You are Here:
My questions after listening to "Freedom!"

Author (Read 4473 times)

My questions after listening to "Freedom!"
« on: August 03, 2016, 09:38:14 PM »
 

formerliberal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 5
    Posts
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
I very recently discovered Adam Kokesh on Youtube. I was instantly intrigued and listened to "Freedom!" the same day. I then commented on youtube, asking that either Adam answer my questions or anyone else who knew what they were talking about. At that point, I didn't know this forum existed. So, here are my questions:

1. When we start having tiny community governments with no military, what happens when huge governments with huge(r) militaries attack these small communities, and put them under their power like a dictatorship? Doesn't that just reverse all of the work that was done to achieve freedom in the first place? You say that large scale invasions don't happen anymore, but look what happened with Russia and Crimea in 2014. I wonder, do you think that the process of localization will happen slowly enough that it will spread to all the other powerful countries before this becomes a problem?
2.  What happens when a criminal doesn't want to make their victims "whole again"? When he is ostracized by the community, there will still inevitably be those who take advantage of that system, and sell him goods and services for more money, and to buy his goods or services for less money. People are greedy. (This is stating the obvious and I know that.) There is also the option of online business.  He could potentially continue to victimize people with barely any consequence, especially if he doesn't care about having friends. How do we solve this?
3. On top of that, family members of victims (especially those of rape or murder) could potentially try to "take 'justice' into their own hands" by murdering the offender in retribution. If things like this continue to happen over and over in what could basically become an endless cycle, that would just be chaos. There would be no justice in that. What would the solution to that problem be?
4. Do people who refuse to contribute to projects such as roads, schools, and the like still get to use these public goods? What about those who are unable to contribute (the poor, the disabled)?
5. Do you believe relatively the same things about the Church and organized religion in general as you do about governments?
6. "Depression is not an organic phenomenon" what exactly do you mean by this? I'm not sure I agree with that statement. (I understand this question might only be able to be answered by Adam but I'm willing to hear what others have to say.
7. Lastly, what stops bigger, powerful people from starting large and powerful organized crime rings? (I think I might be able to answer this question, or at least I'm guessing it has to do with the larger community banding together to stop this from happening.)

Thanks to anyone with some answers. I'm curious to hear solutions to these perceived problems.
 

Re: My questions after listening to "Freedom!"
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2016, 07:41:26 PM »
 

apocaloptimisto

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 11
    Posts
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
    • A few of my crazy rants
I probably won't be drawn into a long conversation here because I'm pretty burnt out on internet and typing as a means of conveying big ideas but it sucks to see good questions sit ignored so here are my thoughts.

Quote
1. When we start having tiny community governments with no military, what happens when huge governments with huge(r) militaries attack these small communities, and put them under their power like a dictatorship? Doesn't that just reverse all of the work that was done to achieve freedom in the first place? You say that large scale invasions don't happen anymore, but look what happened with Russia and Crimea in 2014. I wonder, do you think that the process of localization will happen slowly enough that it will spread to all the other powerful countries before this becomes a problem?

They will die or be enslaved.  This is why free people of the future will need to be nomadic.  If you look at wars where small forces fought off or survived huge forces, it's always been the minimalist, and nomadic that are in tune with their land that survive.  We could do that today, enabled by diy green tech.  I live it so I know it's possible for at least some.  Basically, property beyond what one can carry and personally maintain, and freedom, can't coexist.  True freedom is the ability to thrive without reliance upon property.


Quote
2.  What happens when a criminal doesn't want to make their victims "whole again"? When he is ostracized by the community, there will still inevitably be those who take advantage of that system, and sell him goods and services for more money, and to buy his goods or services for less money. People are greedy. (This is stating the obvious and I know that.) There is also the option of online business.  He could potentially continue to victimize people with barely any consequence, especially if he doesn't care about having friends. How do we solve this?

In an anarchic world, there won't be room for those that can't or don't want to be nice.  The psychopaths won't have civilization's slavery systems to use to empower themselves so they'll have to resort to violence.  This direct violence, unlike the structural violence that currently empowers them, will be easy to recognize.  Those that wish to live peacefully will greatly outnumber the psychopaths and will most likely kill them.  We will see death more like the hunter gatherer people of the world do, like a transition to a new phase of existence.  I say this because those that can't see it this way likely won't survive the collapse that will be necessary if civilization is to be stopped in time to leave any Nature at all.  Eventually, things would balance out and Nature would be the basis of our resource distribution systems again.  In a world full of anarchists, those that are against man made rule systems, the human genome would actually start evolving again because the psycho/sociopaths that civ creates and empowers will have less power over time and less women will breed with them.

