📢Play Enlisted for FREE: playen.link/callmeezekiel The game is available on PC, Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5 and previous console generations. Our link will get you an exclusive bonus pack. Thank you Enlisted for sponsoring this video! 🥰Patreon: www.patreon.com/CallMeEzekiel ▶RU-vid Memberships: ru-vid.com/show-UCnZ1r94_Ptz_1gN5VBnE0Mgjoin ⭐SubscribeStar: www.subscribestar.com/CallMeEzekiel 🙏PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=EAQPBZ8VHGFL6 💬 Join our Discord: discord.gg/callmeezekiel 📚Main sources and further reading: ✊Radicals for Capitalism: amzn.to/3lQLw9T 😂It Usually Begins with Ayn Rand: amzn.to/3m0vF8D 📈Human Action: amzn.to/3h6F2ks ⛓The Road to Serfdom: amzn.to/3nDgsuM 🦅The Discovery of Freedom: Man's Struggle Against Authority: amzn.to/3zBUMSR 🙏The God of the Machine: amzn.to/3FwhUWC 💀Anatomy of the State: amzn.to/3FyVgwP 🗳Democracy: The God that Failed: amzn.to/3h4lInS ⌛A Short History of Man: amzn.to/3WpR7kA 🤝Mutual Aid: amzn.to/3WpRyeI 🌎Atlas Shrugged: amzn.to/3NyA3F9 🌇The Fountainhead: amzn.to/3FDzSGQ 🤔Philosophy: Who Needs It?: amzn.to/3ftG2yv 👁Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology: amzn.to/3SVBFtJ 👨💻The Virtue of Selfishness: amzn.to/3UljFdr 💰Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal: amzn.to/3gRAfmy ✍The Romantic Manifesto: amzn.to/3SX8d6v Note: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Crypto: 💸 🟠BTC: bc1qj2szqj0h0rj2zz5x0zdhr8fzrh85zmatwxht26 🔵ETH: 0x0344A4aF3eCe5F8E5C0f65FC4c7eB667bf31cD60 You can also watch us on... 👀 ❤Odysee: odysee.com/@CallMeEzekiel 💚Rumble: rumble.com/CallMeEzekiel
Countryballs and historical human figures being drawn together is an interesting combo. However both convey things differently. Either way the new art will be interesting for the future.
History major here, i love Mises. He exposed and debunked the absurdity of Marx ideas. Most of my colleagues in college were communists, after reading mises a lot changed their minds. I think the guy was fundamental for winning the cold war.
I truly admire this channel's ability to steelman every position it explains. I'm trying to become more heterodox in my thinking, so this is a great resource.
I don't think anything can objectively be unbiased, because people mainly determine bias based on their own world lens, which seems inherently biased. This channel does provide a reasonable alternative perspective for now, so I share your sentiments.
Regarding 18:17 - 19:40, I recommend Rothbard's one-act play entitled _Mozart Was a Red._ Regardless of its historical accuracy, it's a truly hilarious piece of satire of his experience in Rand's inner circle. I even saw elements of myself in who I presume was Nathaniel Branden, which led me to involuntarily burst out in laughter. For years, I avoided watching it, thinking it was yet another mean-spirited smear against Rand, but, if anything, it's a piece of good-natured ribbing that speaks to Rothbard's personality.
I love how thorough and balanced you are with all these Subjects. Whatever opinions you have on these subjects are more or less absent from the videos. Which is really a Breath of Fresh air because most people who try talking about a Philosophic idea they don't agree with Tend to Explain it in a similar manner to how one would explain some terrible illness. Thus coming across as extremely condescending and grossly daddyish;
@@praxseb4317 so the smartest bodybuilder was still a blithering idiot? That’s kinda sad. I guess it’s like being the tallest midget or cutest uggo lol
In part 2, bring up Mencius Moldbug and Nick Land. Moldbug took Hoppe to rather Authoritarian conclusions in the Neo Reactionary movement, while Nick, combined Neo Reactionarism with the French Post structuralists to go back to Anarchist conclusions, but in a rather... bizarre kind of Schizophrenic AnCapism.
