Complete and brutal take down of another materialist utopian Jewish ideology. Great podcast. If we could get all these high IQ whites to stop playing with these shiny distractions. We could win this thing in a generation

Libertarianism is a common stepping stone for people shedding the traditional “conservative” identity as it has a mildly significant political party and lots of big money backers but it has little in the way of staying power. Libertarianism is a great philosophical topic to discuss via simplistic memes (Taxation is theft!) and social media posts but it is not a serious political philosophy because it prefers esoteric theories over the reality of human nature. I was a big proponent of libertarianism up until the 2016 election and I am sure I am not alone.On the other hand, some libertarian groups are fertile ground for recruiting people into the dissident right. I see a lot of discontent from people in libertarian/liberty groups online thanks to the decision by the Libertarian Party and mouthpieces like Reason to shift libertarianism away from eliminating the income tax and shutting down the Fed to “marriage equality”, legalized pot and open borders. As the LP rushes left to try to capture the pot/amnesty/sodomy vote, many libertarians are going to be left behind and looking for a place to call home.

Good job. A decade ago I would have called myself a Libertarian. I’ll always want less government in my life and in general. But the flaws in some of the ideas and the complete denial of the consequences of their ideas drove me away.Reason has drifted significantly to the left over the past decade. They used to at least stand up to bad ideas such as Islam, not anymore. Now they can’t admit that inviting millions of Muslims into a western democracy is a horrible idea that will result in bloodshed and eventually war or progroms. They also refuse to acknowledge the supply side of labor when arguing for open borders. Pointing these things out to them results in indignation and anger.

Good analysis; a libertarian society is probably not stable, ie it will evolve into something else. Game theory suggests that bands of strong men would gang up, in business, as ‘corporations’, or simply as gangs of violent men. And create monopolies for own benefit. The only defense against this is to make your own band of men….and that’s how tribes, then kings, then states etc, arose. Libertarianism is simply trying to go back to square one and then watch essentially the same systems grow up, probably in worse versions.And, it is actually a sort of offshoot of the marxist view of man, as is Ayn Rand; it sees humans as economic units but not as an advanced and social mammal. Therefore it might work for tigers or bears (they are fairly ‘libertarian’, as lone predators) but not for humans.

Along my path at various points, I have considered myself a conservative, constitutionalist, classical liberal, libertarian, anarchist, anarcho-capitalist, etc. At current, I qualify mostly as a heretic to the Progressivist religion mismanaging our culture. My main objective is to value truth above all else. Politics is beyond my circle of influence. I am increasingly aware of the limitations and drawbacks of individualism in a world filled with tribalists; however, because I have always viewed myself through a lens of individualism, it is not a mentality I can easily abandon. Let us concede that libertarianism makes a poor fit with human nature. Very few people will sign onto libertarian philosophy. Beyond a contingent of white males, barely anyone understands it, let alone supports it. Nevertheless, libertarianism has great value when it promotes skepticism/cynicism toward the government/ruling class. We should take every chance to remind folks that various governments killed over half a billion people during the 20th Century. Power has proven itself one hell of a dangerous commodity. That government may be inevitable hardly makes it trustworthy.

I called myself a libertarian for quite a while until I realized a lot of those guys believed things I know are crazy. But libertarianism was my gateway drug away from National Review “conservatism”. So at least it was transitionally useful in my case.

