I hope Larken rethinks his decision not to travel around and speak anymore. He's such a great speaker and he was part of my transition from statism to voluntaryism/anarchism. I realize he'll still be around doing other things, but he's such a brilliant guy who has so much wisdom to offer. I wish I had the $$ to just pay him to travel and speak at colleges, schools or anywhere else people could gather and listen to him.

@cardioactivist9953

8 жыл бұрын

He is currently working on a brilliant software program where people will be able to confront THEIR OWN contradictory thought at their own pace....

@srobart

8 жыл бұрын

+Cardio Activist Yeah, I'm really looking forward to The Mirror. :)

@mrmtn37

6 жыл бұрын

He is truly a great intellectual . Have you thought about starting a crowd fund for him?

I fully agree, government IS the problem, not the solution.

@thenew4559

7 жыл бұрын

But "private"(fascist) bankers have no power to wage war without governments and governments give them a legal monopoly to print money to which they owe their existence, thus advocating an anti-government or a small government agenda would be counterintuitive to their power and thus would make no sense. And it goes without saying that these top criminals have more than enough sense, as they are allegedly able to manipulate states and entire nations.

@joebananatube

7 жыл бұрын

The New Patriot There's nothing "alleged" about it, it's an established fact.

@thenew4559

7 жыл бұрын

Hey, man, I stated "alleged" because I don't really know a whole lot on the subject of the bankers, to me it is only a symptom of the problem of the government power they use to achieve their ends. That being said they are evil, immoral people and it would easily be in the realm of likelyhood for them to use government power in such ways as to manipukate wars, economies, etc. So I do not dispute the theory.

@joebananatube

7 жыл бұрын

The New Patriot Sounds like you are informed enough to come to the logical conclusion that the banksters are evil. And our tyrannical form of government is bought and paid for by the banking cartel.

@thenew4559

7 жыл бұрын

Oh, sure, yes. The banksters do have a lot of control over the govenment and econ policies, as do very oarge corporations with their influence through lobbying, and possibly back room deals. Of course, the problem is not the banksters and big corporations, it is the government which they use as a tool. If we outlawed lobbying and left the government's power to regulate and control the people, then they would find anihter way to control the government at their wills. If you have a monopoly on the right of violence, then it won't be soon before you're being used, bu that is only the symptom of the problem. To cure ourselves permanently we must extract the cancer that is government.

What I absolutely luv about Larken Rose his ability to simplify what is, in many minds, very complex. It truly does come down to BEING RULED or RULING YOURSELF - That's IT! I want to be responsible for myself - I'm a big girl. Thanks for making things so easy to understand for people who otherwise don't have that ability. ~Peace

Larken Rose is brilliant in this.

The concept can really be boiled down to: Are you for slavery or against slavery. The end.

@digitecdevil

9 жыл бұрын

You can pretend that a stateless world involves nothing like slavery but that doesn't make it so. Scarcity implies conflict and coercion.

@decompyler

9 жыл бұрын

... So does the artificial generation of scarcity through those who would wish to control others.

@thomaslowe6378

9 жыл бұрын

digitecdevil We live under Crony Capitalism in 2015 we do not have a Free Marketplace on anything.

@mikedavino2400

9 жыл бұрын

decompyler one word .ignorance

@smh9902

8 жыл бұрын

+Steven Dixon Refuse to pay taxes and you'll meet your master.

I was a "minarchist" for a decade or two. I recently transitioned to "anarchist". It was an EASY transition for me. What made it easy was applying additional education and growing a more rational mind.

@voluntarism335

4 жыл бұрын

you are slow and stupid. did you try to pay resitution to your victims? I bet you did not you piggy, you are a bastard and a pig that goes OINK OINK

@lavabubble8255

Жыл бұрын

I was a monarchist for about 2 months then I realized that the few things that I thought the government should do were the worst things the government does

Brilliant, calm & basic presentation. Thank you.

