General

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Anenome — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 21:25:08 GMT

Wow, some pretty devastating critiques in there, and a cautionary tale.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Minarchist — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 10:54:32 GMT

Buzz Killington:

Stefan Molyneux:

Destroying Your Statist Arguments

[and family]

LOL...yup.

I came across this website which documents some of the rather unsavory aspects of Molyneux's organization, eye-opening to say the least.

Especially this, and this.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Examiner — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 01:45:48 GMT

NonAntiAnarchist:

But Molyneux indicts "the family" and "parents" when these are the very things that Nature has designated as children's first line of defense. Tearing up and rewriting the family is the domain of every tyrant. Saying "family" is the problem is a lot like saying DNA is the problem. Even if it could be true, it wouldn't matter. We're stuck with it by virtue of what we are.

Dude, nowhere does Molyneux say family in itself is the problem; he says that abusive relationships within the family are the problem, and that one should walk away from them, or at least not feel bounded to abusive relationships based on the fact that these people may be family.

It's been a while since I followed Molyneux on this topic, but it's even obvious to me that you are confused about his actual claims in more than once instance. I guess this should be expected since you made it very clear you have very little interest in hearing what he has to say.

I think you perhaps are making valid points, but it's obvious they are all over the place, as opposed to in context of what Molyneux is actually saying.

Exactly! Molyneux is quite clear that not all parents are worthy of being considered collateral damage by deFOOing them, to put a few euphemisms together to make the idea easier to take.

However, a lot of libertarians have a bland misconception. They think, if you can believe this, that if people merely understood the principles of liberty, they'd be competent enough to enact them and live them. This couldn't be further from the truth! Sure, Stefan sees that you need to put together YouTube videos and Libertopia presentations and so on to get the intellectual ideas out there, so he does that. But that's not the most helpful thing at Freedomain Radio.

The most helpful thing is when someone will come in and agree with Stefan that really abusive parents should be left behind but think that they can determine for themselves whether their parents are worthy of this or not. No! Stefan is quite an authority on the matter to whom we should defer, as he's been to therapy for a few years where he journalled a lot and thus he can validly say that he's one of the few people alive who's dealt with their trauma! He has spent countless hours showing people that their impressions of their families are completely wrong due to psychological trauma that removes their ability to figure things out in significant ways. How can you expect such an incapacitated person to make valid decisions even with the best libertarian philosophy?

That is why we're lucky to have such a man in libertarianism! Unlike most of us, he can see clearly now, the trauma is gone. He can see all obstacles in our way. Gone are the dark clouds that held us back. It's going to be a bright, bright, bright, bright sunshiny day!

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

National Acrobat — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 18:05:43 GMT

gotlucky:

So Molyneux is only 80% of a cult leader? Honestly, I have no idea why you would bring up cults. It only makes Molyneux look worse...lol

I think it's fairly clear that the point of the thread isn't to make Molyneux look good and raise questions about well known libertarians associating with him and his ideas.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Autolykos — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:45:19 GMT

Jumping in here, I think Molyneux's argument can be refined. As I see it, the problem isn't with the family (i.e. kinship) per se - the problem is with the notion that parents own their offspring. I'm deliberately using the term "offspring" instead of "children" because I think saying "parents own their children" can readily imply in the minds of others that parents' offspring will own themselves once they become adults. The notion that parents own their offspring is meant to convey that there's no necessary point at which that ownership must disappear. In the extreme, a single person could be considered to own all of his living descendants, no matter how many generations there are. Furthermore, I think the notion of parents owning their offspring was the origin of the state.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

NonAntiAnarchist — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 17:07:51 GMT

But Molyneux indicts "the family" and "parents" when these are the very things that Nature has designated as children's first line of defense. Tearing up and rewriting the family is the domain of every tyrant. Saying "family" is the problem is a lot like saying DNA is the problem. Even if it could be true, it wouldn't matter. We're stuck with it by virtue of what we are.

Dude, nowhere does Molyneux say family in itself is the problem; he says that abusive relationships within the family are the problem, and that one should walk away from them, or at least not feel bounded to abusive relationships based on the fact that these people may be family.

It's been a while since I followed Molyneux on this topic, but it's even obvious to me that you are confused about his actual claims in more than once instance. I guess this should be expected since you made it very clear you have very little interest in hearing what he has to say.

I think you perhaps are making valid points, but it's obvious they are all over the place, as opposed to in context of what Molyneux is actually saying.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Clayton — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:51:16 GMT

I've never seen something which will make or break an individual, as it were, than their family life and childhood...

