Description

This is part two from Episode 9, Why I am an anarchist, what that means, and why you should be one too…

LINKS:

The Incredible Vanishing Minarchist by Bryan Caplan: https://www.econlib.org/archives/2015/06/the_incredible_3.html

Important Difference Between the State and Government by C. Jay Engel: http://reformedlibertarian.com/blog/editor/important-difference-between-the-state-and-government/

A Further Note on Governments and States by C. Jay Engel: http://reformedlibertarian.com/blog/a-further-note-on-governments-and-states/

Info about Caryn Ann: http://lpedia.org/Caryn_Ann_Harlos

Please support this podcast by visiting: http://biglpodcast.com/#Support

iTunes review also help!  Please leave one today for a shout-out (unless it is a bad review, LOL, then you may get a different kind of shout-out).

You can also support Caryn Ann also by beginning all Amazon purchases through her affiliate link.  For instance, check out this book at https://amzn.to/2OwnKsJ (a great intro book to the Party), and then just continue your searches and purchases from there.  Amazon gives credit to any purchases done during the session not just the featured book.  Please shop OFTEN AND HARD.

You can contact Caryn Ann at [email protected]

Follow Caryn Ann on social media and other sharing sites:

Steemit: https://steemit.com/@pinkflame

Facebook Public Figure: https://www.facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/

Facebook Personal: https://www.facebook.com/carynannharlos

Facebook Big L Podcast Page: https://www.facebook.com/biglpodcast

MeWe: mewe.com/i/caryn_annharlos

Minds: https://www.minds.com/CarynAnnHarlos

YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/pinkflameofliberty

All Big L Patrons are automatically given patron status for the Pink Flame of Liberty show.

Disclaimer:  All opinions are those of Caryn Ann Harlos only and not to be attributed as the official position of the Libertarian Party.

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

discussions

  • What role (if any) should the gov’t play in the continued funding of cutting-edge scientific research? According to the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and  Development), approximately 10% of all R&D conducted globally is directly funded by governments, with approximately 60% done by private industry and 20% by educational institutions. Granted, this number probably doesn’t take into account indirect gov’t funding through tax subsidies and incentives. That 10% goes towards projects on the cutting edge of science, such as NASAs various space ventures and the Large Hadron Collider at CERN (funded through the governments of the member states). Proponents of big gov’t science, such as Neil Degrasse Tyson, have stated in the past that projects like these are unlikely to be privately funded due to their high risk, high cost, and lack of return on investment. Gov’t, claims Tyson, is required to make the initial step and take all the risk so that private firms can follow in its wake with a clear picture of the requirements of such endeavours. TAM 2011: Our Future in Space Would such high risk, high cost projects be possible without gov’t backing?

    Jump to Discussion Post 10 replies
  • Dominance, Sharing, and Privacy gives us a simplified (maybe oversimplified), and intuitive way to categorize human sociality. Instead of thinking of social structures as being diverse and too complicated to be categorized, these three categories allow us to classify behaviors that address conflict as one of three types or a combination of the three.  For example, might makes right is not really a property norm but it is a dominance strategy. The ethic that the world belongs to everyone is not an alternative property norm, it is the nullification of property in favor of a sharing norm.  The violent defense of a territory is not a might makes right or dominance behavior but is the defense of privacy. The reluctance to intrude on others prior establish territory is not just a fear of retaliation but a respect for privacy.   For moe read: Dominance, Sharing, and Privacy (DSP), The Three Principles of Sociality  

    Jump to Discussion Post 1 reply
  • If the state was abolished but private property was not then wouldn’t landlords effectively become the state? There are a lot of similarities between a landlord and a state.  They both hold territory that they can exclude people from.  A proprietor can tell their tenants what to do while they are on their property. Taxes are similar to rent.  Laws are like the rules of a rental contract.  A proprietor may defend their property with force.   So what is the difference?

    Jump to Discussion Post 12 replies
  • What is the origination of property rights? Where do they come from that you can reason their existence as natural? We usually argue for property rights at some point in our discussions as libertarians, but I’m curious as to where we can claim they’re from. Personally, I derive mine from God and my religious beliefs, similar to what Jefferson stated about God given rights. But what about someone who doesn’t believe in a deity? How can they derive property rights in a way that can’t be dismissed as ideals, but derived in nature? This is also (and arguably more so) important for arguing these natural rights to people who won’t accept a divine aspect. It’s important to have property rights, and they’re evidently beneficial, but the argument remains for declaring these as rights, otherwise the NAP is in jeopardy. How do we have a right to property?

    Jump to Discussion Post 11 replies
  • Hello Liberty Community! We wanted to introduce ourselves as the latest liberty-based podcast to join the net. We recently chatted with Jeffery in an episode we will be releasing next week and he suggested we join the site to say hello, to meet fellow liberty-minded folks, and share our content with you! Here’s the most recent episode released today! Feel free to get a hold of us and let us know what you think! In their most controversial episode yet, Danny and Michael arrive very late to the party to plumb the depths of the possibly well-intentioned, though likely intellectually faulty social justice movement and find they have very different opinions as to why the movement exists. http://flagshipfreedom.blubrry.com/2016/10/24/ff006-social-justice-the-post-modern-religion/

    Jump to Discussion Post 2 replies