Absolutely agree with everything were discussed in this clip. I've read Larken's book "The Most Dangerous Superstition" and would highly recommend this read, it really helped me processing some old, stagnant beliefs that were there since birth (I suppose), my only regrett is not to have read this book much sooner. I am very grateful for the clarity that Larken brought with this book :) If I could I would attend to his "Candle in the Dark"...perhaps someday...Larken Rose, brilliant author and a man of integrity, thank you for your great works :)

@magnus4g63

4 жыл бұрын

i second that 👍

Anarchy is Kindness. Watch your motives.

I'm glad I've found this interview. :)

Larken is a brave human. He's also 100% correct about everything he said in this interview. I wish there were more humans like him.

Great video.

This is great

Didn't Ben Franklin suggest that we need to have the system reset every 7 years or so? Meaning that he foresaw this fundamental issue of Government and thought that a collapse/war/reset will keep things inline. They saw this issue and couldn't figure out how to fix it. Anarchy is how we get to 1000 years of heaven on earth.

@voluntarism335

4 жыл бұрын

"1000 years of heaven on earth." - WRONG COMMIE STATIST PIG, it brings forever peace when government goes away to something like bitcoin the government will hopefully vanish and we will live in a voluntary society forever.

@eclipse369.

3 жыл бұрын

@@voluntarism335 bitcoin? Lmao invisible money requiring technology? hahaha

Is there any chance of a formal debate between an Objectivist and an anarchist on minimum government vs no government?

Larken Rose Pardon if I missed it but why is this the "last speaking tour ever?" Will you do interviews anymore? Still make vids? I have interviewed several fellow anarchists such as Adam Kokesh, Jeff Berwick, and also Marc Stevens. I would like to interview you if you're ever open to it.

Once you truly understand the anarchist position, there is no going back -- it is an irreversible awakening. If two people are on opposite sides of a fence, being closer to the fence doesn't matter. In the final analysis, there's anarchy, and there's statism, with no gradations in between. We still love ya, but we're not in the same place in terms of evolution of consciousness.

@magnus4g63

4 жыл бұрын

exactly 👍

By your definition I am an anarchist, I prefer the term voluntarust though.

@ClickKlack43

8 жыл бұрын

+Dennis Geoffroy They're not mutually exclusive. All Voluntarists are Anarchists, but not all Anarchists are Voluntarists. Cheers.

@patrickharvey5736

4 жыл бұрын

Only voluntaryists are true anarchists. All other forms of anarchy lead to a ruling class and ultimately a government.

@voluntarism335

4 жыл бұрын

@@ClickKlack43 wrong

@ClickKlack43

4 жыл бұрын

VOLUNTARYIST VEGAN PROLIFE BLACKPILLED Do you think you could articulate what you seem to believe I’m wrong about (I’m not wrong), and maybe include some basic grammar and punctuation, or are you too protein and stamina deficient from the vegan thing to push the keyboard buttons for more than 5 letters?

@voluntarism335

4 жыл бұрын

@@ClickKlack43 Anarchists are voluntaryists because if they are not they are not anarchists.

i would like to meet this man!

Can someone please give me an easy to understand definition of Minerkism (Minerkist) Thanks

Very nice, thank you! at 13.20, Justin introduces the point that even though some people may manage to be represented by government, the others have to go along for the ride, essentially. The percentage used as a 'for example' was 51%, so, in the example, 49% are left out ... I just finished a video on this topic, and the number in actuality is much, much lower ... it only LOOKS like 51%. I'd like to invite anyone who wants to do so to give it a view, check my math, and dispute the premise.

nice vdeo

Cannot remember which talk but Judge Napolitano tells a story about speaking with a senator about the 13 things that govt has power to do, and how is it they do so much more then the Constituion allows for? The Senator says because the constitution does not say they cannot?