I have read many libertarian authors, in the book 'Government and State' in Rothbard's view, the State is not capable of exercising choices for specific ends, without destroying other unpredictable ends. It is worth remembering that Murray has a more libertarian view of the economy.
Yea not really. Most libertarians i know are libertarians for economic reasons, mostly being against debasing of the currency, excessive government spending militarily or domestically, central economic planning, central banks, and fractional reserve banking.
@@TherealJesseLivermore is that a funny joke? I am not following. Way to back up the loser observation though lmao. A libertarian would type that out and go “ha that’s a good one. Got him”. Jesus, you need to get out more.
@@Leotv19 Whatever dude, people are losers because they don’t agree with you politically. I told you why most libertarians are libertarians but if you want to summarize that as a “loser” because you don’t understand one thing I mentioned in that post, and it gets your superiority complex going, you do you.
Not comprehensive but a decent primer for someone who doesn’t know anything about the movement. Probably include Bastiat in your next video. Can’t wait for Hoppe.
I do think Libertarians would be a strong party in U.S legislature if the voting system was different. Compared to how much third parties are suppressed in the U.S, it's actually kind of impressive that the Libertarian Party has a modest following in the U.S. If they had a chance to win seats, then they would be even more popular.
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." -John Rogers
Funny that you mentioned The Lord of the Rings, because if ever there were a character that embodies the Libertarian ideal, it would be Tom Bombadil, an ancient being with absolute power within his own domain and no interest in projecting that power farther afield. Bombadil's libertarian mentality makes it impossible for The Ring to tempt him, simply because it has nothing it can tempt him with.
@@ladymacbethofmtensk896 you know it's a story, right? And you know that TB is Tolkien's metaphor for the worldspirit incarnated? So you're essentially saying that your libertarian ideal is to be a living god, which is interesting but doesn't scale
I'd say for sure that if Ancapstan is going to become a reality eventually, it will happen in Brazil of all places. The Libertarians in the US are lost in the useless political debate between left and right clowns, you don't hear much being spoken about Bitcoin, tax evasion and solutions to avoid the state, most of them even vote for some reason. While the Brazilian Ancaps hate any form of political participation, love Bitcoin (almost as a cult), are evading taxes (legally or not) all the time and are much more motivated in general.
Are you kidding me, BTC and other crypto is dominated by libertarian types and there’s no shortage of such fringe candidates pushing for such currencies
6:39 - 7:06 So what your telling me is that many of the problems were facing today, such as an ever increasing national debt, is because someone got bored?!
Government is a tool humanity has developed to organize large groups of people for solving problems individuals can not. What libertarians fail to see in their anti government zeal is that a lot of the issues they blame on governments won't go away if we abolish governments. On the contrary, we would loose the most effective tool we have to address these problems.
As someone who people won’t stop calling a libertarian (even though I don’t like to associate myself with groups). This video was good, great art style and very educational.
@@Emel_unlegit They are different kinds of Communists some dont care others abuse it like the Afghan communists in their last three years I admit I dont know the correct term for irrational fear/hatred of christians
honestly i didn't know rothbard was polish, i respect the man who when pressed by an atheist refused to bow down. in essence rothbard was the real libertarin in that situation
I love the fact that you used “March of the Profits” in the opening when talking about the libertarian awakening, very appropriate (coming from me a authoritarian-libertarian XD)
Libertarianism isn't threatening to our misrulers. You can denounce fiat money, fractional reserve banking and the Federal Reserve System all you want without running the risk of being canceled, which shows that our elites just don't feel vulnerable in those areas. If you want to see where our elites' real weaknesses lie, notice whom they are openly persecuting through doxing, deplatforming, depriving of financial services, railroading for crimes they didn't commit and so forth.
It took me a while to remember where I'd heard this track before: Its a bad apple remix from the channel Astrophysics. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QgJr9MNyqOQ.html
@@thefrenchareharlequins2743 Say that when the private army comes to your doorstep to evict you because someone wants to build a factory on your estate.
Please don't go further with this anime-wacky- route. The video becomes less watchable otherwise, plus it will be taken less seriously. Countryballs are better in every regard.
On the channels Ayn Rand Center UK & the Ayn Rand Institute, there are a shockingly high number of people who actually were with Ayn Rand for years. I recommend giving them a listen too, specifically James Valliant as he as he has sort of become the living histogtopher since the 60s.