Libertarianism is a tough one for me. If we were all angels, Libertarianism would be great. But we’re not, and we’re importing and breeding more and more devils all the time.Like all Utopian schemes of the Right and the Left, Libertarianism starts with “First, create humans that don’t behave like humans.”We were actually mind-bogglingly close in the 18th and 19th century US. I think we’ve all heard the saying attributed to John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” (Haven’t checked to see if the quote is really by him, but it’s not important, just making a point.*)That’s very, very true. Our founders, while they were not, as the Zman points out, Libertarian, did create probably the most Libertarianish significant government ever. And it worked pretty darn well, because the American population was surprisingly virtuous. Of course, there were lots of evil people, but the proportion of the population that was more or less “good people” was strikingly high. High enough to carry us for a long time, until we were undone by mass immigration and the welfare state.I am still reflexively Libertarian in my approach, because I look at our ruling class and I see, clearly, they are not smart enough to tell me how to live. They are vomitously corrupt and decadent.And then I look at most of the alt right leaders. Most of them are ideologues. Some of them might want to deport me because I’m half-Italian and my grandparents were immigrants (my Mom’s side may go all the way back to the Mayflower for all I know**). None of them are smart or virtuous enough to tell me how to live, either.I just want to be left alone. I do pretty well without need for government coercion. I am, without arrogance, a vast net benefit to this country: I have raised decent, law-abiding children (four out of five of them adults now), I make a lot of money and pay an extraordinary amount in taxes as a reward.I’m that privileged White male who works two productive private sector jobs, keeps the trains running on time, the roads paved (via taxes; I’m not a construction worker or locomotive engineer), looks out for my neighbor and doesn’t commit any of what we traditionally think of as crimes.I am thus thoroughly reviled by my progressive betters. Why should I trustanyonewith power over me?*Ah ha! Apparently the quotation is genuine:http://www.beliefnet.com/resourcelib/docs/115/Message_from_John_Adams_to_the_Officers_of_the_First_Brigade_1.htmlAs Abraham Lincoln said, “The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity.”**My maternal grandmother’s maiden name is Gardner. There was a Gardinar on the Mayflower. Small spelling changes in names were very common in the pre-oppressive-government era. On my Italian side I have close relatives (aunts and uncles ) who use a different last letter for their name than I do.

Our friends, the farmers. https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/26/gop-yoder-vote-provide-more-visa-workers-for-farmers/ If you can read the comments, lots of “farmers” that are quite pissed that their slave labor illegals could be gone. Privatize the profit, socialize the loss through degraded white/black work ethic, wage stagnation and drugs.

My understanding of the opioid crisis is a bit different. Thirty years ago in my state we were required to have duplicate prescription pads specifically for schedule II drugs as a hedge against fraud, which was very unusual. The low level of fraud led to dropping the special Rx’s to having the same plain paper Rx for all prescriptions. (Actually, when I went to med school having pre-printed Rx’s was something high class doctors did, or drug or medical stationery companies provided as promotions, we were taught to write them on blank pieces of paper).There was a very gradual increase in fraud year over year after that, which I noted by people stealing prescription pads out of exam rooms in my offices. The big bang, so to speak came with two events. One was the emergence of the “pain specialist”; the other was the publication of a letter in one of the journals (it wasn’t even a study) where people who were given high doses of narcotics as inpatients were noted to not develop dependence. This letter then began to be used as a reference in other articles to justify the use of highly potent drugs such as oxycontin. The average doc felt he could prescribe these things without ill effect.The above also happened at a time when the border security was very lax, so that may have had an effect as well. I remember taking care of traumas in lots of Mexicans during that time.Since then everything has changed. We now use Rx’s with special paper and the pharmacies track opioid prescriptions through a statewide system so fraud can be picked up. In the old days emergency rooms used to have lists of people to watch out for, now there is a statewide database of abusers. Physicians who prescribe long term narcotics are monitored as well, and when this is done there must be documentation of a contract with the patient not to seek narcotics elsewhere, with the penalty being dismissal from the practice. Meanwhile the narcotics used have switched over from being prescribed to being illegally imported or extralegally manufactured. Thus the heroin overdoses and meth labs.Addiction also appears to be a family phenomenon. Passed on from generation to generation, either by adoption of behavior, or by genetic predisposition according to neurotransmitter reception sites. The people who got addicted to oxycontin have children who are more likely to be addicts as well. These are the people dying of heroin overdose.The way I look at this is like when alcohol was introduced to indian tribes who had been addicted to nicotine only, and whose hepatic metabolisms weren’t up to getting ethanol out of the system quickly. When they got ahold of booze everything went out of control. Well, some white people have a similar genetic problem with narcs, only instead of hepatic metabolism other pathways and receptors are involved.The one thing to note is that most of the above problems have their genesis in people who assume that they have some special enlightenment about how things work or should work. This, in various iterations, is the basic defect with almost all ideologies and ideas, which may have some merit at some point, but get pushed too far. This is hubris. Not a new concept.

