All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 19, 2012 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
19:32
2190 So one day you wake up in a Tarantino movie..'. Stefan Molyneux Speaks at FreedomFest 2012
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thanks, everybody.
I appreciate your patience.
Everyone's glad we're able to make it through.
I'll try and be quick and brief.
I invite you to join me in a Tarantino movie.
We will be speaking very fast and have lots of guns.
But I want to make a case for what we're trying to do as a community.
Now, of course, nobody can be the voice of the community, but I'd like to make a case as to what we're doing and how it can help liberate us in our interpersonal lives, which is really the only place where liberty can occur.
One of the great temptations of being part of a big movement, and libertarianism is the biggest movement because it's talking about the most fundamental moral issues and the greatest changes that society has ever seen.
One of the great temptations is for us to spend our precious energy, our blood and treasure, the blood and treasure of our souls, on things we can't change.
And the Fed!
Right?
So this is Jeff, you know, talking about a mountain.
You know, the mountain, with all due respect, not quite the right metaphor, because mountains stay the same size, right?
Sometimes it seems to come down very fast.
But maybe it's a dancing mountain.
A dancing mountain.
There's not a good dancer.
You don't know where the foot's going to go.
But we have to make sure when we define things like the non-aggression principle, like a respect for property rights, I think we're good to go.
A kind of seedy brother.
Anyone in the audience does, in fact, have a seedy brother?
Let's imagine you have a seedy brother who, you know, he's kind of skimmed around the up and down side of the law and all that, and he calls you up one morning and he's like, hey man, I need to go to the I don't know why he sounds like a bad mollygrap, but he does.
He drinks and smokes a lot, his voice, you know, Godfather of crime or whatever.
Anyway, so you say, okay, he's my brother.
He's been trying to come clean and do the right things.
I'm going to get my car and go drive it, right?
Anyway, so you go and you pick him up and he's got a couple of friends and they have, well in Canada we call them hockey bags.
I don't know what they call them here, duffel bags?
They got some duffel bags.
And you're like, huh, I guess he's got some friends who want to go to the bank too.
Didn't mention that.
Because you don't know which film you're in.
I told you you're in a Tarantino film, so you know what's going to happen.
But in real life, nobody tells you the film you're in.
Maybe you're going to go and hunt cartoon gear in the woods.
I don't know.
But in this case, it's a Tarantino film, so you know what's going to happen.
So then you drive him to the bank, and he's like, listen, I'm just going to be, according to the plan, six to seven and a half minutes.
He's very specific, and he's not known for his specificity, so this is another clue as to what is going to happen.
And then, you know, he goes out, and even though it's Vegas, let's make this, you know, a Tarantino film has got to happen in Vegas in this instance.
So it's Vegas, and it's of course, I think, if we convert from imperial to metric, it's about 450,000 degrees, if I get that right.
So what he does is they pull on their balaclavas because they're chilly.
Maybe the air conditioning turned up too high.
Maybe they're expecting the air conditioning in the bank to be kind of cranked up.
So they put on their balaclavas and they go running in.
And you sit in your car and, you know, it begins to dawn on you maybe that this is not going to be an ATM friendly withdrawal from the bank.
Anyway, so then after the approximate six to seven and a half minutes, he comes screaming out at the bank, and he jumps into your car, and clearly, obviously, somebody got, you know, maybe there was an ailment in the bank, there's lots of sirens and so on, and they've got big bags of money, and they've got shotguns in their duffle bags, and he jumps into the car, and he's like, drive, man, drive!
See, he doesn't sound like Marlon Brando anymore, because he's panicking.
Maybe that's what Marlon Brando sounds when he's panicking, but I'm off topic.
So, in this moment, it's very clear that you are now participating in a crime.
There's no court who would say, even after all of these clues, at this point, you know he just robbed the bank.
And interestingly enough, if you do drive off, then you are now an accomplice, and a significant accomplice in an egregious crime, theft.
Now, I would argue that in libertarianism, we're trying to wake people up to the movie they're in, right?
Because, you know, lots of people think they're into, you know, Mr.
Smith goes to Washington or Dave or, you know, I don't know, whatever patriotic films are around, The Longest Day or whatever, but they're not.
They're really not.
