Sam Seder vs. Libertarian Professor Walter Block: Round 2 (Full Debate)

[@nicholaspoulos7694]

Imagine having this guy as an econ professor and him explaining why we cant afford medicare for all but we can afford 10,000 competing courts for petty theft.

[@jackstratif9988]

Mind boggling to think about.

[@PowerfulWarrior69]

Pain

[@Libretad-cw4cb]

Who said those courts are paid by the government or contributing? Those are independent court with their own budgets.

[@nicholaspoulos7694]

@@Libretad-cw4cb Why would anyone respect a private court with a donated budget any more than a fucking arbitration judge that you didnt sign a contract with?

[@Libretad-cw4cb]

@@nicholaspoulos7694 first if you have a irrational rage please reserve the right to writers and second there is something called reputation if you have the right to choose you choose the more reputable courts as the same you choose the most reputable accountant firm or lawyer for example when you don’t have the right to choose you end up with government imposing you to be judged by a political party in course. That is the thing people is that blind by government education that can’t see how to trust anyone other than governments.

[@zacg_]

Professor Block is silly and absurd throughout this whole thing but from 41:00-46:40 you can watch his entire premise implode. He's basically arguing that human rights are innate and derived from your body and your labor. But when it comes to mixing labor with land he basically says that Native Americans can't claim this land because "too bad." In other words, the European model for land ownership is by definition correct and Native Americans are greedy if they claim this land as their own. But there is no innate reason to view it that way. It just somehow coincidentally lines up with the idea that Native Americans are owed almost nothing for being driven from their lands and murdered and robbed. In other words, let's just draw the line in such a way that the people in power today can conveniently not have to give away anything they have. You could make a logistical argument against returning all American land to the Native Americans but you can't make that argument on libertarian terms. And that is the point. These things aren't derived from innate purely logical laws of nature that can be objectively ascertained. That's why societies exist and these decisions are made by some version of groups of people trying to reasonably establish how power in society will be determined. No man is an island, even in libertarian fantasy.

[@mattlodder]

I am amazed that "too bad" is not a summary, but a literal quotation.

[@jzoobs]

@@mattlodder lol yeah "too bad, because I say so". And that's why after Sam responds to him he basically says, "I don't want to keep talking about this", and brings up a bunch of other controversial topics that he'd rather get wrapped up in.

[@giovannirosado5606]

@@mattlodder Did you miss the context of Sam's question?

[@uberhikari]

0.5% might not sound like a lot. But it would actually be equivalent to a portion of the USA the size of California and West Virginia combined. The Native population in the US is 2.8 million. That's a shit ton of land for 3 million people. If we gave the Natives that land plus $50,000 each that would be a humongous amount of reparations for 3 million people.

[@danwarrington2450]

@@uberhikari Point is though that ancaps claim property rights are inviolable and transferrable through inheritance, so saying '0.5% of this big pie is more than enough for your needs' should be beside the point if your ancestors held the whole pie in common for 10,000 years. More broadly this discussion illustrates that the right to property in the capitalist sense behaves very differently to all the other natural rights (life, liberty, equality) as it is exclusive rather than inclusive. Proudhon used this to argue that property (in the capitalist sense) is not a natural right.

[@sunflower-qn3wu]

Omg that moment when libertarianism inevitably leads to age of consent laws.

[@lordprettyflackoskillz3575]

Block's explanation of how a simple petty theft crime would be adjudicated in 25 different courts was beautifully moronic

[@infiniteflame2374]

Well said it might be one of the most stupidest things I have ever heard.

[@smaakjeks]

I'll just start a court corporation, Fair Law Inc, which treats everybody quite fair, unless someone comes into conflict with me. Then I secretly have the court agree with me every time. I hire PR firms to create the illusion that my court corporation is awesome and fair. Then I meet other well-to-do people and sell them a subscription for the secret club of people who will always win in my court.

[@grbenny]

Block is missing something. He gets paid for this? Sexual choices and business choices are the same? I’m going to homestead...somewhere. As much and as good.

[@robotron17]

@@smaakjeks Assuming your rulings at Fair Law are obviously wrong (which they would have to be in order to provide victories for your secret subscribers who, if they had a reasonable case, would not need to pay extra for your corrupt services) , the appeals process would show massive non-confirmation of your rulings, thereby exposing you. You would then be prosecuted, and would lose everything. Also, media coverage of the "little guy" getting unfair treatment at Fair Law would also expose you. This is just so obvious.

[@grayson0916]

Lord Pretty Flacko Skillz but government is inefficient according to libertarians somehow lol

[@b.g.3073]

"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson never realized it, but at the time of this quote, during his boxing career..... He was actually debunking libertarianism.

[@7YearsWar]

Funny he has a tattoo of Che on his stomach and Mao on his arm. Maybe he knew what he was doing.

[@marcashley8492]

"Punchers are born, boxers are made." It's an old saying but whoever coined it couldn't have known they were describing the morally compromised and moronic intellectual laziness of statists vs the nuanced and principled position of libertarianism.

