3 min clip from Stefan, very fascinating discussion about the effectiveness of the southern border wall. Please just watch till the end, you will thank me later for it.
Also, did Ron Paul ever propose building a southern border wall like Trump? Oh well, watch and discuss.
Meh, a few days ago Molyneux asked an eastern European if he thought their country would consider removing the socialist policies that support immigration, and strike at the root of the problem, because in Serbia I think it was they set aside a bunch of land for Muslim immigrants - but they wouldn't be able to collect any welfare there - and turned out none of the immigrants wanted to move there..none... and the guy agreed that was very unlikely they would end their socialist policies and so they would have to use force to keep them out.
Here is a nice little 15 second video that he put out the other day that makes a good point about immigration to socialist countries as well:
Ultimately they both seem to agree on the issue, I'm not sure what the big complaint is. I don't think Ron Paul is completely opposed to a wall, he just knows that there are more effective ways to deal with the problem - they both seem to agree so I'm not sure what the issue is.
If I go back and watch the original video that Molyneux posted, will I find that there was a lot of audio editing done to the version you posted?
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
If those who would otherwise agree that the welfare state should be wholly ended instead take the position of increasing government enforcement of immigration laws, the chances of ending the welfare state goes from being a fringe issue to not even part of the discussion.Originally Posted by dannno
Going into a negotiation with the intent of getting a dollar and asking for 25 cents is a losing proposition.
This is to say nothing of the incentives politicians face, and the effects those incentives have on the implementation of policy.
The epitome of libertarian populism
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
I've warmed to Molyneux recently, and I don't mind Trump, but someone needs to call Stef out on his ambivalence towards Ron Paul and his absolute adulation of "the Donald".
NeoReactionary. American High Tory.
The counter-revolution will not be televised.
He commented on it. He did defend Ron back in the day and he always spoke nicely of Ron.
The difference between Ron and Donald now is that the Donald is much closer to power. There is a lot more lies being spread about Trump and Stefan respects Trump for getting this far.
You do recognize that Molyneaux has the most contradictory points on immigration. It seems that he that he pondering to the fox news crowd type voter to make money not steering them towards the concepts of liberty.
No, I listen to all of his podcasts now and I don't need doctored up bull$#@! strawman video to tell me what his views on immigration are.. He does not hold contradictory points on immigration, he's taken hours and hours to go over his positions extensively and I've listened to many of them and pretty much all of them in the last year or so.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Stefan Molyneux is an imbecile.
http://www.fdrliberated.com/
At the very least, he's changed his mind. Which is fine, so did I on immigration, but squaring his previous opinions with his current ones is quite the task. He seems incapable of saying "I was wrong".
The video isn't a strawman either, it's entirely in context.
NeoReactionary. American High Tory.
The counter-revolution will not be televised.
...which says a lot.
Check out the link I posted.
Then you haven't been listening to his latest podcasts on the topic..and yes it is absolutely a strawman.
Immigration currently exists as a government program.. Most immigrants come here and are on government assistance. They are committing aggression against current citizens without paying into the system. Immigration control prevents that aggression from happening, using less aggression - additionally - immigration brings in more people who will vote for more welfare and socialism, which is even more aggression. He is picking the lesser of the evils and not abandoning his original position in any way, shape or form. He has no issue with immigration in a voluntary society.
Last edited by dannno; 04-28-2016 at 10:55 PM.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
No, he's actually very intelligent. The people who who don't like him are often incapable of reasoning well, or just don't take the time to understand his arguments.
Last edited by dannno; 04-28-2016 at 10:58 PM.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
He admits he is wrong when he finds evidence and reasoning that shows he was wrong, not when some random pseudo-intellectuals on the internet who don't take the time to understand his positions say he is wrong.
I don't agree with him all of the time, but most of his stuff is pretty solid and well reasoned.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Molyneux is a pseudo-intellectual. I mean David Gordon from the Mises institutes did criticized his work and it got him kicked out the Rockwell's circle.
Last edited by Wilf; 04-28-2016 at 11:47 PM.
Yea, something is wrong there; looks like Stef changed his tune 180 degrees.
I sort of recall a "Ron Paul Wall" Molyneux broadcast. Good points on how silly the WALL concept is. Stefan was not fond of RP. I recall the laughing.
-versus-
Donald Trump's wall will be finer and so awesome. Stefan likes Trump, so Trump's wall will be awesome. No laughing. (You must be kidding me!)
The big problem I see is America's "free social aid/healthcare" programs and many
"illegal this or that" laws that create black market opportunity. THAT IS WHAT
ATTRACTS people who want to cross borders. A wall is not going to fix/stop that.
The free everything policy for votes is cancer; it will eventually die and take
everything with it.
POTUS Trump will offer lots of interesting entertainment...
I like both of these guys, a lot.
Last edited by FindLiberty; 04-28-2016 at 11:42 PM.