@@ericpreston8877 the ones with James usually talk about the inner history of the movement. Less so policies; want Piekoff & Harry for those questions.
@@adherentofladycolumbia725 Nah, I'm just pointing out the insane hypocrisy of Rand, who ended q endorsing Nixon, the Vietnam War, and being in practice essentially indistinguishable from any other conservative of the 1970s.
@@ericpreston8877 This is not an accurate description of Rand's position on Vietnam or Nixon. In every speech and publication of Rand that I have read, she opposed the Vietnam War. She was never a fan of Nixon. She only preferred him to the alternative, "Anti-Nixonite for Nixon." Do you have any support for your contentions that, in context, show her support for Vietnam or Nixon? Or that she is indistinguishable from conservatives in practice?
Good to know it's very few of the first one. And don't put libertarianism and anarchism/voluntarianism next to each other, there is bigger gap between them than between either and the centre.
@@A_B_1917 Really? If you don't waver from the NAP in Libertarianism & Voluntaryism it equals Anarchy. Also each philosophy is deeply rooted in natural law.
@@jasonjobsis6535 Natural Law breaks down when you have bosses that can own factories across the entire nation. Hell, even one factory. In nature, if someone doesn't use something himself, there isn't much stoping you from just using it yourself. And that's compatible with anarchists, who belive in personal property, that you own because you use it. But private property requires authority to protect it, and gives leverage to abuse power and create hierarchy, that gives the bourgoisie opportunity to effectively bring back the state, but now one completly subservient to their will.
I'm surprised the Chicago School of Economics wasn't included. I'm a Rothbardian Anarchist who is also a Catholic, but I do enjoy the writings of Sowell, Friedman, and Williams. Even Milton Friedman's son David had his own philosophy on Anarchism, but also continuing his father's legacy. The CATO Institute is a Libertarian Think Tank founded by the ideas of Friedman. The big philosophy tanks that fight each other are The Mises Institute, the CATO Institute and the Ayn Rand Institute...FEE just sits back, relaxes and creates fantastic content.
@@flippydaflip5310 in what way am I not an Anarchist? I don't believe the state should exist because it is the greatest evil throughout history. Anarchism is the philosophy of consent, and the negation of the state. Anarchists then are split into the camps of those who believe money and free markets are consent vs those who believe money and free markets are force. I am an Anarcho-Capitalist because I believe in the consent of the voluntary exchange of goods and services. So I am an Anarchist. I will point out that the inherent founding of the philosophy of Anarcho-Capitalism comes from the Austrian School of Economics, Objectivism and American Libertarianism. There are Leftist Anarchists who believe that Capitalism is force. They believe in centrally planning society, but somehow not have a state to centrally plan. As an Anarchist, I find it to be an Oxymoron to be a leftist and an anarchist. The inherent ideas of Leftist economics is anti-liberty and pro-statism. I don't even like the concept of Democracy. It's an idiotic idea to subjugate dissent. It always becomes authoritarian.
@@foundationgamer9771 Even if they did, you wouldn't care. That's the beauty of neo-liberalism/conservatism. Champion human rights by trampling human rights.
Not a follower of Rand, but not a fair depiction. She would say to only do what your boss says if following your boss IS in your own self interest (or at least if you think it is). If doing what your boss says is not within your own interest and a more promising opportunity is available (like a better boss or self employment) then go after that.
@@JP-rf8rr Problem is that's not an option for poor people a lot of the time. A single paycheck can be the difference between eating or starvation, so even if a better opportunity is available (Which is a rare thing already) they might well lack the ability to go for it. Now a Union might be able to negotiate better working conditions or wages to eliminate those problems, or perhaps even government regulations on the matter, but from what I can see, Rand isn't a fan of either
@Dingus Dean If it's not an option for poor people a lot of the time, then putting up with the best boss available to keep yourself fed is working towards your own interest. From what I understand, Rand and her followers are not against unions per se, just when unions either form connections with government or political figures (or becomes too big). Because then its not a small group of individuals working towards their interest which just so happens to align. It becomes an organization that can force people to work against their own interests. A key example is when you're required to join a union and are not allowed to leave. The union you are stuck in can then fight for interest that have nothing to do with you personally.