“Libertarians generally believe in and abide by the non-aggression principal, which renders the philosophy itself impotent in the cause of implementing its own principals.”– James LaFondHecontinues:“Libertarians generally seem to believe that the Founding Fathers of the U.S, were libertarians, when the majority of them were either bankers with monopolistic designs or slave masters seeking to wring more profit from their chattel. The actual libertarians of the Revolutionary Era were those escaped and released white slaves who headed into the Ohio Country to escape the plantation economy and the natives they battled against.And, for the tie breaker, it goes to the cons. Libertarianism is a purely materialistic view of life, which appeals predominantly to atheists. Atheists, however, tend to be drawn to collective worship of the human cause, to save and extend every life at all costs, and generally abhor libertarians. What is more, libertarianism ultimately comes to a point of agreement with the left, regarding the body as more important than the mind, the material world more sacred than the transcendent. For instance, in his otherwise very good audio article, The Truth About Slavery, Stefan Molyneux, the foremost libertarian spokesperson today, declared that escaping from or fighting against enslavement made no sense to American blacks during the plantation era, as they were assured better shelter and food in chains than on the run! The problem with all materialistic philosophies and ideologies is that they lead to such sell-out conclusions, a chief taking glass beads to disinherit his grandchildren, a slave dying in chains rather than in combat, a tribe giving up its identity for t-shirts, a nation throwing away its ideals for the cause of obesity.Lastly, libertarian views may only be understood by the rational human mind. So, when competing with sentimental conservatism and collective liberalism, with the identity-based right and security-based left, a libertarian view can only hope to appeal to the tiny minority of intelligent people. Public education and the media have essential disabled the vast majority of Americans from comprehending views more complex than a snack-food commercial.”

There’s a very strong cultural Marxist strain in libertarianism. The same people who tell you we can’t have borders or any kind of social safety net will immediately declare that the government must prevent discrimination against blacks or gays or Muslims. Freedom to discriminate is apparently against freedom. Arguing with them is pointless because as a previous comment noted they just get angry.

If you ask a libertarian why Detroit is a basket case they will tell you it’s onerous taxation and regulation policies. There’s some truth in their criticisms of government in general but I don’t need to spin myself in circles trying to explain things like Detroit in order to be critical of the government. There’s a lot of problems with libertarianism but I came to the conclusion a while ago that even if I wanted a libertarian world, supporting open borders libertarians would more quickly turn us into Venezuela than if I supported the socialist party.

Libertarianism is the cop-out when you reject the status quo, but don’t want to face the socially uncomfortable cultural and biological realities right in front of you. Here’s the test. When you are with lefties that for whatever reason you aren’t interested in intimidating, and you are forced to put some opinions out there, you cloak your views in libertarian arguments.

Great podcast Z Man! I think the biggest problem for Libertarianism, other than being a utopian fantasy, is that it is almost exclusively a “frontier” ideology. You referenced that word a few times in the podcast but having a frontier with low hanging fruits that could easily be exploited (land, labor, capital) was the reason that it sorta worked for a while in the U.S. And it’s the reason why it has no appeal in Europe, which has been settled for thousands of years. Libertarians idioitically think that the UK can solve its astronomical housing costs with just adopting a Houston, Texas sprawl model, not thinking that literally 75% of the island would be covered in concrete.

It is written, in John 15:13, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”This is of course the sort of maudlin nonsense rejected by libertarians. A libertarian is simply a self-worshipping asshole, if I may be allowed to generalize. There exist neither moral nor economic arguments for a libertarian ‘laying down his life” for anyone at all; sovereign in his leather jacket in a godless matrix, he has one task: To be awesome!Laugh all you want at the great swindle known as Christianity, or even Communism, but John’s precept was lived by many in each Faith, and they – consequently – made themselves forces in the world.I await libertarian martyrdoms. Ok, not really; that’s like Linus awaiting the arrival of the Great Pumpkin.

FYI, wolves and coyotes are genetically closer than Africans and Asians, though regarded as different species. Both groups can interbreed…and that doesn’t make coyotes a “social construct.”

