Description

John Hunt and Doug Casey are back with the second installment of the High Ground Series, “Drug Lord.” John discusses how the war on drugs is a complete disaster and how the government has made matters worse! Also, the problem with legal drugs and the revolving door of cronyism from the guys at the FDA! For many people out there, legalizing drugs still sounds bat crazy but looking at the system we have today…is it really that crazy? Look at all the unintended consequences of government making drugs illegal. Instead of things being above ground where it’s safer and you know what’s in the good you’re consuming, instead you’re trusting a drug dealer! What happens to people that are addicted to legal drugs like pain killers? They seek a cheaper alternative called heroine! This out of control drug war needs to stop! The war on drugs has made it less safe, not safer like the government wants you to believe!

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

I farm and work on a feedlot just outside of Billings, MT. My dad and I will feed up to 8,000 head of cattle every year at the feedlot. As of September 20th I launched a podcast on iTunes where I talk about the current issues of the day. My mantra is defending the free market and making the moral case for capitalism! My show is weekly and is available on iTunes, Stitcher and your web browser.

discussions

  • Would it be worthwhile advocating for a voluntary state? Now this might seem a contradiction in terms, but consider this: 1) This state would collect voluntary taxation 2) Candidates would be elected by voters to spend the voluntary taxes on ‘public services’ such as welfare, public housing etc., all the goodies progressives want. 3) This state would not have the power to use force in its interactions with citizens Advocating such a system would show that these things can be paid for voluntary, and expose the gun in the room of our current system. Just a thought. Has such an idea ever been proposed? Would it be worthwhile?

    Jump to Discussion Post 6 replies
  • For the past few years, police departments have been on something of a power trip in the United States. Only citing the lesser-known instances that come to my mind, cops have assaulted autistic teenagers and murdered unarmed civilians, and were subsequently cleared of all charges and let back on the force. A zealous, dogmatic conservative “fanbase,” alongside a legal system that actively defends police from facing charges of murder, manslaughter, or assault, assures that these men and women never see justice for their actions. It’s awful what police are doing in society, but it’s even worse that they can get off scot-free for it. Of course, most of you already know this. So here’s my question: has any United States representative or senator proposed a bill designed to fight against unjust acquittals or introduce charges that are harder to to be overturned? As an agorist, I’m partially convinced that this has never happened and that anyone who gets elected for public office in this day and age is a vapid authoritarian, but a sliver of hope remains for me somewhere. Have any of you heard of such legislation on a federal level? If not, then what about on a state level?

    Jump to Discussion Post 1 reply
  • 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
  • Its seems they always skip over the issue. There is always this refusal to acknowledge or “give-in” in to the reality of what its happening on their part Does anyone know why this mentality exists? Is there anyway to stop it? Or try to get through to these people that’s its tyranny that is the enemy?

    Jump to Discussion Post 11 replies
  • When people are foolish into thinking that the “law” (police, written laws) protect them, does that afford them to not protecting themselves, because they think that the police, and or “law” is always going to be there for them? I feel this will only influence these ‘types’ of people to provoke others whom they dont like, because they know the “law will be on their side.” So as an example: When the person reacts, naturally, the instigator can turn around and say, “Help, help, police!” I feel that this is an abuse and exploitation of law and policing. When police and or law protects people, do people foolishly think that the law is on their side and they can bend it to their will, against their enemies AKA: people they dont like in society, and do they? My conclusion is that people use the police and law, to get THEM what they want against their enemies, because they KNOW the law will “protect” them in the process. So in many cases you find for example, bad co-workers, bosses, friends and family, who deliberately instigate a provocation KNOWING FULLY the other persons reaction, so that person they targeted, can be sent to jail or fined.  The police or laws are exploited as a mafia type agency for these types of people. One could say the strong arm of these types of people. All the while these people, DONT PROTECT THEMSELVES! Your thoughts?

    Jump to Discussion Post 2 replies