How exciting is this!? That voluntaryism is actually being recognized now? That the question of the legitimacy of the state is now starting to being addressed?!
part 7, part 8, part 9, part 10, part 11, part 12, part 13, part 14
part 15, part 16, part 17, part 18, part 19, part 20, part 21, part 22, part 23, part 24
Ah, interesting.
Clickable link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX2TqXT8GcY
Here is some more info about it:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/93/boards/thread/8578406/
The debate is organized as two teams of two debaters each. The best of both sides will be brought out to discuss, argue and convince the audience either that government is necessary to better the condition of people, or that government can only do harm, with complete liberty being the only way to prosperity and justice.
Voluntaryist/Anarcho-capitalist team
Joey Hill
Scholarship winner 2009 Mises University
Member of Ludwig von Mises Institute
Member of Rothbard Institute
Member of Molinary Institute
Terrorism Awareness/Chem-Bio, Radiological & Nuclear Defense Instructor
B.S. Interdisciplinary Studies, Suma Cum Laude, New York Institute of Technology
Joe Corbett
B.S. Accounting, University of Southern California
Former Naval Officer
Democratic-Socialist Team
Herb Shore
Member of National Political Committee & Webmaster of Democratic Socialists of America (http://dsausa.org…)
Activist in San Diego Affordable Housing Coalition
Activist in San Diego Maquiladora Workers’ Solidarity Network
Professor Emeritus of Physics at San Diego State University
Gregg Robinson
Political Vice President of AFT Local 1931
Activist in San Diego Affordable Housing Coalition and many other organizations
Professor of Sociology at Grossmont Community College
Moderator:
Donna Orlando, co-founder of Orlando-Ward & Associates, Inc., a consulting/mediation/training company.
what i find funny is its basically economics students vs. professors of sociology and physics.
Very stereotypical positions for both sides.
This is fun to watch. I’m at the point where the social-democrats are introducing themselves. The man introducing their position near the beginning of his introduction states: 'I’m not going to get into theory [then he begins to provide a theory, thus contradicts himself by stating immediately after the word “theory”:] ‘…as the world is too complex so I’m going to rely upon observations of reality as it is now.’
well back to the debate…
That’s in San Diego; I didn’t go to that debate because I’ve been busy with my fraternity, but I wish I did. I’ve gone to a couple of their meetings.
the socialists were like
“in a socialist society, the voluntaryists can have their way - all they need to do is convince everyone else to vote for voluntaryist leaders!”
“one dollar, one vote is coercion too!” [characterizing voluntarism]
I do find it interesting that the socialists come from a completely ends justify the means approach and cannot wrap their minds around the fact that it is criminal and that they cannot show what would have happened without government interference.
I think the socialists would have done better if they had just said yes, we are gonna initiate force on you, and here’s why it is justified…
Instead they ceded that initiating force is bad, and then tried to say why socialism doesn’t require initiation of force. This sealed their defeat, if there was such a thing.
In part 6. Again the Social Democrat brings up, being that he is a theoretical physicist, that theory can never debunk experiment but experimentation always can debunk theory. He has it backwards. If there is a noticeable change in the experiment - how was that change noticed? By thought. If the individual doesn’t comprehend or realize what’s happening then the experiment will simply go on without any noticeable change. A comprehension in the mind that something isn’t fitting the previously held theory is a realization or a thought that something has changed. The mind interprets what’s going on and the individual intellectually realizes with knowledge. It is with that knowledge that the individual is able to know in the first place what is happening in the experiment to begin with.
I suggest he reads this.
Secondly, humans aren’t of the natural sciences so his application is a category error in that regards too.
Couldn’t you technically have voluntary socialism?
Of course-- but that doesn’t seem to even occur to the statists in question.
NewLiberty,
I agree the social democrats are failing in the debate on the issue of force. The s.d. in part 13 stated paying a mortgage is coercive because if they don’t pay they are thrown out of the house. The audience member said the person took the mortgage voluntarily but in paying taxes there is no voluntary choice. The s.d. keeps pulling it back to mortgage is force and maintains that there is a confusion on what “force” means. Mortgage is forced on people…ok[:^)]
edit: there were bits not put on the youtube and the ending stops at part 13 when it seemed to have continued but no video to account of.
That was proposed to them by the voluntaryist, but they rejected it.
Yes, but when individuals who are impoverished by their poor decision try to break away and they are forced to adhere to a flawed ideology it no longer becomes voluntary.
Are these guys students? If they were that this is pretty funny because they are making the professors go gah gah.
From the end of part 13 I wish I was there so I could ask the guy trying to equate being penalised for not paying taxes with being penalised for not paying for a mortgage, if he thought 2 men agreeing to a fight to the death was the same as a murder. Or if rough sex is the same as rape.
Lol, straight up from the definitions you can see the difference.
Voluntaryists definitions were concise and simple to understand.
Democratic socialists had a paragraph of complete vagueness.
Voluntaryist definition of government could have been better.
Btw, OP - could you possibly link / provide a list of the other parts? Cheers.
Kewl, just started watching. It looks like Mr. Hill is wearing a Mises tie! Awesome [8-|]
Part 3: “We are now in an era of deregulated free market enterprise where anything goes”
What world is this socialist clown living in..?