Is The Latest Video About Libertarianism or Anarchism?

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

A whole video on Marx?

No, not Marx, but Socialism vs Capitalism.

[commie]

33 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

A monopoly of force does not have to be perfect or absolute. Of course in the early days of the US things were somewhat loose. But still there were laws, courts, legislature, police, military, government agencies, etc.

What a monopoly has to be is... monopolistic. I agree it doesn't need to be perfect but it still needs to be overwhelming in practice whenever the monopoly is challenged. Even as far as intent was concerned, one of these laws was the 2nd amendment which was explicitly aimed to prevent such a monopoly.

A true federation has no monopoly of force. The EU for instance also has laws, courts, agencies and a legislature. It doesn't need overwhelming military force because members are allowed to secede.

Please keep in mind that in the context of this thread I'm trying to argue the mainstream anarchist (or federalist) position and not the individualist position which I loathe. No doubt I'm doing a poor job of it, not being an anarchist myself. But I'm not trying to say you don't need a monopoly at some level but rather that the monopoly need not be in the hands of a state (which necessarily has little in the way of accountability to its subjects).

Edited July 5, 2020 by commie

[Leo Gura]

33 minutes ago, commie said:

What a monopoly has to be is... monopolistic. I agree it doesn't need to be perfect but it still needs to be overwhelming in practice whenever the monopoly is challenged. Even as far as intent was concerned, one of these laws was the 2nd amendment which was explicitly aimed to prevent such a monopoly.

A true federation has no monopoly of force. The EU for instance also has laws, courts, agencies and a legislature. It doesn't need overwhelming military force because members are allowed to secede.

Please keep in mind that in the context of this thread I'm trying to argue the mainstream anarchist (or federalist) position and not the individualist position which I loathe. No doubt I'm doing a poor job of it, not being an anarchist myself. But I'm not trying to say you don't need a monopoly at some level but rather that the monopoly need not be in the hands of a state (which necessarily has little in the way of accountability to its subjects).

These are some nuances which are beyond the scope of what I was talking about in the video.

The more evolved a society gets the less it will need to rely on brute physical force to enforce its laws and rules. Most US laws do not require brute physical enforcement these days.

Maybe in the far distant future there won't need to be a military at all. But not in our lifetimes so I don't really care about that.

9 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Wow! I'm really looking forward.

...will you be favorable to capitalism?

Depends on how you define capitalism.

[Leo Gura]

Just now, Husseinisdoingfine said:

The means of production and industry being run privately for profit

Depends on which industries. Many industries can be private, but not all.

[Leo Gura]

@Husseinisdoingfine Wait for the video

[commie]

4 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

aaaaarrrrrrggggg...

How do you define capitalism  

It's surprisingly hard to find a coherent definition of capitalism which has traction on "reality" (as our host might put it).

Any industry can be made private for instance, as long as it's sufficiently regulated. That is, it might as well be public expect for capitalist ideology.

Edited July 6, 2020 by commie

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

If I'm a socialist, should I be scared?

Only devils should be scared

[Lyubov]

58 minutes ago, commie said:

It's surprisingly hard to find a coherent definition of capitalism which has traction on "reality" (as our host might put it).

I don't think so. Capitalism is a pretty straight forward concept, the invisible hand. The vast majority of economists and politicians are quite clear on the concept. It's the reason why there is so much tension currently in politics (in US), cause a large part of the society is ready to move on from capitalism and build upon it to create a new system. 

[commie]

57 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

Capitalism is a pretty straight forward concept, the invisible hand. The vast majority of economists and politicians are quite clear on the concept. It's the reason why there is so much tension currently in politics (in US), cause a large part of the society is ready to move on from capitalism and build upon it to create a new system. 

How is the infamous "invisible hand" of all theories straightforward?!? And on the face of it, it's about markets rather than capital. If we're going to talk hopelessly dated political economy, Marx's MCM' is flawed but at least it describes something you can actually observe in the wild even today.

Granted, I've got no degree or job in that field. But I've got some experience trolling the professionals you are referring to by taking part in graduate seminars, chatting with people who wrote books about this and so forth. Look at data or ask questions and any clarity falls apart. I can't tell you the name of anyone who published a workable system, and it's not for lack of looking. Never mind building something new, just keeping the existing system from crashing is basically trial and error.

Which isn't to say that you can't define a word or being clear about a concept. The problem I posed earlier is: how much traction does the definition or concept have when dealing with "reality"?

[Spiral Wizard]

14 hours ago, Akemrelax said:

Also, you should do a video about Leadership. In your recent videos you mentioned some things about leadership which shattered a lot of my preconceived notions about it which I picked up from my culture. Now that I think about it leadership is not about being the most “moral” and “virtuous” person, it seems to be more about “selfishness”, at least at lower stages. 