[@HarryPainter]

@moz zo interesting that those who currently have power are almost exclusively not libertarians, yet you’re worried economics professors and philosophy nerds are going to take all the power. Who are you trying to protect?

[@HarryPainter]

@moz zo I agree that libertarians (who tend to be middle class and own land) would do better in a free market society in which it’s easier for more people to get richer. But so would everyone who makes their money honestly. People in power today are very hostile to laissez faire. That’s because, I think, they benefit from the system we have with its corporate welfare and government cronyism. If libertarians are guilty of wanting to transfer power from those people to regular people, that speaks well of libertarianism.

[@HarryPainter]

@moz zo politics is a binary. Libertarians didn’t side with Republicans during the Bush years because his wars were a deal breaker. These days the Republicans are clearly more libertarian than the Democrats (to most libertarians) because of war, taxes, regulations, etc. I don’t think cronyism is clearly better on one side or the other, though Republicans are certainly guilty of it. Interesting that Biden was the choice of the big banks this cycle and we heard not one peep from Democrats about campaign finance reform. I didn’t say anything about “free of corporate monsters,” I just said that for some reason these corporate monsters seem very hostile to laissez faire. Why is that? Re: your last point, that situation is no different than the current system. It can only get better with choice. That’s the argument for any market process. Choice and competition are good things. Why do you want a monopoly?

[@rainisvain]

Every single libertarian and ancap brings up age of consent laws if you let them speak long enough. It's just a law of nature.

[@Shilgne1]

42:52

[@HomelessTaxation]

@@Shilgne1 sams fucking face that whole convo lmao

[@joehuiras4955]

COMPULSORY BISEXUALITY

[@GeorgWilde]

Yeah, because if they don't say it, you will just say they are not libertarian/ancap, right?

[@5thgearouttahere]

@@joehuiras4955 Don't threaten me with a good time 😂🤣😂

[@zachariah78]

The amount of time these people spend coming up with this dream world is amazing.

[@lights473]

Or maybe it's you who doesn't think about having a grounded political philosophy that makes sense

[@frank6842]

@@lights473 libertarians aren't grounded in anything let alone political science

[@lights473]

@@frank6842 what part about libertarianism isn't grounded exactly? I recommend watching a video called "libertarianism from first principles" here on KZbin.

[@Jefferson-ly5qe]

One of the other things I think is hilarious is the fascination with homesteading. Has this prof ever swung a hoe in his life? I think if he did he'd realise pretty quickly why few people live like that in the developed world.

[@granudisimo]

@@lights473 I'm not gonna go to that private court you want me to go to, because I don't want to. Also, your property is mine now. Cops? What cops? I am the cops, now get lost. Ownership deed? Ummm 🤔, no, I am the owner, here's the deed. Your deed is in your house I just burned down? Pity. Ah you had a cloud server with a backup? Funny I also have that, what an amazing coincidence, isn't it? Now scram before any of my guys gets nervous and shoots you because they feel threatened and they have to defend themselves. My country's government is bigger yet I'm freer to not die of health problems because I can't pay whatever the insurance has decided I have to pay this year, and with less government spending on top of it due to the ability of public institutions to negotiate prices of drugs and other medical supplies. You can point at every single video in the internet, your ideology is a joke, your ideology is a fantasy, and all you have is sophistry and unearned confidence, just like the so called professor.

[@jeffreysegal2065]

Having watched the first "debate" with Block, I must admit I never expected to see a second one, so kudos to the patience of Seder. I find Block to be infantile, self-satisfied and condescending which helps masquerade how inept he is at making his own case. I agree with Seder that the problem with libertarian thought is it never arrives at specific solutions. Apparently the key is to continually frame and reframe the debate, not to solve anything.

[@HughVoodoo]

Revisiting this video. I remember watching this as a young libertarian and thinking Block was making so many great points and Sam was just being a close-minded statist. All these years later, I cannot reconcile any of the stuff Walter Block is saying. He prides himself on being logically consistent with regards to the NAP. Sam's line of questioning perfectly demonstrates WHY Block's position, when reduced to it's simplest form, is utter contradictory nonsense. This was a fantastic take down of a truly stupid worldview that I regret ever trying to defend.

[@jjoohhhnn]

hey, personal growth is essential and part of life and it sounds like you did well on the political front.

[@DarkZide8]

Well at least you made the journey. I doubt some of the anachro-capitalists I run into by chance sometimes will change as much as you have.

[@Libretad-cw4cb]

What do you defend now? It seems to me that every single political point of view has arbitrarily take decision to create it own sort of foundation. You first build rules and then the morality upon those rules. I can deduct that from religions in general. If there wasn’t any there wasn’t any principles to work with at the beginning of the times.

[@HughVoodoo]

@@Libretad-cw4cb I defend what I view now as reality and human nature. The worldview and society Walter Block wants to see is a utopian fantasy that will never be implemented, nor should it. It relies on the foundation of this sort of unspoken cooperation between billions of people. It's insanity.

[@Jefferson-ly5qe]

It seems this issue of property rights are where the rubber hits the road. Good on you for thinking about it and moving past it.