Then why did he argue against the idea that immigrants come for the welfare? Why did he chastise Ron Paul for wanting to build a wall and argue that walls don't work? Why does he chastise supposedly pro-spanking libertarians when asked about his consistency on immigration, as though that has anything to do with his arguments? He was making the very arguments he laughs at (that I agree are laughable). Has he explained why he was wrong about these things?
I agree with Molyneux on immigration; if anything I'm far more right wing than he is, but I don't claim to adhere to the NAP, and I don't care if people think I'm not a libertarian.
NeoReactionary. American High Tory.
The counter-revolution will not be televised.
When did Stefan ever claim he was never wrong and has never changed his mind? In fact he has said the opposite.. he changes his mind when he runs into reason and evidence to the contrary. For example, long, long ago before the podcast he supported multi-culturalism. He is ok with multi-culturism now to the extent that it is voluntary, he says that cultures can potentially assimilate, slowly, over time, potentially in a healthy way, but that multi-culturalism should not be something to promote because it usually ends up badly. He has also changed his mind on race and IQ. If he did ever argue that immigrants don't come here because of welfare or that a wall is a bad idea, then in a sense perhaps he has changed his mind on those - although I will have to take some time later to watch that video because I have a hard time believing that he really made the argument that immigrants don't come here for welfare but it is certainly possible.
Why people make stupid youtube videos that show he changed his mind on something and claim he is contradictory when he has changed his mind based on reason and evidence is kinda ridiculous.
He has said some really great things about Ron Paul - I am not totally happy with his treatment of Ron Paul at times, and I don't intend on supporting Trump - but in general he is a great source of philosophy discussions and research based podcasts and he does do a good job of supporting his views with reason.
I mean, a wall does help curb immigration, but it isn't the end all solution. So that means you can make a valid argument in both directions, which he has.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Against my better judgement, (I detest Molyneux!) I did as you asked....
You owe me 3 minutes of my life back.
I literally cannot fathom this. He did NOT speak nicely of Ron back in the day; and he was always dismissive. He was literally incapable of seeing Ron's nuanced approach; that his real goal was education first & foremost:
Stefan was guilty of the purist deviation fallacy.
I haven't been listening / paying attention to him or his podcasts for about a year. What did I miss? How on earth has it gone all Trumptard?Reporter: “As you are reflecting back on your campaign, are you unhappy with your party?”
Ron Paul: “Well, it’s not my party. I don’t like politics at all… As far as being pleased I am super pleased with what’s working… I am super-energized and optimistic about what’s happening, because the ideas are changing. What I’m talking about is an ideological revolution.”
Anyone who thinks the media's actions against Trump are a vindication of him; as compared to Ron's treatment is demented.
“I will be as harsh as truth, and uncompromising as justice... I am in earnest, I will not equivocate, I will not excuse, I will not retreat a single inch, and I will be heard.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison
Worthy Threads:
- Ron Paul reconfirms his voluntarism
- Murray N. Rothbard: In Memoriam by Ron Paul
- State or Private Law Society?
- Please convince me of statism!
- Ron Paul and Private Courts
- Youtube
Ron, to my knowledge, never mentioned a border wall.
He was against a border "fence" and voted against it in Congress. He also talked about the border fence being used to keep Americans IN the US.
Ron's position on border security was to bring all of our troops home and station them at the borders. Personally, that's a far more costly and dangerous idea than a fence.
Walls and fences are nonsense. They should just end all free $#@! to immigrants and build a North/South Trans-American rail system with free rides to Canada with free brochures on the myriad free $#@! the Queen offers up there.
The pre-1914 world saw no immigration issues or policies, and no real border controls. Instead, there was free movement in the real sense; there were no questions asked, people were treated respectfully and one did not even need official documents to enter or leave a country. This all changed with the First World War, after which states seem to compete with having the least humane view on foreigners seeking refuge within its territory.The “immigration policies” of modern states is yet another licensing scheme of the 20th century: the state has enforced licensing of movement. It is virtually impossible to move across the artificial boundaries of the state’s territory in the search for opportunity, love, or work; one needs a state-issued license to move one’s body, be it across a river, over a mountain or through a forest. The Berlin Wall may be gone, but the basic principle of it lives and thrives. […]
Yet the immigration issue seems to be somewhat of a divide within libertarianism, with two seemingly conflicting views on how to deal with population growth through immigration. On the one hand, it is not possible as a libertarian to support a regulated immigration policy, since government itself is never legitimate. This is the somewhat classical libertarian standpoint on immigration: open borders.
On the other hand, the theory of natural rights and, especially, private property rights tells us anyone could move anywhere — but they need first to purchase their own piece of land on which to live or obtain necessary permission from the owner. Otherwise immigration becomes a violation of property rights, a trespass. This is an interpretation of a libertarian-principled immigration policy presented by Hans-Hermann Hoppe a few years ago, which since then has gained increasing recognition and support.
I intend to show that the libertarian idea is as powerful as we claim, and that there is no reason we should not be able to reach consensus in the immigration issue. Both sides in this debate, the anti-government-policy as well as the pro-private-property, somehow fail to realize there is no real contradiction in their views.