Just need some good ole Common sense to see where he's coming from what a breath of fresh air few and far between

The problem is you can't argue for a moral system with an amoral society ....That is why I embrace polycentric law. It gets you to the same place but with individual consequence for trying to control the freedoms of others

@Grero

9 жыл бұрын

What if people want monopoly law? :-)

@dingusmungus

9 жыл бұрын

Grero.com They could set up a monopoly law by legitimately owning all the land the law would apply to... This prevents anyone from setting the law for land they do not own, and allows landowners to choose what agency would enforce the law on that land, including both competing agencies or a single monopoly agency. A modern example of this would be an HOA or mall security. In which tenants voluntarily agree to pay for a service as part of their use of the land.

Some folks want "Limited government" and I suppose it could work on some level. But we can't REALLY define or quantify "limited", now can we?

Larken's impact on the world will be felt throughout the generations... this is just the beginning. Read his book "The Most Dangerous Superstition" if you want to see the REAL Matrix... that shit will blow your fucking head back

The only problem I see with anarchy is who will enforce the NAP. What is gonna stop someone from stealing or killing someone else? I am not trying to be a troll, just genuinely curious.

@coltonposeyfishing

3 жыл бұрын

Look up Michael Malice Anarchy he is an expert on very many subjects. Michael goes through that concern in depth.

Great, fantastic... So let's do it. Let's set up somewhere and actually do it. Let's get some land and show everyone how it's done.

@vsav331

8 жыл бұрын

+BupSahn Sunim Sadly, there are just TOO MANY PEOPLE who are brainwashed and will NEVER, EVER take that leap :( ~Peace

In a way, a limited governemnt is almost more dangerious. The government that starts the smallest ends the largest. A government that starts big never has the economic freedom to grow an economy to leech of off to grow government - it's own lack of freedom limits it from runaway growth.

***** Pardon if I missed it but why is this his "last speaking tour ever?"

PLEASE!! NOOOOO! Larkin must continue!!

No one gets to force anyone else to do anything. There, problem solved. :-)

@steveryan1799

3 жыл бұрын

@Matt Guitar It's a special type of narcissistic arrogance.

Where are there places that have successfully lived out an anarchist values?

As soon as you claim property you create government. There is only creation Your task is to harmonize with yourself in it.

What about voluntary taxing? Any Ancap have a problem with that?

@Donbd83

6 жыл бұрын

Give me an example of a voluntary tax? It sounds like a contradiction in terms. A tax is something that is forced and no way around it, income tax you work you pay it, sales tax you buy something you pay it, property tax etc. There is no way around it it can not be voluntary. A voluntary giving of some type of property to another person or entity of ones free will well we call that charity.

@Barskor1

6 жыл бұрын

Voluntary tax is just paying for what you want.

@Donbd83

6 жыл бұрын

+Barskor1 Tax: a compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers' income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions. Voluntary: done, given, or acting of one's own free will. Compulsory: Required by law or a rule; obligatory. Involving or exercising compulsion; coercive. Clearly this is an oxymoron it is a contradiction in terms. Charity: The voluntary giving of help, typically in the form of money, to those in need.

@LeoAr37

6 жыл бұрын

Donbd83 That is the definition of taxes as they exist right now.

@Donbd83

6 жыл бұрын

+Yippie37 So I am suppose to go on what? A fictional definition that doesn't exist yet or will likely never exist? Do we get to change the definition of charity as well to fit your fictional world? I am in the business of calling a spade a spade.

what's behind you larken?

I am an ancap, but I wholeheartedly disagree with your views on voting. For now, government exists; it is more desirable to have a government that steals less of your money. It is not logical or economic to let big statists win when there are realistic chances of putting libertarian minarchists in office who will lower taxes, get rid of mandatory minimum sentences, and who won't invade other countries.

If Man is good he doesn't need a government and imposing one would be evil. If Man is evil then government will only compound his evil. If Man is both good and evil then the evil men will use government to dominate the good men. There is no scenario where government is rational and moral.

This is great interview with Larken Rose kzread.info/dash/bejne/rHZqp7enoZnfiJM.html

Government or no government-neither works without Christ and a deep understanding of the duties, demands, and obligations of Liberty in us. I agree with no external government, but not with no internal government. Personal principles coupled with a deep understanding of our Stewardship over our Person and Property from God is the best we have in this fallen state and world. Remove these things and anarchism turns to chaos, and governments turn to despotic tyrants.

