Larken's massive creativity and impact
With respect: I've read your books. Loved the message in the fiction, as well as the general happenings in the book. Not as deep or complex as I typically enjoy in fiction but oh well, can't have it all. The Most Dangerous Superstition rocked and I want the entire Universe to read it. I also love and have massively promoted your animations, especially the Anarchia one and the Jones Plantation! They are golden to me because they really help statists see what's really going on.
I'm glad you care enough to speak out about what you seem to perceive as a fly in the ointment. I watched the debate between you and Adam. To me it seemed like one person was self controlled and gracious while the other was doing a bunch of name calling and missing the point. That said, I'm glad for your idealism and passion, Larken. I've admired you for years. And no, this is not being "passive aggressive." This is giving you credit where it is due and being honest with my thoughts.
Black & white thinking
I wish - hope - you experience something in your life that clicks for you in a way where your vision is less limited to binary thinking. Otherwise known as "black & white thinking," otherwise known as "splitting" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology). If you read about it, you may notice it describes you. I'm not kidding when I say I believe a person CAN shift away from those limiting thought patterns because I've done it. I was you. Many years of martial arts training, some massive trauma, and mushrooms all contributed to "snapping me out of it." So I'm confident it is possible to liberate yourself from limiting thought patterns.
Unity vs division
I'm a fan of embracing/accepting both the negative and the positive, so I'm not really disappointed in you for taking the negative stance here and wanting to point out something you see as destructive to a movement you believe strongly in. Where I am disappointed is that you are promoting division while Adam is promoting unity. He is ADAPTING to their language, so that his message will spread further. I understand how adapting can overlap with and/or seem like a lapse in integrity. But it doesn't have to mean that. In this case I don't think it does.
Actions vs words
I'm not biased here, either. So I say, ha! I discovered you before I did Adam and immediately started gobbling up everything you created AND sharing it with anyone who would listen! I've had beefs with Adam and we've worked close together before. Overall, my experience of him is that he believes in the cause and - much more importantly - his ACTIONS are in line with what he says.
Humility
Something Milton Friedman said comes to mind. It was something like how to him, being a Libertarian meant being humble; showing humility. He explained that one example of that is the idea that we don't know what is best for others, so we definitely don't try to change them. You seem to be coming from a place of thinking you know what is best in terms of how to best shift people from Statism to Voluntaryism. I can certainly be wrong about what you think. It's your words and manner that come across this way, like you know it all and people doing it any other way are just wrong, stupid, or misguided. When you are so sure of yourself and there are only two choices (in your mind), I see how it is easy to be so sure of yourself. Obtaining that kind of confidence is one of the reasons people undergoing certain kinds of trauma will become binary thinkers; when your life is chaotic and/or you have no control, reducing things down to only two choices can add clarity, along with feelings of control and safety.
Is trust a binary thing?
Do you either trust or not trust, with no middle grounds? Are you are either right or wrong in all situations? Are you either an honest person or a liar? Really? So if you lied once in your life, you are forever a liar? Or is it twice? You tell me, Larken. There is no middle ground for you, is there? This is extremely limiting. I wrote an article on that topic here: https://steemit.com/life/@scottermonkey/is-it-better-to-see-trust-as-black-and-white-or-spectrum
Multi-pronged approach
I think Jeff Berwick nailed it in the debate when he mentioned a "multi-pronged approach." I, too, believe we need to be coming at this from many directions. For many reasons! Including the fact that we all have different skills and talents to contribute. Here's an article I wrote on the many ways we can all contribute to changing the world toward more Voluntaryism:
https://steemit.com/voluntaryism/@scottermonkey/recipe-for-peaceful-revolution
I hear you that you worry that by using the aparatus of the State to try to dissolve the State is not an easy thing. Actually, you would put it more like "impossible," right?
Ron Paul
But why not try? And are you going to continue to discount the number of people who will be transformed by hearing Adam's message as he campaigns? You make weak distinctions between Adam and Ron Paul. Is this in order to tiptoe around offending the gazillions of us who respect and value what Ron Paul did for the liberty movement? But I don't hear anything solid from you on that.
Speaking of solid, when you talk about how voting "legitimizes" the State, I get the concept and how it could be a thing, but really? When the voting is for a 3rd party, it sends a message. We could debate about how powerful that message is, but it does exist and I think it more than makes up for this "legitimizing" you imagine is going on. And what about voting at a level where laws and regulations are removed? Are those not at least good to some extent? I bet I lost you at "some extent" because you want to hear all or none, don't you? Either voting is all good or all bad. Limiting. Sad. Remove YOUR shackles, Larken.
Does this make any sense to you?
So I'm betting what I'm saying here may make little sense to you, filtered through your lack of [current] ability to process information in a way that allows for "middle grounds" or "shades of gray." But correct me, please.