The anti-government-policy immigration standpoint (or, the open borders argument) and the pro-private-property ditto are two sides of a coin; their respective proponents have simply fallen prey to the devil in the details. Let’s go through the main arguments of both camps, and see to their respective strengths and weaknesses, and I’ll show you how this is true. […]
We must not forget libertarianism is not a teleological dogma striving for a certain end; it rather sees individual freedom and rights as the natural point of departure for a just society. When people are truly free, whatever will be will be. Hence, the question is not what the effects of a certain immigration policy would be, but whether there should be one at all.
From a libertarian point of view, it is not relevant to discuss whether to support immigration policy A, B, or C. The answer is not open borders but no borders; the libertarian case is not whether private property rights restrict immigration or not, but that a free society is based on private property. Both of these views are equally libertarian — but they apply the libertarian idea from different points of view. The open borders argument provides the libertarian stand on immigration from a macro view, and therefore stresses the libertarian values of tolerance and openness.[2] The private property argument assumes the micro view and therefore stresses the individual and natural rights.
There is no conflict between these views, except when each perspective is presented as a policy to be enforced by the state. With the state as it is today, should we as libertarians champion open borders or enforced property rights (with citizens’ claims on “state property”)? Both views are equally troublesome when applied within the framework of the state, but they do not contradict each other; they are not opposites.
— Per Bylund, The Libertarian Immigration Conundrum
^ The solution.
“I will be as harsh as truth, and uncompromising as justice... I am in earnest, I will not equivocate, I will not excuse, I will not retreat a single inch, and I will be heard.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison
Worthy Threads:
- Ron Paul reconfirms his voluntarism
- Murray N. Rothbard: In Memoriam by Ron Paul
- State or Private Law Society?
- Please convince me of statism!
- Ron Paul and Private Courts
- Youtube
Ron has clearly come out AGAINST having a border wall.
"Rep. Ron Paul has a problem with the idea of a U.S. border fence.
'The people that want big fences and guns, sure, we could secure the border,' the congressman noted. 'A barbed wire fence with machine guns, that would do the trick. I don’t believe that is what America is all about.
Every time you think about this toughness on the border and ID cards and REAL IDs, think it’s a penalty against the American people too. I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in. In economic turmoil, the people want to leave with their capital and there’s capital controls and there’s people controls. Every time you think about the fence, think about the fences being used against us, keeping us in.'
http://nation.foxnews.com/ron-paul/2...e-used-keep-us
Not at all. The "State" cannot own land. The government is neither an individual nor a group of individuals. Therefore it cannot have any rights, including property rights. "State" land is nothing more than unowned land. And movement across unowned land is never restricted. To think otherwise is to turn the State into a King, automatically controlling all land and doling out as it chooses, a modern day feudal system. This might explain why some seem to think property taxes are just, the lord demanding his cut of your work on the lord's land, but it is completely antithetical to any formulation of individual liberty.
So crossing a state or national border, across unowned land, is not trespassing in the least.
Molyneux is off the rails and has been for a long time. He is veering into complete narcissism, if not already there.
That's fine, I'm not a big fan of a border fence either. I prefer getting rid of entitlements, that is a much better solution. That is the solution Ron Paul prefers, that is the solution Stefan prefers, I think that is the solution we all prefer.
Ron Paul had this principled stance that he was tired of the government expanding to fix problems that they themselves created. He saw the wall as government expansion to fix a problem they created through entitlements, hence the principled stand he took against it.
However, Ron Paul was FOR a HUMAN WALL at the border, but the catch was we didn't have to expand government - we could use the troops who are overseas killing people and put them at the border, kill two birds with one stone so to speak..
The reason a lot of people want to see the wall built is because they know the government won't get rid of entitlements but they know they might be able to get them to build a wall or fence. So they are being a little more realistic than Ron Paul on this one.
The other issue with Ron Paul's position is that by allowing more people in, we will be expanding government even more than if we just built the damn fence because they will be voting for socialist policies.
Personally I agree with Ron Paul, I wish we lived in a country where we didn't need to fence off our border, it's un-American.. But socialism is even more un-American. Clearly he sees a reason to protect the border and clearly protecting the border will help slow the growth of govt. somewhat so it's really just tiny little semantics and minor issues we are dealing with here, no huge philosophical differences that you guys are trying to turn this into.
Last edited by dannno; 04-29-2016 at 02:12 PM.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
He's actually the most informative and well-researched podcasters on the internet. I don't always agree with him, but by shutting him out completely you are doing yourself an enormous disservice.
There are a lot of lies and bull$#@! out there about Stef, I've run into quite a lot by anti-Stef posters on this site. These people tend to have very low reasoning skills or are very uninformed.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
How does one become an owner of land?
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
Agree 100%.
ALWAYS something to think about from his amazing perspicacity regarding
current events (and watching how well he handles some of those callers).
Bonus: ...and if Stefbot ever does flip out, his wife is fully licensed
and standing by, ready to comfort and medicate him, if necessary...
So no worries there mate!
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us