I am so thankful I was raised by a lifetime Anarchist. IMHO I see Syndaclist Community Action Groups as the start. A move twords setting up lines of communication between them tbrough a clerk, recorder. 49% does not require 51% to tell them how to live. Decentralized small community syndaclist groups voluntarily coming together to decide community ideas. The only mandate is defensive right, and that all life is priceless and must be preserved. I mean all life bacteria to whales.

It takes a government to prohibit a government. Or at least, to prohibit gangs from forming that act to impose their will on others. Money and a free market isn't enough to do it, since collectives with money will inevitably form that end up with sufficient power to tyrannize and subvert that free market. The idea of a democratically elected government is that the people are supposed to exert oversight. It often works poorly, but if you want to see what happens in what is essentially an anarchy, take a look at the countries where the south american drug gangs rule, or go watch Mad Max again. Those gangs operate in a free market-based world where laws are essentially inconsequential-- as are the governments. The reason you can't point to a successful anarchic state in history, as we usually see them as something else, they soon are supplanted by some sort of gang authoritarian rule. You can't keep gangs from forming and taking charge simply by arming all the people because that simply results in gang warfare. And a large number of people don't feel qualified to "run their own lives" and actively look to someone else to provide them security-- once they've given authority to someone else to manage their lives, guess what-- they have established a government. You'll never get absolutely everyone to agree anarchy is the way to go, and without complete unanimity it's unsustainable. The idea an anarchy can be sustainable is simple-minded and not supported by the facts, get over it.

Why can't we have government without taxation, funded 100% by donation?

@voluntarism335

4 жыл бұрын

fuck off commie statist pig, fuck you government is always violence and murder.

Cognitive dissonance is rife in 2020 merry Coronavirus and a happy New world order

16:50 I would disagree a government is an unchallenged or almost unchallenged monopoly on force in a particular area so therefore its subject could consent if the gov acutally owned the land. wich I know larken has defined government in similar way

Ever??? :(

Anarchism or anarcho-capitalism can't stop governments from rising though. If an agrarian region is invaded by violent people and instate an oligarchy by force how does that agrarian community defend itself? Private military? What if that private military is made up of people? People who want part of the power this violent oligarchy might have?

@cevinzeke5110

7 жыл бұрын

+randominthesameway add in a drought or a natural disaster and what happens then? People don't want to go hungry. People will do anything to avoid that. I'd like to think an anarchist world would deal with this maturely. But we hardly have seen that. People aren't naturally selfish or altruistic, they are both

I appreciate to some extent any anti-state/ anti-authoritarian ideology. That said, Anarcho-Capitalism has a massive massive blind spot when it comes to the existence of private corporate power, and its potential to effectively limit the personal liberty of employees and consumers where it conflicts with profit. To simply eliminate the state without a cultural revolution that spreads radicle ideas of personal freedom, we will end up in a situation in which the corporations divide up the land and set up smaller esentialy feudal-like states. Ultimate the irony is that Anarcho-Capitalism is not true anarchism but still a form of Minarchism, because it justifies the continued existence of the corporate hierarchy which has (not all) but many atributes in common with the structure of the state. A true anarchistic free market shouldn't have anything as athoritarian as the role curently filled by CEO's.

@reyarbolay2714

9 жыл бұрын

First, how do you see corporations dividing up the land and setting up feudal-like systems without the violence of the state? Why would an Anarchist society attempt to forbid a private corporation from organizing as it chooses, including hiring a CEO? How could they possibly achieve it?