Want a take on Libertarianism from today. Go to Lew Rockwell and two articles stand out with the standard fare. One about hoping the Russians win the trade war, because:bad policy. Two Jesus was not a socialist but probably would be closer to us.Ideology is a bitch, and I consider those types at Rockwell much better that your standard “Reason” types. I still go because there because still a paleo remnant there.

It’s easy to poke fun at liberatarianism – I do it all the time at misesuk.org – but … the real discussion point you need to spend a Power Hour on, and which was almost a throw-away comment, is the point that you get as much government as the social organization can bear without collapsing, no more, no less.This is actually the elephant in the room all thanks to modern technology. We’re entering the panopticon and it’s increasingly clear that only those with the least morals and the highest psychopathy are in in charge.Once you get beyond social organization where the King is the bravest fighter who has the vision and the stones to hold the society together, the parasites take over and it becomes inevitable the host will die.Unless the Z Man has a recipe to limit the power of government pointing and laughing at libertarians is simply fiddling while Rome is burning. I certainly haven’t seen anything from the alt-right about how to restrain the power of government in a materially wealthy and technologically advanced society. This is the problem of our age, not SJWs, not Muslims, not whatever else. The tiny intolerant minority end up running any society and today with the possibility of total social control of the individual (see China’s social media scoring) this means the end of human life as we have previously understood it. We all become slaves to the system which is there to service the system not human values. We’re pretty much there already.

If libertarians really hated the state as much as they hate the nation, they might actually be good for something. Except they don’t, and they aren’t.

If the NAP is wrong, then there is no morality at all. Is it possible that morality does not exist? That there is no such thing as morality? That it is nothing more than a fiction created by different peoples at different times? I think we all agree that there is no universal belief system that applies to all humans. Thus, any attempt to create such is pointlessly silly.

Excellent podcast. I would like to add one aspect that may be helpful to your understanding. Big “L” libertarianism as a political movement is a farce as you so eloquently explain. However, small “l” libertarianism is, at it’s root, about love of liberty and survival of the fittest. The latter is about as ancient and natural as evolution itself.

Lots of people with lots of different beliefs call themselves libertarian. I love the fools who think that because they oppose laws against some drugs and prostitution they are therefore libertarian. My definition of libertarian is someone who practices the NAP. NAP means “non-aggression principle.” So let’s be clear about what NAP means. The NAP is about determining under what circumstances an act of violence, or the threat of violence, or an act of fraud is morally justified. According to the NAP, violence, threats of violence and fraud are only justified in response to the initiation of violence, the threat of violence, or fraud.Let’s compare two examples. If you and I are walking down a road, you heading east and me heading west, and as we pass each other I punch you in the nose, we can all probably agree that that is an act of violence. On the other hand, if we’re walking along as before but you punch me in the nose first, and then in response I punch you in the nose, we have both committed acts of violence. But according to the NAP there’s an important difference in my action vs yours. In the first case I initiated violence, making my act of violence unjustified. In the second case, you initiated violence, and even though my punching you in the nose was an identical physical act as in the first case, in the second case my act of violence is justified. It’s justified because I did not initiate violence in the second case. Rather, you did.So, given that definition of the NAP, I’d like The Z Man to to answer this question.Would the world be a better or worse place if you live by the NAP? In other words, if you only commit acts of violence, or threaten violence, or commit fraud, in response to another person initiating violence or the threat of violence or fraud against you or another person, would the world be a better place or a worse place?

Bastiat convinced me years ago “Free Trade” was wonderful. I scoffed at Perot when he talked about the “giant Sucking sound”. Now you have convinced me, not about the issues like free trade, but about me being too impressionable to read any more. Thanks a lot.

More clown horn! At least it’s a must if Nick Gillespie or the apple heads at the Scroto Institute get a mention.

Somehow the country survived the zombie apocalypse of every drug imaginable drug being legal before America lost it’s mind in the late progressive era. You know, that backward time where despite the absence of big, loving government to destroy the foundation of the Constitution, we whelped out little advancements like the light bulb, phonograph, telegraph, telephone, A/C electric, the airplane and I’m sure one or two other things.And I’m having a hard time figuring out who to root for in this drug war. If MS-13 pulls a home invasion of my house at 4:00AM, I’m at least allowed to shoot them once they are in my house. But I’m assured a death sentence if I shoot back at the DEA and/or local SWAT team doing the same if they get the address wrong on their search warrant.

