What do you think? I just, I can't do it.
	I can't ask for it. I cannot.
	Sink my gorge down and weigh down my soul enough with that supplication.
	I cannot go on bended knee.
	I can't do it. I can't bend on my knee and beg these assholes for a few more scraps of freedom.
	I can't do it. I think that swells the vain power of the sadists at the top.
	And I can't do it.
	Can't do it. How do free market economists put a price on polluting the common environment?
	How much should Japan have to pay for irradiating the waters of the Pacific or China for polluting the air that travels to other parts of the world?
	Well, nuclear power, and I've made this argument in a show I did last year, The Truth About Nuclear Power, Nuclear Power Exposed, it's on YouTube.
	Nuclear power only exists because the government is willing to limit the liability for the companies.
	I mean, of course, I mean, the liability that is faced by these companies in Japan who relied on the government, of course, to protect them from tsunamis and other evils of nature.
	If corporations did not have the legal shield called incorporation, which was entirely set up to protect the money classes from the results of their own actions, Well, I think that there would be no such thing as nuclear power.
	In fact, nuclear power was not being developed until the government offered to shield people from the consequences, from the liabilities, to put a cap on these sorts of things.
	Which is the same thing is true of the deep oil drilling in the Gulf.
	It's only because the government is willing to release people from the consequences of their own actions that these actions are even pursued.
	The free market was Making perfect hay of pollution before the government came along.
	I mean, this is not a new problem.
	Pollution didn't start with the Industrial Revolution or nuclear power.
	Pollution has been part of people's issues.
	I mean, farmers running manure crap off their field going into another guy's field.
	I mean, this stuff's been around as long as human beings have been around.
	The traditional remedy is, you damage my property, you owe me a restitution.
	It's that simple. Your tree, you're cutting down your tree and it falls on my barn.
	You owe me a new barn. And in the Industrial Revolution, when the smokestacks were pouring out the crap and it was rolling like, you know, like that's the smoke God from from lost onto the farmers fields and crapping all over their apples.
	The farmers took the smokestack corporate owners to court and said, you owe us.
	We've crapped all over our apples.
	We can't sell them. So you owe us huge amounts of money.
	And the government said, hmm, I'm getting a lot more taxes from the manufacturers than they are from the farmers, so no, you can pollute, and no, you don't get restitution.
	The government stepped in and undermined and destroyed the common law that was dealing with the problem as it always had if dealt with the problem of pollution.
	All we have to do is put the guns down and voluntarism will take care of these issues, as it always has.
	We're becoming like these old guys in the book 1984 who's like, well, I remember before the revolution there was a wedding and there was a guy with a big hat who was dancing.
	We don't remember anymore how these problems used to be solved in the absence of centralized violence.
	I can tell you, though, there is no sane human being.
	You know, it's funny. We always have to make the case for freedom.
	I'm going to do a show on this once.
	Somebody trying to make the case, like an anarchic society, a free society, a society without a state, and someone comes along and says, yeah, you know, we've still got a few issues.
	I see a couple of poor people there.
	I see a little bit of pollution over there.
	And, you know, these people don't seem to be very happy.
	So I've got a great idea.
	You know what we should do? Yeah, this is going to be beautiful.
	This is going to work so nicely.
	Gonna get a small group of people.
	And we're gonna give them all the guns in the world.
	And we're gonna disarm everyone else.
	See? And anyone who disagrees with this small group of people with all the guns in the world are gonna get arrested by guys...
	Let's make their costume blue.
	And give them, you know, funny little hats.
	The guys with funny little hats and the blue costumes are going to run around with guns to disarm citizens and throw...
	They're going to sort of kidnap and lock up anyone who kind of disagrees with the people who have all the guns in the world.
	And that, I think, is going to solve the few remaining problems that we have.
	And it's not going to cause any new problems.
	I mean, how could it? What could go wrong with that plan?
	Well, I think as we've seen over the past...
	Six to sixty thousand years.
	Pretty much everything can go wrong with that plan.
	And it has. Well, Ian, are we done?
	Nudity is perfectly natural.
	I invite you to Canada.
	Nudity may be perfectly natural, but the only thing that it helps you look more erect in is your nipples.
	So, I think, yeah, I think we're done.
	I think, Ian, it's up to me.
	Okay, if I can do one more question, if I have another one.
	Yeah, I can do it.
	Are you wearing pants? Shall I stand up?
	Shall I stand up? No, let's not stand up.
	But you do see me shifting around a lot, right?
	Oh, I love me some velvet.
	Do it. Assless chaps, you know it.
	You know it. You see boobs all the time.
	What, you don't look down?
	How do you address legislation needed to prevent bullying or other supposed emotional problems caused by another?
	Yeah, that's a great question.
	That's a great question.
	I mean, I put a lot of thought into bullying because I'd really like to...
	I bully people to get more donations for my show.
	I'm really trying to work out the mindset and what's necessary to achieve that goal.
	But bullying results from incarceration, first and foremost.
	The reason that children bully each other is that they're forced into proximity with each other and they have to go back and so I mean the first thing that you would do to solve the problem of bullying is to stop taxing the parents to pay for schools and then The parents would see if they wanted to have schools or not.
	I mean, if you weren't being taxed to pay for schools, a lot more kids would be homeschooled.
	A lot more kids would be schooled collectively with other kids in their neighborhood.
	And, you know, they'd meet at people's houses or meet at some gym or whatever for a particular lesson from experts that day.
	And if some kid was being a total jerk, well, he's uninvited and they don't have to deal with each other anymore.
	I mean, it's like prison.
	The problem is incarceration.