@dustinzaccaria7644

9 жыл бұрын

All forms of state that have existited to this point have existed as a means of the forces of capital controlling and thus enslaving the forces of labor. So long as the capitalist ruling class continues to control the means of society's production the state will continue to exist, even though the visible governmental state as we know it no longer exists. Instead of the masses being suprresed and madent act in a fashion that serves the interests of the he corporate elite being conducted by the police forces, armies and judicial systems of state the would be forced into submition by private security firms hired directly and under the control of the corporate oligarchy. The state would simply have changed its face, instead of presidents, prime ministers and parliaments, we would be governednby CEOs and corporate directorial boards. For a trulely anarchist, stateless society to exist the the forces of labor would have have to control capital instead of capital controlling labor, this would be achieved is by the working class seizing control of the means of production at a grass roots level, where individual workers would act collectively and take control of their workplaces. History almost saw the creation of an stateless, anarchist society durion the Russian revolution, however due to an absence of anarchist society thinkers and leaders, the Bolshevik s were able to pervert the situation and manipulate events to gain control over society's means of production, when le at the same time establishing a brutal police state, where they effectively became the new ruling class.

@gaborhelesfai

9 жыл бұрын

"Corporation" is a government invented term (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_personality) and it has only power through government. Bailouts, "too big, to fail" are direct, regulations, licensing and patents are indirect forms where the state helps these entities to be big and powerful. Once the belief in authority diminishes the corporations will have less power.

@jaromor8808

9 жыл бұрын

...oh jeebus, how many times have i heard this "they are forgetting about"?

@ABCarnage

9 жыл бұрын

Dustin Zaccaria If you don't want to work in a given corporation, why would you? You are voluntarily there.

Limited government can work, but the problem is that it never stays limited, and it never will. Anarchy would never last either, regardless of whether it proved to be successful or not. The fact that libertarians and anarchists refuse to acknowledge is that most people do not want to be free. They find comfort and security in government. Unfortunately, that's the way it is, and the way that it always will be. It's nice to think that we can someday, somehow change human nature. It gives us something to hope for and believe in. It's sad that we will go to our graves disappointed, and so will the folks who believe they can make big government work efficiently for them. It's a losing game for everyone.

@WalPainters

9 жыл бұрын

If there were really a thing called "human nature" we would be behaving the way we were 200,000 years ago. Throughout human history we have adapted and changed to our environment, if the environment and attitude is liberty and justice then human beings would refuse and fight to the death against government. There have been a number of studies about human behavior and environment. It is without a doubt the biggest factor in changing or molding human behavior. Hence the Gov wanting their paws on our very young children, the Constant fear campaign given to us, the uncertainty of it all etc. it creates an environment that creates the attitude.... i need government, they love me and it's real scary out there without them. It is rather simple to change the world. Teach your children to question authority, to distrust the gov and take responsibility for their own life's and teach them that gov is just people in uniforms, they hold no higher value or Virtue. If everyone started teaching these values to their children today it would be within years a free society would emerge.

@LucidDream101

9 жыл бұрын

'Cult' ture is the culprit.

@digitecdevil

9 жыл бұрын

Chas Mcghee Something very like a government would still pop among most people trying to agree on how to live together without literally all engaging in direct contracts with each other. Pretending people only have governments because they've been brainwashed may sound nice to people who obsess over governments, but to those who realize corporations make sense to reduce transaction costs in private affairs, governments or things very much like them make sense to reduce transaction costs in public affairs. The only alternative to this is to privatize absolutely everything, and in doing that, you make no guarantees that you don't end up with yet another thing looking very much like a government. People will only be free from coercion and conflict when they're free from scarcity. Pretending government is the problem just kicks the can down the road.

@ronaldcaravaggio6109

9 жыл бұрын

digitecdevil You're right. You will always end up with the heavy hand of government, no matter what you do. But why? It comes back to the same thing. It's what people have been programmed to believe. Government is NOT the problem. People are the problem. They created the coercive power of government, and government has always used that power to convince the people that their creation is the ONLY way. We created a monster, and that monster will control us till the end. We wouldn't have it any other way.

@LucidDream101

9 жыл бұрын

Ronald Caravaggio Governments always grow and then collapse under their own weight eventually. You'll be the one that suffers not the politicians that grab their shit and run for their mountainside cottage (mansion). I agree though. It's a mental thing. That's why I was impressed with Larken's "Most Dangerous Superstition". It pretty much nails it.