My point isn't that abuse doesn't matter but that Molyneux has misdiagnosed it. In fact, he hasn't diagnosed it at all, he's given a magical explanation that it's a self-reinforcing problem that started a long time ago (for no known reason) and has been raging, unabated, ever since. Abuse doutbless plays a role in social dysfunction of every type. But Molyneux indicts "the family" and "parents" when these are the very things that Nature has designated as children's first line of defense. Tearing up and rewriting the family is the domain of every tyrant. Saying "family" is the problem is a lot like saying DNA is the problem. Even if it could be true, it wouldn't matter. We're stuck with it by virtue of what we are.

Also for whatever it's worth I've noticed a very distinct tendency for people with better upbringings to be more libertarian... This could totally just be a coincidence though, because it is in no way universal.

I think there is a positive correlation with socioeconomic status and libertarian social values (as distinct from libertarian political values). In other words, I think it is the poor and lower-middle-class who are mostly afflicted with feelings of a false duty to self-sacrifice. And this is the foundation upon which the anti-libertarian social order is built. 80+% of the population can be buffaloed into believing that they ought to give up some percentage of their income if they work, that they must follow the dictates of other human beings when properly arrayed in ceremony and floral language, that they need to be prepared to give their lives "in defense of freedom", and so on. And this is a purely moral conquest - people will still try to "cheat" the system but they sincerely feel guilty for doing so and that is the statist meme in action.

The upper middle class and the wealthy, on the other hand, are less deluded. They basically "get it" that they're being bilked by their sociopolitical superiors and that the whole thing is a pyramid all the way up. The solution? "If you can't lick 'em, join 'em". They seek to join in the bilking of the 80%. These are the ambitious bourgeoise, the ones who see "promotion" and "climbing the social ladder" as their entire purpose in life. So, as far as their "internal" morality, they are libertarian... they understand they have no right to take from others and nobody has any right to take from them. But as far as their behavior goes, they are anti-libertarian because that's how you move up. I suspect this describes the vast majority of politicians.

Clayton -

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

NonAntiAnarchist — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:36:11 GMT

If you watch a great video on how cults work (YouTube video zxJyfqeaKU8), you'll see that he only does about 80% of that

Lol.

I intuitively agree with Molyneux on child abuse, and mostly the idea that insecure relationships with parents, authority figures, and peers (which often take the place of authority figures in school, unfortunately) more or less leads to a degredation of self-esteem and rational capacities. This may or may not be exactly what Molyneux posits, and my claim isn't necessarily scientific, but on an empirical level, I've come to think that child abuse generally has a massive impact on self-esteem, and that low self-esteem can lead one to live irrational, self-degredating lives.

In my own case, I don't think I ever realized how truly growing up in a single-parent family from brith affected me until I got into my teens, where I had a lot of trouble with anxiety in many areas of life that I know look back at, and wonder if a lack of a father figure (and generally a bad relationship with him in general) may have influenced how I delt with controversy.

That said, it was also a blessing to be with my mom on her own, because she was a great parent and allowed me absolute freedom to come to conclusions on my own. She could not discipline me like a father, simply because it was not possible for her at times, and I think this allowed me a path of self-learning, which may have been difficult in comparison to many teens, but which left me with an open-mind, a ton of self-awareness....

And anarchy!! Woo!! Go capitalism ftw!

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

gotlucky — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:12:09 GMT

So Molyneux is only 80% of a cult leader? Honestly, I have no idea why you would bring up cults. It only makes Molyneux look worse...lol

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Examiner — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:02:53 GMT

Buzz Killington:

Stefan Molyneux:

Destroying Your Statist Arguments

[and family]

That's a common misconception of Stefan's work. In fact, people who say ugly things like that will usually start to say that he's some kind of cult leader. I've seen it time and time again.

If you watch a great video on how cults work (YouTube video zxJyfqeaKU8), you'll see that he only does about 80% of that (even if you go past the outer layers of the "onion" to see what happens to people who get much more involved with Freedomain Radio), which shows that he's not a real cult leader.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Neodoxy — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 14:30:06 GMT

Clayton,

In my life I have always been struck by two things to do with personal relationships: the horror of what people often to do to themselves, and the horror of what people often do to one another, and I have to say that I agree with Molyneux to a fair extent. I've never seen something which will make or break an individual, as it were, than their family life and childhood... And I'm saying this as someone who had a really wonderful childhood (no sarcasm)

Also for whatever it's worth I've noticed a very distinct tendency for people with better upbringings to be more libertarian... This could totally just be a coincidence though, because it is in no way universal.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Live_Free_Or_Die — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 09:57:35 GMT

"How to make libertarianism finally work"

as if that is possible. perhaps some critical thinking is in order.