@Akemrelax some leaders might seem selfish relative to your stage of development but as far as my understanding goes the leader should be more selfless and developed relative to his followers.

So for example, if you have a purple tribe there will probably not be a beige ruler, but a red one and so one... The leader is a good one if he is 1 or 2 stages ahead. At least that is what @Leo Gura mentioned in one of his videos. Of course, there are collective ego backlashes, which results in "leaders" like Trump, but it should be quite obvious that this whole situation is pretty dysfunctional...

[Spiral Wizard]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There will be one world government, of course.

 

that's a stage yellow wet dream...

[AlwaysBeNice]

14 hours ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

*phew* I can keep my political principles (anti-capitalism, sry it's just my belief).

ps I'm starting a belief reset, doing lots of reading

 

 

pls follow list

That's a sure way to delay your enlightenment by 15 years

[Yog]

I think Leo is utterly wrong that Liberterian societies do not exist. Just damn wrong.
They do exist, in our collective imagination, maybe a bit because of the fear of the possibility.

Interestingly enough cyberpunk as a genre is a criticism of both the lawlessness of libertarianism ,capitalism and the plurality of post-modernism.
The most common themes are: consciousness and digital-horror, or a detective story, it actually is a perfect world for a detective story,  a world devoid of transparency in societal means, where the police is having brutally heavy time.

Its almost like a deep cry of the collective psyche manifested trough the utterance of the artist to nooooot libertarianism and nooooot kill meta narratives, nooooot digitize too much, Its a dark genre, quite depressive. I love it.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Yog

[Yog]

I would also add, that EvE online is a game that summarizes leo's video extremely well. Its a space sandbox MMORPG with map spreading thousands solar systems. It has live economy and was used for economical studies of some British researchers, its quite a sandbox. Has a single server and universe and it has massive player count.

In the game there are.
Hisec = 1.0 sec status systems = high government (NPC faction space)
Lowsec = 0.4 sec status = low government (NPC faction outscirt systems)
Null-sec = 0.0 sec status = no government. (Non-claimed territory)

You can go in nullsec as a player and claim territory, people group as corporations and many corporations in alliances and many alliances into clusters.

It is interesting to observe how people quickly group and in as corporations and alliances, and any solo player in that territory is hunted and humiliated, warned not to come back.

The thing is In the game when your ship dies, it is dead, thats it, you have to buy a new one. So many flock in the safety of hi-sec., , so nullsec players had to invent government. Almost 90% of the cases a monarch style of government.

For eg: you are allowed to move freely across these 500 systems and mine, farm ect, but you'll have to pay 10% tax. You are also protected from raids as we guard our borders. But you will have to answer the "call to arms" when needed, we will provide your ship.

Enjoy these virtual governments.

@Leo Gura
I bet you will like it.
Timestamped:

 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Yog

[Leo Gura]

@Yog My brother and I both played EVE online when it first came out. It was so vicious, we got so beat up on by pirates that we quit the game in frustration. My brother was even scammed for $100 and all his in-game money.

Which perfectly explains why no one wants to live in libertarianland. The bullies dominate everyone else because there is no referee. EVE is a game full of scammers and trolls. In real life such people would rape your children in front of you for sport.

Which is why EVE never went mainstream. It can only exist as a niche game for the most hardcore people.

[Yog]

@Leo Gura Yea...neat..a brutal game

imagine what I did. It didn't take me long to realize that,..... well why mine, why trade, why search for that exploration loot, when I can band with 2 friends, or even solo, go low-sec and pirate, camp, cargo scan folk, make them drop cargo, make them pay toll, extract as much as possible value out of it, if its not worth it, just blow it up, or blow it up so you can salvage something useful. I didn't go that brutal on people, but others surely did.

I could not pay for sub, was too expensive for me, so I had to grind in-game isk for sub. A brutal game.

it was defiantly a more lucrative approach than grinding,farming, mining. Yes it was.
So there is my testimony.

But nowadays I have more heart and like to make my victims happy .
You don't see that much in EvE
 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Yog

[Socrates]

7 hours ago, AlwaysBeNice said:

That's a sure way to delay your enlightenment by 15 years

LMAO... facts

[TrustTheProcess]

@Husseinisdoingfine

haha, lots of og philosophy is really dense and dated. especially all of the theology and "logic" talk... if you are interested, get an intro book and if an idea or philosopher is interesting to you explore it. for the most part though, a lot of what you will find is not practical and will ultimately end up distracting you from awakening. 

Edited July 6, 2020 by louhad