The market is any human interacting with each other without tge oligarch bullshit

"We anarchists believe in the market 100% of the time". *The* market. How do you get a *The* market without a state? Who's going to stop people making other markets without a state? You cannot have 1 market and no state - it requires centralized power. The idea of the market as a centralising principle sounds like anarchism but it is actually market organised statism. Anarchy will not inhibit you or anyone else from starting and maintaining a different community with a different market. Insomuch as people are inherently social anarchy is socialist because anarchy is just people being people. Edit: btw - I completely agree with the videos protagonists criticisms of authority, I just don't see the single market is a likely and sustainable outcome of anarchy.

@TheodoreMinick

7 жыл бұрын

Tim Novice "the market" is a short-cut term for all of the individual voluntary transactions in society. It's _every_ voluntary exchange. There is no "one market". All markets are "the market".

@Scarletpimpanel73

7 жыл бұрын

Theodore Minick Is it a shortcut really? So in your stateless world there are many markets of which some are completely unconnected and running on different rules of trade and property?

@TheodoreMinick

7 жыл бұрын

Tim Novice possibly. Here, Rothbard explains it better than I can in a KZread comment: mises.org/library/what-free-market

@Scarletpimpanel73

7 жыл бұрын

Theodore Minick I can (and do) accept markets so long as they are genuinely free and not coercive but this to me is where freedom and socialism meet. This means multiple markets as well. In many ways the capitalists and the socialists are arguing about what we think the outcome of freedom is. I think we can agree on freedom as a primary aim. My question though is can a capitalist be as free as a socialist? This really comes down to definitions of both and in reality freedom is for all or not at all, but it is a question about our view of the nature and extent of freedom.

@TheodoreMinick

7 жыл бұрын

Tim Novice and those "many markets" would all be part of *the* market.

I stop listening when you end every sentence with "you know"

Government policies are always judged on it's results not it's intentions.

@livewire2759

3 жыл бұрын

No, it's always judged on intentions, not results. If it were judged by results, people would realize rather quickly that it doesn't work when they see that it fails 100% of the time, but since it's always judged by intentions, people keep thinking that it's still a good idea, even if it doesn't always work.

Libertarian anarchist is the more proper term

Anarcho-capitalism? God he just lost all credibility. Hey, "no gods, no masters, just bosses" is how the famous anarchist saying goes, right?

@magnus4g63

7 жыл бұрын

no it just goes "no rulers", "an" - without or in the absence off, and "archy" - a ruler or rulers. If you do not like selling your time and skill to an employer, feel free to not do so, there will be no rulers to force you.

@thenew4559

7 жыл бұрын

Playing to a historical definition of a word is not an argument. And if anarchy cannot include capitalism, then we're not anarchists, we're voluntaryists, and we oppose the state!

Anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism, period.

@jesse3564

9 жыл бұрын

Labour * Wrong

@TjDarkFallenLH

9 жыл бұрын

Jesse Thomas You're an idiot. Go read some actual anarchist literature, not Murray fucking Rothbard, before calling me wrong.

@jesse3564

9 жыл бұрын

Labour * Already done. You're still wrong.

@jesse3564

9 жыл бұрын

Labour * Sorry the new anarchists stole your label, but it only makes sense

@TjDarkFallenLH

9 жыл бұрын

Jesse Thomas Sorry the 'new anarchists' have a philosophy that is supposed to be against authority but is fine with the authority of bosses, CEOs, boards of directors, and the like.

Anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism. Anarchism is a left wing ideology. Libertarianism too began as a label for anti-state socialists. Anarchists reject both state domination and private domination. A corporation can dominate people's lives just as much as a Federal government. Only rejecting one source of domination leaves the door open wider for the other form. There are some ideological similarities between anarchists and and anarcho-capitalists, so I suggest everyone who considers themselves to be an anarcho-capitalist to take a look at what the anarchism movement is really about. Have a look at societies which implemented anarchist principals (such as republican Spain during the Spanish civil war) and I think you'll be surprised.