I have dabbled over time in listening to some of him and his FDR but in the past few years I have just found him to especially grind on me irritatingly.
He comes across very absolute in his approach to ‘Voluntaryism’ and Anarchy. Whether that be in his perspectives as far as women, beta and alpha men go. Most of that is for me bland and deluded gender conceptions based on flawed psychology.
It is his obsession with IQs and Race that irk me the most however. Outside of North America, no one really cares about IQ and considers it anything more than something most ‘Americans’ value and obsess over.
I have found that a lot of his race and culture theory seems to stem from North American studies and ‘experiences’ when it comes to such issues. When viewed from an outsiders perspective they are not merely bigoted but also very limited in even the most ‘clever’ of sounding in arguments.
I especially noticed in his attempt to validate race and sports. This was a confused and shallow mess which was unashamedly cheered by his many listeners and those seeking validation in their world views.
I also have noticed his defence of the Trump populism seems to come from a fear baiters place in so far as to how one perceives Oriental others or foreigners in general. I just find that a bias to one populist candidate of a US political party in many ways derides principled claims when it comes to philosophical consistency. Especially when the said candidate, seems to be more rhetorical in bluster (as is the case for most political animals when seeking a general vote granted).
I am curious as to know what other people think of Molyneux and his concepts of ‘Anarchy’ ?