Unless we have a cataclysm, apocalypse, violent revolution, or some other massively fucked up, improbable, or unrealistic event, there won't and can't be an instant 100% switch from statism to Voluntaryism. Can you tell I'm more a fan of a gradual movement? Not that I wouldn't love sudden shift to all gov being gone, but shoot dang, we don't live in Scotter's Fantasy Land :-(
The enemy of my enemy is my friend
Now with regard to your general critique of all Libertarians (I use the big L to denote minarchists), why not choose to see them as allies FOR NOW? If you can for a moment try to see a path where we can move from 100% statism down to 80% down to 60% and so on (requires breaking through your black & white filters), then why not work together with Libertarians until gov becomes the 20% (or whatever) they want. And if we all worked together all the way to that point, can you imagine (a) During that journey, how many of those Libertarians will convert along the way to full on Voluntaryist? (b) And once we get to that 20% gov, how many people will see just how effective the private sector has been at handling all the services they used to think were needing to be under gov purvue and decide they actually want 0% gov?
Do you have the capability to see how 20% gov is better than 40% gov? Or does your mind go straight to, "No! Only 0% is right and good. Even just 1% is like having 1% cancer and thus, not good and not acceptable!" By the way, I've heard you say something like that before and I'm wondering if you have evolved away from at least that position yet?
Finally, it takes a manipulator to recognize one. Like all of us, you have that in you. Maybe if you pull the stick out of your ass, you will be able to relax enough and have a hole big enough to look inside of yourself and do some of the internal work necessary to clean those filters so you can start seeing the wider spectrum of what is going on with perspectives other than your own. I believe you can. I hope you will.
To me, that kind of understanding/acceptance will give you more peace than anything else can. I want this for you.
If someone came along and said he was going to free the world by wearing a huge purple top hat and doing a silly dance, and I said, "That will never work," would you complain about my binary thinking, and say I was being negative and divisive? After all, why not try wearing a purple top hat and wearing a silly dance? A number of your questions also imply that I oppose a huge increase in freedom, if it isn't complete. That has exactly nothing to do with this debate. Adam won't win. He will get 0% of his agenda accomplished.
Larken, do you recall the "Pants on the ground" dude from American Idol many years back? Old fart auditioning with that stupid ass song? He wasn't wearing a huge purple top hat, but I sure did remember him.
Obviously he wasn't going to win, but I bet you 80% of the people who saw that audition remember the words to this day. It hasn't been viral for many years, BUT...It made an imprint.
Now, I begrudgingly agree with you that Adam likely won't win, and will not accomplish what he wishes to accomplish, but if he can make an IMPRESSION. Plant a seed.
If he can do for my young niece's and nephew's generation what Ron Paul did for mine (my son's generation is already lost), maybe something will sprout. Something of STRONGER stock that is harder to snuff out. Something that itself can spread all on it's own.
I love you, Brother...I listen often and I nod my head in agreement a lot. But the apparatus has dumbed down the masses to SUCH an extent that you will simply NEVER red-pill enough people to gain momentum. ALL of us that are on the same wavelength are not even a drop in the bucket enough to do that.
Not yet.
Not in black-and-white fashion.
They say that opinions are like assholes...everybody's got one. This one is mine.
I wish you well.
Thanks for your reply, Larken. Yes, it is black & white thinking to not recognize that silly dance guy's affect on the world can be more than all or nothing. It can be all, SOME, or nothing. And to me, SOME is better than nothing.
stop being a cry baby larken
Here is a black and white question. Is what Adam and his supporters doing a net positive or a net negative for the freedom movement?
I am not convinced that what he is doing a negative.
uh. jay. That is actually the opposite of the black and white binary thinking. You are engaging in exactly what scottermonkey is suggesting: "the bottom line", which will be a result of grey shading. Ironic posting. LOL
I might add to the suggestion, that we add some color to our quotient. I am not yet convinced a little "minarcho" isn't needed for a justice system to exist. Assuming we could raise enough money with voluntary funding to sustain the Courts, still we have a problem: the power of Subpoena and Warrant would be gone in an Anarcho Criminal Justice System.
Here's some solid "binary" thinking: BALLOTS OR BULLETS?; pick one.
Pretty simple choice when a group of humans are thinking about changing their governing structure, huh? Or am I missing a 3rd alternative here? (as if the governing "body" is simply going to dissolve and replace itself without any resistance and morph into something wonderful)
Larken the neoBuddahist monk... as if Voluntaryism is some sort of holy religion. pfffffft. At least show us an altar at which we can come play and pray all day. Let's see how AnarchoForko develops, huh? All the talking at Anarchopulco has it's limitations and can only last for a few days. the "fork" is something which could develop into a year round community experience; enhanced by AnarchoCap time-share unit developers... expanding on something like that which KennysKitchen is up to while attending the events.