There was an old Soviet-era joke: There is no ”truth” inhttps://translate.google.com/?hl=en#ru/en/pravdaand no ”news” inhttps://translate.google.com/?hl=en#ru/en/IzvestiyaAnd of course, no ”reason” in Reason [clown horn].

I think the closest example of a society to libertarianism is Singapore. Singapore is mostly free-market, with the major exception being real-estate (government owns most real estate). Singapore is successful because it is comprised mostly of industrious Chinese people who were raised under an English-based common law system. The alt-right endevours to create a “white” version of Singapore, it would seem. This is probably the best we can accomplish as a realistic objective.One thing is certainly true. Human capital is the basis of everything. HBD is real. Any further improvement in any society can only come about through improvement in quality of human capital.Something that is becoming quite apparent to me in the 6 months or so is just how much of personality and cognitive traits are biologically determined (as opposed to “blank slate” environmentalism). This suggests that future improvements to human cognitive and behavior traits will be accomplished by bio-engineering rather than through embrace of stuff like traditional religion or political philosophy. So, not only is libertarianism not any good. All other political philosophies and religion are equally worthless as well.Its becoming abundantly clear to me that bio-engineering is the future. (e.g. making humans better). Anything else is mere entertainment.

I get your points about HBD, immigration, and the like. I even agree with them. I think we can agree that there is no solution to be found through politics. There are only non-political solutions to our problems.

Gorgar pleased, esp what Z did there at the end.

Re: vigilantes will make us paint our houses red. Not intending to defend them, but did the kkk ever try to make people build their houses a certain way or write books, songs, pamphlets, and even magic cards a certain way? You are trying to rationalize.

Great podcast. Speaking of individualism, Black Pigeon Speaks put up a new video on the issue. Wondering what you think of him, Zman? https://youtu.be/lrVyXdwft8E

Hans Herman Hoppe’s last name is pronounced as in kangaroo. btw I liked last weeks version of TBTM

Evolutionary anthropologist, Robin Fox mentions the relation of feeling pried and associate with one kin-group in “The Tribal Imagination -civilisation and the savage mind” an episode. He had been to a dinner where there was a Lebanese. Foxs mentions to him a lebanese author for saying that all in the middle east that do something or accomplish something always dedicates it to his kin-group of clan or tribe. The Lebanese became extremely angry and denied that and said “The man who wrote that is likely to come from that clan or that tribe” -so, tribalism is confirmed with denialism of its existence . A lebanese version of Jordan Peterson.

Odd that you didn’t mention your age on podcast #53!

There are the libertarian intelligentsia, and these are the ones I think you have a beef with; their ideology has become an “ism” … a religion. And it’s a false ideology because most libertarians seem to assume that human nature aspires to goodness. (No different from socialists on that point.)But if you distill some of the libertarian tenets down to “government should leave productive people the hell alone” then that’s pretty good political philosophy, no? Further, our Founders had a foreign policy that looked a lot like the libertarian Non-Aggression Principle, which seemed to serve America well until 1914. I’d sure like to see an America-first, NAP-centric foreign policy over our current tendency for global empire & perpetual war. So this discussion needs some differentiation between the wacko Libertarian party and some of the more sensible tenets that de-fang governmental power and de-swampify their bureaucracy.If we were to get back to the primary question, “Given the depravity of human nature, what is the purpose of government?” then we’d be on track with American greats like Jefferson & Patrick Henry (who never bothered to label themselves with any “ism”) … and heck, going all the way back to Mosaic government. The purpose is to allow a united (vice diverse) people and their monocultural (vice multicultural) civilization to survive & thrive. The wicked are eliminated or exiled, enemies are annihilated, and the non-assimilable are expelled.

Libertarian equals death because they won’t fight for the resources they need to survive…They can only survive by the sacrifice of others…

Libertarianism is only attractive to white males. This is because it allows them to deny their unfair advantages and privileges.