They're somewhere between a Tarantino film and The Matrix.
Something like that.
And we're trying to wake them up.
So a metaphor I've sometimes used is, you know, they've got these movies where the guys go and steal some of the cat burglars and, you know, the guys are all in suits and the women are all in spandex.
And what they do is they get these water sprayers.
They spray the water and see the lasers.
You don't see the lasers, right?
If you don't see the lasers, then you're going to get caught and all that kind of stuff.
So I think that what we're trying to do is to reveal to people that they're participating in crimes.
I think this is what Wendy was talking about.
But that's a real challenge.
It's a real challenge for people.
I was talking with Wendy before, and she was saying, how do you get through customs and all without being downtrodden or whatever?
But, you know, they're in the matrix.
If some guy in the 1950s in Russia turns out to be a communist, well, of course, that's the whole point of propaganda.
But you can't say he chose communism.
People don't choose statism.
They don't choose patriotism.
This is what is inflicted upon them repeatedly, aggressively, emotionally, manipulatively, and it goes on your whole life.
And it's really hard for people to unplug from that constant repetition of, you need your government, your government is good.
Without your government, there would be lawlessness.
As if there are any laws now.
You know that Obamacare thing?
Nine people study for decades the Constitution, which is, what, 50-odd pages?
And they can't even remotely come to a consensus?
I mean, we're bound by it, you see, as citizens, but they can't even come to a consensus.
There's not a lot of discussion among biologists about evolution.
Most of them would, you know, but when it comes to law, it's all just made-up nonsense.
And so, what I try to do, and I sort of suggest this approach to you in terms of how to bring freedom to your life, how to bring freedom to your life, is to recognize that I think the state, the state is not the guys at the top.
I would argue the men and the women at the top.
It's not the cops.
It's not the soldiers.
It's not the prison guards.
It's not the propagandists.
The state is horizontal.
The effect of the state is vertical.
But the state, sorry, think of a pyramid.
A pyramid has got stuff at the top, but it's all dependent upon what's on the base, what is the base.
So I would argue that the state is like this sword that's kept aloft by people's belief that it's good, that it's necessary, that it's virtuous.
So how many people here have gone to jail for libertarianism?
One.
Yes, you have chickens.
Mommy needs it.
How many chickens here?
Two.
Okay, good.
Alright, so how many people have experienced negative social repercussions for speaking the truth about the situation in the world?
Right, excellent.
The person who hasn't...
I may have some help here.
But this is the reality, that the negative social repercussions that we experience for speaking the truth are significant.
And you know, scientifically, it's very interesting.
Do you know that when we experience social ostracism, it activates exactly the same brain centers as physical pain?
Exactly, it is to our minds deep down and our bodies is indistinguishable from physical pain.
This is why ostracism is so powerful.
And this is why we don't need to say it.
When we are looking at the state, we're looking at the effects, and we want to make sure we look at the cause.
The cause is people's belief that the state is virtuous and necessary.
And why do they believe that?
Because that's what they've been told their whole lives.
I don't believe that they're morally responsible for that.
I mean, if it turns out that the world is flat and I've been lied to my whole life, you know, I can't cross-check every conceivable fact in the known universe.
I have to accept some things on faith.
I don't believe the moon is made of green cheese.
But if it turns out that it is, A. I'm now hungry.
And B. I'm just not responsible for, you know, having been lied to by everyone my whole life.
And so my argument is that what we're trying to do is we're trying to remind people or to bring people to the awareness that the state, by initiating force, is a criminal organization.
That's really hard for people to process.
Because, you know, we all Stockholm Syndrome with the state, you know?
Ah, the flag, ah, the politicians, ah, you know, the heroes, and so on, right?
And so it's really, really hard for people to do that, but I think it's really essential to do that.
And I'll give you sort of one little tool that I've used over the years to help people to understand this.
So, just to give you an example from my show, I do a college show every Sunday.
One person called in and they were really for the surge.
Remember, this is back in the day, a couple of years ago.
The surge in Iraq, remember, because it was going to Solve all the problems.
I can't even say that stuff in the street.
It's going to solve all the problems.
You know, why used to be able to say that stuff in the street?
I can't anymore.
And this woman was calling in.
She was really for the search.