"How to sell the most libertarian ideas in a world where the idea most sold prevails."

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Clayton — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 08:10:17 GMT

I was disciplined at a level that would shock most people but I came through it without major emotional dysfunctions. I'm not saying I'm a representative sample, merely that this idea that if a kid gets hit or yelled at once he's doomed to emotional dysfunction, is ridiculous. We see in nature that animal parents apply mild physical coercion and punishment (e.g. a mother dog nipping her puppies' ears when they bite while suckling). Humans, in this regard, were no different in the ancestral environment. Of course, both animal and human children in the ancestral environment are essentially Rothbardian... they leave whenever they don't want to be around a parent and nobody does anything about it.

Oh, I forgot one of the fastest growing forms of child abuse: drugs. They're pumping children full of these psychotropic drugs and this is a depraved act of violence. Compare the reaction of the man on the street to: (a) "date rape drug" and (b) "Ritalin". In the former case, his face will wrinkle up in horror and disgust. "How awful that someone could forcibly drug someone without their consent!" In the latter case, his face will go somber and devout, "Yes, how good it is that we have modern tools to help children cope with emotional maladjustments and psychological problems like Attention-Deficit Disorder." But, logically, what is the difference? Administering Ritalin to a small child is no different than slipping date-rape drug into a woman's drink. The child cannot possibly consent to what is being done to him. He is being drugged without consent. And you can't compare it to chemo or some other life-saving technique because the child can consent to "living"... he can't consent to being drugged for a "disease" that he himself does not even believe he has. Thomas Szasz FTW.

Clayton -

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Anenome — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 07:54:50 GMT

Clayton:

Stefan has a point, in that the nuclear family in the modern era is a toxic waste dump but he is in outer space when it comes to the logic of blaming parents. What happened to parents? Did they all get together and just agree to start being shitty parents? Was there a big "shitty parents convention" a few thousand years ago and we're all suffering under the self-reinforcing effects of this?

Hmm, I have to say I lean towards agreeing with you just offhand.

I think the roots of statism are actually contained in the line between aggression and defensive coercion. People blur that line in their own defense and become tyrants in their own defense, going much further than is needed to stop another's aggression and ultimately instituting aggression in the name of defensive-coercion. I call that line the def-off line, for the point at which defensive-coercion moves into being offensive-coercion, or aggression.

That's not at all unique to families...

Clayton:
I have not read UPB and never will.

Is his family-centered thesis the point of UPB? Hmm.

Clayton:
Hats off to David Gordon for doing the dirty work. One of the undertones I've noticed in Stefan's work is this "unstated counterfactual world" where children are never slapped or yelled at and everyone grows up to be happy and healthy. I don't think this is the case at all. I think that Nature designed us to be able to take a few whacks and some tongue-lashings. Other animals do it to their younglings. Of course, the potential intensity of human abuse is much greater than in the rest of the animal kingdom and I think it is this intensification that is the problem.

Yeah, tend to agree. I wasn't spanked but a few times as a kid, but looking back they weren't unreasonable.

Re: How to make libertarianism finally work!

Anenome — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 07:46:41 GMT

Molyneux is on my radar. I saw him speak at Libertopia and must say he a brilliant speaker, witty and fresh and understand the issues on a deep philosophical level and is able to present in humorous and penetrating ways, even extemporaneously.

He's a perfect spokesman for libertarianism from what I've seen so far, and is a full time libertarian educator now, speaking on on Freedomain Radio and making a living off his books and the like.

His books can be found/bought here, digital versions free for download. The book referenced in the OP is there as well.

The OP is absolutely right that the war is primarily moral in character. It is the moral argument that primarily draws adherents into the socialist camp, for they are convinced that socialism's moral principles are correct and that capitalism must be immoral.

However they are led to conclude this with a couple bad premises, and by that are led into a lifetime of opposing freedom in favor of impossible egalitarianism and the like.

Rothbard characterized old classical libertarianism as fundamentally hopeful and progressive. We were the original progressives, looking forward to a future of hope and prosperity. For a few reasons, the old libertarians lost that, and that mantle was taken up by the socialists.

We've got to recapture that vision of hope and progress, combine it with our moral clarity on rights and property. The ideological war can only be fought on moral grounds. Cede the moral realm and you cede the fight.

In that sense, I think Molyneux's effort a good one, just from the description of it. It was perhaps Rand that kicked off the moral fight in modern times, Rothbard and others continued in that vein, and we've made traction ever since.