	That's why you're getting all of this bullying.
	And of course, like all prior impressions or impositions of force, it always requires more and more impositions of force.
	So the fact that the parents are forced to pay means the kids are forced to be there.
	This releases the kids to go and be more tax fodder or tax cattle for the estate, which means that their parents don't have the option to stay home and raise their kids or educate their kids.
	And so the kids are forced to be in this environment and they're segregated by age.
	I mean, age, what a ridiculous standard to segregate kids by.
	You don't want to segregate kids by age because there's such vastly different levels of maturity and intellectual ability.
	You want it by ability.
	You segregate by ability and by temperament, by nature, by so on, right?
	Not by age. It's ridiculous.
	It's like saying everyone who's got to get married has got to get married to someone who's, you know, three months within their age.
	What a ridiculous limit to put on things and how silly a thing to put on things.
	So yeah, I mean, bullying, this all results from compulsion.
	But bullying does have significant emotional damage.
	I mean, the people can commit suicide, they can get stressed, they get sleepless nights, they can whatever, right?
	And that needs to be addressed.
	But like all the things that happen to people who are underage, the moral responsibility accrues to the parents.
	If you raised a bully, you've got to pay restitution, I think.
	And so, you know, in a free society, parents would buy bullying insurance.
	So if my child has ever proven to be a bully, you will pay all of the costs.
	And then the companies who sell bullying insurance will have ways of reducing bullying, right?
	The same way that the life insurance companies will charge you less if you're not a smoker.
	And so they'll find ways to prevent bullying.
	They'll find ways to minimize it, to turn it around if it starts.
	They'll see the early warning signs and have ways of intervening.
	But none of this makes anyone a damn penny.
	In the modern system, the profit is all made from responding to aggression, responding to sickness, responding to dysfunction.
	Never about preventing it.
	it to do that you need a free market all right what is the breaking point for another revolutionary war There's not going to be another Revolutionary War.
	Come on. I mean, they've got nukes. They've got spy satellites.
	They've got, you know, all the technology that they've been blessed with as the result of the free market.
	So there's not going to be...
	We're not going to overthrow the state.
	We're not going to take it out in some sort of mad arms glory fest.
	It's not going to happen. You could do that with the British because the British had a supply line 3,000 miles across the ocean and the domestic advantage was to the Americans and the weaponry was about the same and Britain was involved in other conflicts and was running an empire and so was willing to let it go because it didn't seem like America was worth that much because they hadn't invented the Big Mac yet.
	So it was possible in the past.
	It's not possible anymore. The power disparity, the capacity for violence, they got WMDs, they got...
	Anthrax, spores, bioweapons, forget it.
	It's not going to happen.
	It's not going to happen through reason and it's not going to happen through force because you can't overthrow a power structure through reason because people at the top of or invested in that power structure, which is about half the US population at least, is not going to listen to reason.
	In order to reason with someone, they have to be open to reason.
	Not much point taking a science textbook to an Amazon witch doctor.
	And so people are not open to reason and people have too much power to be overthrown through force.
	So forget all of that stuff.
	Forget all of that stuff. You can't reason the world into being sane because the world is insane.
	You should never argue with a crazy man, man, man, man, man.
	So says Juan B. Joel, excellent philosopher from New York, New Jersey, I think.
	And so what you do is you, as Voltaire said in Candide, you tend your own garden.
	You bring peace and reason and the non-aggression principle to your own family, to your own children, to your own relationships.
	You refuse to violate the non-aggression principle in the raising of your children, and that means no spanking, no threatening, no abandonment, and you try and keep them away from the brain-mincing predatory shoots and public school degradations.
	And that's how you build a free society.
	We have to grow a generation who's capable of reasoning before we can win arguments through rationality.
	And that generation, I say this from 30 years of debating and about 10 million bits of feedback from the internet, the population as a whole is barely able, barely able to think.
	And you cannot create a cavalry with people who have no legs and no horses.
	You can try, but it's just going to be grotesque.
	So, you know, we have to focus on the parenting.
	We have to grow a generation that's capable of reasoning, which means they have to grow in peace and respect and negotiation.
	And then the arguments from rationality and evidence will win when we have people capable and with the ears and the maturity and the wisdom and the intelligence to hear the lessons that are so clearly spoken by those of us in the know.
	Homosexuality is not a personal choice.
	The science seems to be quite clear that it is inherent and that it arises from particular stressors on the mother's system in the first trimester.
	Steph, good news. We solved all of the problems preventing white-stale adoption of a voluntary society while you were rambling on your last answer.
	Isn't that great? Not only is it great, but I feel I participated by drawing most of the oxygen away from the ruling class during that rant.
	So I hope that helps.
	Well, listen, it's getting late.
	I could talk all night. But I think that Ian has got to get up early for cheerleader practice.
	I think just watching, not just participating.
	So I just thank you so much for the time.
	It was really enjoyable. As always, thank you so much for just genius, brilliant-style questions.
	I just love me talking to some libertarians and some voluntarists.
	And I hope to be able to do this again soon and have yourselves a great week.
	If you want to support the show, I'm going to be speaking at...
	Porcupine Freedom Festival Libertopia.
	I'm going to be speaking in Vancouver at Capitalism and Morality with Rick Rule and Doug Casey.
	I'm going to be speaking at the Texas Libertarian Convention in June in Dallas.
	So in all of this, if you can help with airfare and if you can help with other costs to do with the show, freedomainradio.com forward slash donate.
	Always, always hugely, hugely appreciated.
	You can sign up for like five bucks a month, whatever.
	That would really, really help.
	Thanks everyone and have yourself a great week.

▲