Now, you know, my old temptation would have been imperialism and blah, blah, blah, right?
But I said, okay, well, if you're for the search, that's fine.
That's your belief.
You should send them some money and you should, or volunteer, or, you know, whatever it is that you feel is going to support that particular cause.
I respect your right to support the search.
And she said, well, that's nice.
And I said, will you return to me the same respect for me not to support the surge?
Let's pretend I'm American for a while.
I got this tour of the colonies accent, but let's pretend that the colony I'm touring is one that has, you know, gone AWOL. And we used to want you back.
We did the Empire thing.
That's old news for us.
But, uh...
Oh, yeah, yeah, this is a joke again.
So, do you give me the same respect back She said, yeah, I give you the same respect.
Because she thought she was just talking my opinion against the surge.
I said, okay, well, if you respect my right to not support the surge, then you must respect my right not to be forced to fund it.
There's no point having an opinion, having a conscience, that you are forced to act in opposition.
I mean, that's not freedom.
It's like, oh, you're free to trade, but you have to go to jail if you do.
Well, then you're not.
This is the weird thing you get into status, right?
It's a social contract.
It's voluntary.
Great, then we don't need to enforce it.
Well, no, we have to enforce it.
Oh, then it's not a social contract.
No, it's a social contract.
It's all in a print, but we have to force it.
No, we don't want to work.
It's like you're stuck in these revolving doors.
Hey, I think I've seen this before.
I think I've seen this before.
Think I've seen this before?
So, it was hard for her to process.
Because, remember, it's very, very important.
And let's, you know, to the minute, his friends in the room, you know, 12 to 16 months, no problem.
We're waiting.
It's a big desert.
Tough to cross, we get lost.
Just, you know, follow the golden eagles.
It's hard for people to understand that if you're against the drug war, right?
And someone says, I'm for the drug war.
I think that cocaine users should be arrested or whatever, right?
Punished.
So, well, you recognize that you are supporting the initiation of force against me as an individual.
Because the drug was very abstract.
The welfare state, imperialism, it's all very abstract stuff.
But this is guns to flesh that people are talking about when they're talking about state force.
It's guns to flesh.
It's nice in X. Right, so I said to a woman, Will you allow me to not be kidnapped and caged if I don't agree with you?
Because that's really all it comes down to.
If I don't believe that the welfare state helps the poor, if I believe it traps them in an underworld perpetual poverty, ignorance and declining prospects, am I allowed to disagree with you about the welfare state without you supporting cats in blue coming through my window dragging me off to a cage?
I will let you have your beliefs without wanting force used against you.
Will you return to me the same respect as a civilized and equal human being?
That is a very powerful argument to make, because people talk about law and order and courts.
They don't get that what they're advocating is the initiation of force.
I'm not talking about self-defense.
Self-defense, of course, is perfectly valid, but relatively unimportant.
How many times do people run at you with chainsaws?
Not often.
Oh, wait, unless we're in a Tarantino movie.
It's a stream of the movie.
But we are talking about the initiation of force.
And it is very real.
The state is something, people use it to abstract all the time, to abstract things all the time.
Obamacare.
Can I disagree with your healthcare plan without somebody pointing a gun at me?
Will you grant me that respect as a civilized, fellow human being?
Even if you disagree with me, or perhaps especially if you disagree with me, because I will allow you to disagree with me and not subject you to force.
Will you allow me to disagree with you and not subject me to force?
In other words, will you drop your support of violence against me for my conscience, for my convictions?
Will you put down the gun so that we can talk?
Will you get out of the getaway car?
Will you recognize that you are participating in a crime?
That you are supporting a crime?
You see, the important thing is that the bank robbery can't happen without the getaway driver.
No getaway driver.
No bank robbery.
No support of institutional violence.
No institutional violence.
But we can never talk people out of that which they call virtue.
We can never talk somebody out of that which they call virtue.
You can force them to act against it.
You can't talk them out of it.
And this is why I write a book on ethics, this is why I talk about what I call the argument for morality.
Oh, sorry, Free Domain Radio.
Freedom Radio would have been a great idea.
But I'm too branded now.
I got the tattoos, I can't change it.
But it is essential that we keep hammering the argument for morality.
