oioioi wrote: Remember people are very easily manipulated by television. Most people actually don't have opinions of their own, they regurgitate the views that are broadcast to them. Most people cannot think critically. At all.

Is that the Stefan Molyneux of Freedomain radio? He has some rather interesting views on the Zimmerman case....


hmmmmmm

This is great stuff but from Stefans earlier days.
Did you know that of late he has changed his mind and favours anarcho-syndicalism?

EDIT: Just for clarity, reply is to reptired.

feather wrote:

Aye, I laughed

andyh wrote:
No, he kept that quiet, he was slobbering all over Chomsky on his podcast a few weeks back though.
What's your source?

Edit (D.R.O.'s were not Stef idea originally )

Reptired wrote:
Cos now when he quotes Noam it's "slobbering"

Bwahahahahaha! Happy New Year indeed!

mikey mikey wrote:
He was interviewing/slobbering over Chomsky.

Reptired wrote:
From the interviews and lectures that I have seen, Noam Chomsky seems very modest and is not one to demand deference. If Stefans decided to fawn, it would have been his own decision.

I would interested to see the interview now, just to see of the slobbering is apparent to anybody else but you,

mikey mikey wrote:
Oh, he's fawning now is he?


What was the thread about again?

Reptired wrote:
You said slobbering. I haven't see the interview. You have. Your description. Could you link it?

Or are you unsure about the validity of your interpretation?

So here is I believe the only interview Stefan Molyneux has had with Chosky.

Thing is I can't see any slobber.#

I CAN see a lot of frothing at the mouth in the comments section.

But that is by a bunch of very disappointed wingnuts

Reptired wrote:
His own channel, he understands that ultimately dog eat dog isn't going to work for anybody but the top dog.
Not only that, but you cannot have anarcho-capitalism working without a complete blank slate for everyone which is not possible to arrange without authoritarian intervention of the strangest kind because the market has already been cornered by an elite few, its fair to state that gov has colluded to bring about this situation but nothings going to change that now short of divine intervention.
All you are left with is sabotage of the system, playing it against itself, which is precisely what anarcho-syndicalism is all about.
Its anarchism for realists. Molyneux's illness has no doubt simply sped up the inevitable conclusion IMHO.

andyh wrote:
Can you point me to the source, I listen to some of most of the stuff he puts out and other than the Chomsky interview I haven't seen anything that would indicate a new found preference for syndicalism, unless it's happened in the last few weeks.
Molyneux has stated many times that he doesn't have a problem with syndicalism, provided it's not forced on people, it's consistent with Anarchism (in the literal meaning), perhaps this is what you meant?

Ofc he has no issue with syndicalism, its merely an accumulation of common sense.
You can see it in his chat with peter joseph back in september for example. There has to be admissions that plain out anarcho-capitalism will never work, quite simply put, its nothing more than idealistic intellectual fantasy for educational purposes and not a SOLUTION.
There are numerous barriers to purist anarcho-capitalism, basically short of divine intervention it can never come about, because it has a monetary system that is flawed as it currently is, so again it quite simply cannot exist, its impossible.
Anarcho-syndicalism is as close as you can get to an ideal scenario in todays world, simple as. Not only that but there is living proof of it in action in mondragon.
Anarcho-syndicalism is not a solution either, merely a logical next step towards improvement/evolution of our social/economic/political model.
Capitalism is ownership of the means of production with a belief (and belief is the important word here) that the hidden hand of free markets will balance it all out.
Stefan has yet to explain how the carte-blanche situation is to come about short of some kind of divine intervention, so what are you left with as a REALISTIC improvement on our situation today without forcing people to do anything, without voting for change we all know will not come about?
A-S is about making everyone self employed and a direct and equal shareholder of the means of production and also a direct equal controlling voter of what the profits get spent on both business wise and social wise. Its not perfect or utopia etc etc we've been over that a thousand times now, merely a model towards change for the better.
It sabotages the system because it exploits the loophole in the system which biases towards incorporated entities and makes the current rep democratic system irrelevant. There is NOTHING Stefan can say against a system which is proven to work because there is no theory at play here, its a living factual example in mondragon. He's standing on nothing more than thin air and ofc he knows it, you can dream about what is ideal from now til doomsday it will change nothing. Man did not go from fire and the wheel to putting men on the moon overnight, nor has he got started yet IMHO, if certain barriers were removed such as the current FR banking system or a monetary system entirely then he will most likely evolve into a completely different creature with different belief sets and abilities. Such a creature would be a God to us IMHO, capable of perhaps moulding entire solar systems and ultimately galaxies to his whim because the only barrier he would have to overcome is the limit of his own imagination and resources to hand...actual physical resources instead of make believe self limiting monetary resources. At the moment we are infants in the nursery learning by gaming each other and for personal physical gain.
Intellectual and spiritual gain is something we are hundreds of years off getting a peek at yet IMHO.
I will never live to see it and IMHO things will just continue to get worse until we learn our lesson but its going to have to be the majority of people on the planet who have to come to this realisation and we're talking billions. Technology might speed it up but I'm still pessimistic about the speed given that humanity as a whole seems to only progress through pain - substantial pain - before 'getting it'.