Quote
3. On top of that, family members of victims (especially those of rape or murder) could potentially try to "take 'justice' into their own hands" by murdering the offender in retribution. If things like this continue to happen over and over in what could basically become an endless cycle, that would just be chaos. There would be no justice in that. What would the solution to that problem be?

If someone raped my daughter, I would kill them, laws or not.  Tribes could solve disputes as they did for hundreds of thousands of years before agriculture, by getting together, exchanging gifts, and talking things out.  There will always be violence but in an anarchist world, it would be more direct, between much smaller groups, and using much less destructive weapons than civ's inherently corrupt dispute resolution systems.

Quote
4. Do people who refuse to contribute to projects such as roads, schools, and the like still get to use these public goods? What about those who are unable to contribute (the poor, the disabled)?

If someone acted voluntarily with a group of others to build a road over land that others might use for hunting, walking, etc, and they have a problem with someone that didn't contribute using it, they would be instituting a man made rule system, which is against anarchy, anti freedom, and an unsustainable ethic.  I personally only use roads because there are no trails in between the places I like to go and there are fences and people with guns everywhere. 

Quote
5. Do you believe relatively the same things about the Church and organized religion in general as you do about governments?

Systems of hierarchy are systems of hierarchy.  They use man made rules and men as enforcers so psychopaths will always rise to the top because man's rules can be cheated and men can be corrupted.  Faith and spirituality are great but they are also great tools for control and exploitation when abused so when an easily abusable hierarchical system makes the "rules", people will suffer.


Quote
6. "Depression is not an organic phenomenon" what exactly do you mean by this? I'm not sure I agree with that statement. (I understand this question might only be able to be answered by Adam but I'm willing to hear what others have to say.

I think that means that it's not just a chemical in the brain, virus, bacteria, but a result of exposure to environment, diet, exercise, trauma, etc.  It may manifest showing symbols of organic phenomena in the brain and a false sense of something resembling happiness may be obtained with medicine but the true cause is literally civilization itself.  Being a domesticated animal that's stuck in hierarchy is just inherently depressing.  Robert Sapolsky has a good video on youtube regarding hierarchy and mental health.  If all of the arms of civilization need hierarchy to create control systems to prevent abuse, doesn't that mean that being a human, participating in slavery, and living in a human zoo called a city is going to result in depression?


Quote
7. Lastly, what stops bigger, powerful people from starting large and powerful organized crime rings? (I think I might be able to answer this question, or at least I'm guessing it has to do with the larger community banding together to stop this from happening.)

You got it.  Big powerful people won't be able to use monopoly money and guys in uniforms to exploit/control people so they'll actually have to be physically and/or mentally awesome to gain any kind of following, in particular in a post civ world where most of the follower types have killed each other because they didn't know how to independently and sustainably survive.

Basically, a lot of "anarchists" are just against "rulers" but don't realize that all of civ's systems need rules to prevent abuse.  If there are no rulers to enforce the rules, the rules are meaningless.  Following this logic, a true anarchist  that really believes in freedom is nomadic, minimalist, freegan, and fiercely independent, yet able to cooperate with Nature and their community.  People that are attached to property, money, religion, permanent settlement, agriculture, or any form of organization that affects resource distribution, really can't claim to be anarchists because they're dependent upon and supportive of systems of hierarchy, and therefore, rulers.  And please don't suggest that we let the robots run the show.  They will eliminate us without a doubt. ;)
"An" - means without  "Archy" - man's systems of rule
Money is one of man's systems of rule.
 

Re: My questions after listening to "Freedom!"
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2016, 10:21:13 PM »
 

formerliberal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 5
    Posts
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Thanks for your answers guys! And no, I don't believe any church should micromanage your behavior bob-rob.   ;D
 

Re: My questions after listening to "Freedom!"
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2016, 01:55:03 PM »
 

Stradog

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 58
    Posts
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • Proud member of the #Freedom2020 Team
    • View Profile
    • Citizens Action Network
Hey y'all!  Thanks for answering formerliberal's questions bob-rob and apocaloptimisto.  I just sent a message to Adam to see if he can come and answer these questions which I agree with apocaloptimisto that they are good questions.  #Stradog in Gun Barrel City, Texas #Freedom2020 #Kokesh2020 #Freedom4All
Frederick H, Stralow - Rick aka Stradog
Gun Barrel City, Texas
Citizens Action Network
We The People-United
Texas Revolution
"There is Power in Numbers"
 

Re: My questions after listening to "Freedom!"
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2016, 09:10:52 PM »
 

Spencer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 5
    Posts
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Good questions, and there are solid, objective answers. I'll suggest reading anything by Murray Rothbard for the essentials!
 

Re: My questions after listening to "Freedom!"
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2018, 09:48:25 PM »
 

Maxpintx

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 2
    Posts
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
We would like to co-invent. And share your opinion about the debate that has been debated now.