People always want to talk about consequences.
Well, the consequence of Obamacare is some people will get healthcare who otherwise wouldn't.
That's exactly true.
The consequence of slavery is people get cheaper shirts.
Don't make it right.
Well, if we get rid of slavery, we won't have any cotton.
No, we'll just have different things.
Giant machines will drink dinosaur juice and go across the plains and pick all the cotton in the known universe, and we don't know what happens after freedom.
But people always want to talk about consequences, and that means nothing.
Consequences is no way to judge an ethical theory.
The consequence for a mugger is he's richer.
So he's all for it.
I mean, look, I have a watch and a wallet.
These consequences rock!
And the consequence for political power is idiots get to tell everyone else what to do and idiots believe that they can't.
Intelligent people don't try to run out of other people's lives.
So consequentialism and utilitarianism and pragmatism is all nonsense.
It's a fundamental, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, that we need to keep focusing on and to recognize with two people that, to wake them up to the fact that they are, I agree unknowingly and unwittingly and with all great sympathy that they are participating in crimes.
If they praise the state, I'm not saying everyone's got to go to jail.
Of course not.
But if you praise the state, if you don't recognize That the state is violent.
That the state is coercion.
That the state is brutal and uncivilized.
And the state is a 10,000-year-old system.
Good God!
I want to cure statism.
I think you just passed a law.
I know what that sounds like.
I want to cure statism.
Just passed a law that says that you can't use any technology newer than the oldest one you love.
Oh, you love the state?
That's about 10,000-year-olds.
Sorry, you don't get antibiotics.
We've got some bucket of leeches here for you.
Witch doctor, you know, but sorry, we just can't give you any new technology because you love, you're old school.
You love that old stuff where a small minority of people have all the guns in the world to tell everyone what to do.
That's tribalism.
That's way old.
Airplane?
Sorry.
No, no, no, no.
That was newfangled nonsense.
You could walk, but that's about it.
I mean, horses weren't domesticated, you know, until way after the state was invented, so we'll do that later.
But I think waking people up to the fact that they are unknowingly and unwittingly participating in a crime creates a moral choice for them.
I believe when you're in the state of propaganda, when you're in the matrix, you don't have a moral choice.
Choice is knowledge, right?
Morality is a kind of technology, right?
You can't describe antibiotics as a doctor before they're invented, and you can't make the choice to oppose immorality if you mistakenly believe that that which is evil is good.
And I'll leave you just one final thought.
I mean, I think the fundamental mission statement of libertarianism is fight evil.
Fight evil!
You know, I mean, I swear to God, if we all looked fantastic in capes and tights, that would be...
That would be the official...
I guess, costume.
I didn't say costume.
Our mascot.
I mean, we're superheroes.
We're trying to fight evil.
And it's early days, right?
And it's really early days in this fight.
There's not much point being an abolitionist now.
Kind of dealt with the slavery thing, at least the over a kind.
But it's really great to be in the ground floor of a moral revolution.
That's where the real medals are.
That's where the real hero is immensely.
But we fight evil.
And there's no way to fight evil.
That's what's so annoying about it.
It's so slippery.
Because it always redefines itself as the good.
Right?
It's a social contract that's part of it.
Patriots, don't you care about the poor?
What, you want to take healthcare away from sick and old people?
What kind of monster are you?
Don't you want to bomb some democracy into people?
It's a crater of freedom Their atoms will thank you as they float among the strataspheme Because it always redefines itself as good Once people see evil, they reject evil, which is why evil is the chameleon.
It camouflages itself all the time.
It is deleted, it moves, it changes, it redefines itself all the time.
And that's why you go back to basic principles, you know, spray that good old moral vapor, show the lasers, show the violence, reveal that this is not an ATM-friendly withdrawal.
This is not a man taking out a bank something he put into the bank.
This is a man taken by force out of the bank something he did not put into the bank.
That's evil, that's immoral.
That gives people a choice about the moral direction that they're going to take, and I believe That is the illumination of that choice that is the fundamental crossroads of the future.
If we don't see that choice, evil will only escalate and multiply.
If we see that choice, when people clearly see what evil is, we recoil from it.
We reject it.
And that's what we need, I think, to save the future.
▲
Export Selection