Understand that there is nothing wrong with Stefans anarcho-capitalist outlook from a gaming pov, provided all the players play by the same rules, its pretty obvious you're not going to have that as cheating is part and parcel of gaming

andyh wrote:


I was looking for the source of your claim that Molyneux prefers syndicalism, because I would like to see his reasoning.
Did he actually say that or not?

lol no, you won't get any bare faced admission, only a series of small concessions about human nature and what is merely idealism rather than realism and this is more prevalent in his latest stuff since he got ill.
The burning point is that anarcho-syndicalists and anarcho-capitalists can agree strongly on many many important key points, such as self employment, taxation, monetary system etc etc, the list goes on and on. Its just that one has his head in the sky while the other has his feet on the ground. One is for actually doing something about it, the other is just all about never getting anywhere.
Ultimately I view both as the same type of person, just that one got over his hangups basically.

Anarcho-communists are stuck with the same hangups too IMHO, some things are just unachievable and you just have to get over it and get on with life. People are ultimately flawed creatures and you need to take account of these flaws, if you make an assumption that people will always do the right perfect thing every time then you're going to fail every time. There is no such thing as the perfect person who will think out every possible option and always do what is 'perfect' in every situation, I don't myself for example, neither does Chomsky or as I'm sure you'll admit yourself either. The human experience is about making mistakes but the evolutionary experience is about learning from and adapting to those mistakes instead of staying stuck in a rut forever, religion is like that for example. It wants to stay with the same belief forever, only willing to adapt upon some miraculous 'second coming' of the messiah who will then dictate what to change

It doesn't matter for example that various aspects of each religion are shown to be flawed, that their beliefs actually hurt themselves or other people and that they should change, they just go on with their beliefs like lemmings jumping off a cliff.
Stefan is great at taking apart religion, but he needs to come to terms with the fact that he has a religion of its own and that religion is belief in a gaming system. Some players will learn how to play players and they will then dictate the parameters of the game for themselves, we need a game that cannot be controlled in such a way and only evolutionary change will bring that about. No amount of revolution will change a thing and that includes anarcho-syndicalism which is IMHO a revolutionary thing, not evolutionary, it merely presents a scenario whereby evolutionary change is more likely, that is all.

mikey mikey wrote:

Ha ha ha, for once mikey you hit the nail on the head.

andyh wrote:
Thanks for the clarification, I think you're misunderstanding though, if you listen to the sunday call-in shows, there's almost always a token syndicalist or zeitgeister in there, and if they insist that their system is the only system that can work, it's not pretty.
Go and listen to some of the sunday shows if you don't believe me.

First off TZM is different from TVP.
Also anarcho-syndicalists are a world apart from that too.

Care to explain how anarcho-capitalism is going to suddenly appear and work within the current socio-economic system?

Stefan has never done that, nor will he, because its impossible. Bear in mind that I have never said that any of these solutions are all there is, nor that they are perfect or utopian etc etc. Simply that anarcho-syndicalism is the only option of the lot that can actually be applied, quite simply because it exists, there is living proof in mondragon showing it working, so there is outright denial already there on stefans part if you get my drift.
Capitalism and communism have BOTH never ever ever existed in reality in their true intended way...why? Because people have gamed the system to their own advantage and they will continue to game it to their advantage, anarcho-syndicalism is gaming the system to a group advantage, it is merely playing the elite at their own game. This in your face reality is undeniable its there for anyone to see if they care to look...if you make it big enough then people cannot avoid seeing it, they cannot hide it and eventually they will have to come to terms with it.

In the battle between idealism and realism, realism knocks it for 6 every time. You can see this in every aspect of the truth movement or conspiracy movement or whatever you care to call it, lizard people for example, 2012 etc etc its all the same shit and it fails again and again as reality knocks these 'followers' for 6 when they have to come to terms with it. Bullshit is bullshit, you just have to swallow it and move on, logic has to at some point overcome emotional denial.