@@dingusdean1905 union more often than not are the reason those problems exist. you can't get promoted or get a raise because you've been with the compony for less time than crackhead joe who does half the work and doesn't show up for his shifts most of the time, but because he has been with the compony for a longer time, he gets the raises or promotions. Unions are anti-merit so people who actually put forward effort don't get rewarded for it
@@JP-rf8rr She may not say anything anti-union, but her positions would effectively rob the Unions of their ability to apply the necessary pressure on bosses to implement changes. So de-facto, her positions are anti-union, and with no other way to improve the situation for the poor, effectively sums up to “do what your boss says because that’s what’s in your best interest”
So funny that you speak about Libertarianism (coopted, in fact its just Ancap) without mentioning that this is a minuscule tradition in Anarchism which is...libertarian socialist. Not even mentioning that it was laissez-faire that caused most of the issues with the great depression. Propaganda which just benefits the 1%, congrats!
An Oxy-moron simply~ Socialism is the Public, Social Group control over the economy & thus the individuals within it, it is always implemented by means of a government {Or something similar} Socialism is the direct antithesis to Free Markets & Laissez-faire, and thus 'Libertarianism'. You can say there is 'Freedom' for the "Collective", the "Workers" or "Aryrans", but this is silly because Collectives don't act nor exist~ It is only individuals who can possess liberty. The Great Depression was caused by Currency printing ~ Interest rate setting, and other government interventions. Certainly by after WW1 the United States was no longer a 'Laissez-faire' economy, especially with the increasing abandonment of gold. It was going down the path of artificial Booms & innevitable Busts, Price Controls, Wage Controls and much more regulations. 'Booms', in short ~ Is a time of mass malinvestment due to free Government handouts, business isn't producing for the demand of the people but for stimulated profit. 'Busts' are the realization of the malinvestments & the lack of actual resources for them, it is the economy fixing the mistakes caused by intervention. The Great Depression was then further extended by the government policies mentioned earlier, and only ended with the partial Freeing of the economy after WW2. In short, it was Government intervention that caused the great depression~ People like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover ~Where the cause of the poverty of the time with their constant interjection. Therefore, promoting Free Markets is clearly in the best interests of all individuals ~ And against the interest of Polititians & the Corporations they foster. I would rather say it is you who spouts 'Propaganda which just benefits the 1%', Silly.
Ironically I recently turned from libertarianism to objectivism ( in Poland we have a coalition of a hardcore traditionalists, nationalists, and "libertarians" ( korwinists and now freedomers ) that are explicitly pro everything that I am against ( ban on abortion, Russia and the leader of the coalition is crypto-fascist and leader of "libertarian" New Hope party is catholic ) they only anti-government in saying ). But this is not the reason I turned from libertarianism for me this ideology is anti-western at the core ( feels like the ideal system for at least polish ones is oligarchy ) and I noticed that sometimes state intervention can help the capitalist cause and total free-market ruin capitalism. The capitalism that Ayn Rand had in mind as a morally ideal economic system or generally system. The system where coercion is only matter of police and soldiers when an individual tries to treat somebodies rights or another nation tries. Etc. Etc. I look at this as our civilizational cornerstone that made most of this world.
I'm glad you are interested in objectivism. I hope you keep reading Rand. Ayn Rand believed in a laissez-faire, unregulated capitalism. State intervention cannot help the "capitalist cause" because state intervention contradicts capitalism (interventions may benefit some persons in the capitalist class, as Karl Marx would put it, but that does not mean that state invention is capitalist philosophically). A total free market cannot ruin capitalism because free market is a description of how markets function under capitalism (unless by "total free market" you mean anarchy -- a market in force -- then yes, Rand was against anarchy and believed that capitalism needed a strictly limited government).
@michaelbeardsley776 exactly, I am trying to refer to her "better marxist-lenninist than anarchy" attitude. She was too anti-anarcho-capitalism ( I am sure she referred to it in "Capitalism. Unknown Ideal" in the chapter about privatized police ). If you wonder where this part of comment gone. After looking at it I concluded this unnecessary long elaboration about Poland's situation that not necessarily says anything.