Ballots equate to bullets. Eventually. Both result in aggression (initiation of force).
The third alternative is to choose neither.
Ironically, Adam said in a speech from the LP-TX the other day, at the very end: (I'm paraphrasing). "Either you do politics, or politics will surely do you." Thinking you can choose neither, is simply not even remotely tied to thinking. steven. It will even take ballots or bullets to maintain anarchoCapVol'sm, once constructed somehow.
excellent composition SM. Sadly, I think Larken the neoBuddahist of Libertavia is just too damned angry to objectively analyze all that that you bring forth; at best, he will attempt to dissect each point, and not see the essence of the synergy of what you posit.
It reminds me of some of the frustration Objectivists in the 50s and 60s had to deal with when attempting to get Ayn Rand to crack the layer of marble around her thick jewish skull and see something she might have missed. (and obviously did, on occasion). Anecdotally, I watched the same thing happen with Irwin Schiff in spite of my personally attempting to get him to not make the same mistake in the early '90s... LOL Irwin's son is acting the same way now with cryptoCurrency!!
This type can't seem to spit their pride and just "let it go" once they become so "invested" in a strain.
Yes, I know the feeling of having to contemplate the idea that you got it all wrong and you have to change your way of thinking. Happened when I was replaying this archived video from 911truth. It also happened several times after listening to some of Larken's videos too.
on that note... I bring to your attention, the real reason Rose is worried about what Kokesh is doing... and what he will end up achieving.
https://christophercantwell.com/2018/03/17/s-o-t-o-s-p-e-a-k-ep-23-realist-report/
I await your objective analysis.
What am I analyzing? I've listened to some of the audio. I don't get it. What is reason Rose is worried?
This:
And you are saying that Rose worried about this?
I believe there is a distinct possibility. Can't know for sure. Don't believe he would publicly admit it. But something has him protesting way too much over Kokesh's use of the political process. Do you remember him ever complaining about Ron Paul like this? See? They can't play the "anti-semite" card on Adam.............. and his "Split 50!" doesn't require a large number of people to convert to libertarianism to float! In fact, it could sell with almost no conversion factor from the population.
Adam is the one promoting division by using the political process, believe it or not, the political process divides anarchists.
That's inaccurate. Adam toured in 46 states last year promoting the unity platform which says it doesn't matter if LP members are anarchist or minarchist, as long as the organization is working to shrink government.
"It doesn't matter whether you are for or against slavery, as long as you want slavemasters to be a little nicer!" <-- Exactly what the abolitionist movement should NOT have been (and wasn't).
I like that. :)
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by ScotterMonkey from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows. Please find us at the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you would like to delegate to the Minnow Support Project you can do so by clicking on the following links: 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.
Be sure to leave at least 50SP undelegated on your account.
Ultimately, no-one can be right all the time. In a world being forced in one direction against the natural flow of the will of the people like a massive cruise ship containing the government, it is highly unlikely it will turn on a dime.
It could with utter chaos, destroying the engine room is certainly one way. Those that hold power will not willingly give it up though. They did not get where they are with feelings for the common man (ironic though that is) or if they did, they have been brow-beaten in a forge of conformity to get along. The deaths of many protecting each side and those caught in the crossfire would be carnage. Much as I would like to see government 'switched off' and grab the popcorn to watch those with a suit and no life skills whatsoever beg on the streets, lets also look at another way....
On the other hand, we have someone who I am not totally convinced is legitimate but be that as it may, he is using the favored 'wedge' tactic to some degree. Turning the ship by a degree or 2. As governments do, he is nudging the tip of a wedge in a seemingly impenetrable door gap (like the regime constantly bringing up a 'cashless'society until years of defeat will turn to victory through repetition and new measures as they seek a way to make it so).
If he does not ruin the forward momentum, he may just be a pioneer for both volunteer/anarchist groups by creating a small opening, like the OP said ' planting the seed'. I'm aware of mixing metaphors here so lets get back to the ship scenario. He may very well fail, but although a ship may not be turned by a single wave, a constant beating by wave after wave even from different directions can rock the boat enough to seriously think about getting to the lifeboats.
Lets hope as said above, that tolerance of different plans toward the same goal can be accomplished (it is the same goal maybe with 10-20% difference that can be indulged at a later date). It really does not matter HOW it is achieved, but it is important a change is made whether small or big. Remember we have got here over lifetimes, and also remember there really are shades of grey ...... no-one can be right all the time.
Larken Who?
The goal is always no government.
Like the goal of no cancer, we may have to settle for 'less cancer for now', but the goal is still and always no canacer at all. Saying 10% cancer is acceptable is missing the point that no cancer is acceptable.