[@ThexVaultxTech]

"I'm a professor, I'm not supposed to answer a question directly."

[@FreekinEkin2]

I'm friends with professors. They're delightful conversation. This guy on the other hand...

[@manuelseniceros9550]

I mean it was a joke but whatever

[@zach-rac]

Ngl that's the moment I knew I was really in for it with this one.... e.O

[@mike196212]

I picked up on that too. Ridiculous.

[@lukebournebatr]

I loved the bits where he would patronize Sam by saying things like 'that was a brilliant ATTEMPT at a reductio ad absurdum' or calling him a 'young man' and Sam just pulled faces like 'wtf??'. This guy is just smart enough to think he's the smartest guy in any room, and not smart enough to realize he's not.

[@jzoobs]

It's so offensive dude, the guy is either so up his own ass that he views these discussions as some kind of sporting leisure activity with no real world implications, or he is deliberately stalling for time to avoid actually dealing with the challenges Sam makes to his philosophy

[@iamalongusername]

Dunning Kruger. Also when he basically calls himself a genius

[@userhm355]

He’s calling into the show, I bet from a room where he’s the only person. Then technically he IS the smartest person in the room by default 😂😂

[@concernedcitizen6313]

Gods, I actually cracked up laughing about 10 minutes in when, during Block's diatribe about courts, particularly when he going off about "bandit courts fighting everybody," I realized he was completely serious and that this is how he views the world.

[@dirrdevil]

Exactly. Why would a person even bother going to any court? Accuse me all you want, I don't have to comply with these optional, private courts at all.

[@theMichaelMelo]

@@dirrdevil If you don't comply, you will be labeled a social pariah and shamed out of polite society until you do the right thing and start following the non-aggression principle again.

[@zztonedefzz1]

​@@theMichaelMelo I'll be over here crying on my stacks of stolen money that I wasn't invited to the Gala

[@kauswekazilimani3736]

​@@theMichaelMelo Tgsys not always how it goes. If you shit on the right person, the masses(polite society) will cheer for you.

[@lorenavedon]

This guy is talking about settling land, clearing fields, planting corn, domesticating cows... Sounds like a solid system to live under, if you're living in 5000 BC.

[@geraldbutterpants5712]

@trollnerd right!? Fuck corn.

[@markmagee4938]

@trollnerd Wheat for pigs or corn for turkeys ... Anti-anachronism League

[@SoundsSilver]

@@markmagee4938 This is one of the wittiest retorts I’ve seen on KZbin. Congrats

[@brandonsides6324]

To be fair he's trying to talk about the foundation of property rights which would necessarily go pretty far back

[@chlorine5795]

@@brandonsides6324 there is no foundation...it's arbitrary.

[@kidpresentable]

It always comes down to age of consent with libertarians lol

[@letters_from_paradise]

No it doesn't.

[@paratrooper6]

His face as he’s listening to this bullshit

[@lokitheman3377]

@@letters_from_paradise yes it does 😹

[@ugadugaga4972]

@@letters_from_paradise sounds like a libratarian on. They absolutely do obsess over it.

[@hermeskun3274]

@@letters_from_paradise it absolutely does.

[@CrazyRightWingNut]

I LOVE the court breakdown! I didn't realize anarchists loved beauracracy so much!

[@aaroncarson1770]

It's Gormanghastian!

[@BroccLeeAV]

Anarcho-crapitalism isn't anarchism. Read Chomsky's Anarchism or just watch his vids on such or work or in general to better understand what anarchism actually is. No gods, no masters.

[@nukiradio]

@@BroccLeeAV but the problem stands, no one can be held accountable

[@BroccLeeAV]

@@nukiradio Why not?... There are rules, just no rulers.

[@BroccLeeAV]

@trollnerd Your corporate shills paid by lobbyists without real democracy the slave patrol banks/oils private army cops who serve and protect the moneyed classes lmao. You're not supposed to swallow the laces while licking their boots ya know... The same corporate shills that bail out wall street and go to endless wars against the will of the majority, those politicians... The same oils/banks private cops that beat/execute/arrest Indigenous peoples to illegally frack on native lands... The same people that LITERALLY caused the Anthropocene (the 6th great mass extinction) with planet eating crapitalism... Okay, hope you're not planning on breeding...

[@ShinMadero]

How can anyone in their right mind listen to Walter Block explain how petty theft would be resolved in 15 different courts and think "Yes, this is a more reasonable system than what we currently have"?

[@Libretad-cw4cb]

This is actually the system we have internationally. Dont you realize that if Russia attacks ukraine there is a committee to take decisions if weather is legal rational or justified action ? That committee is called UN and each country you can call it a court. Wake up

[@ShinMadero]

@@Libretad-cw4cb Yes, the international system is one of anarchy. But I would say that the national court system does a much better job at resolving disputes than the international system.

[@Libretad-cw4cb]

@@ShinMadero that is incorrect. There are many disputes in our legal system than last years and the is because the more complex the dispute is more it last when something is cristal clear it is fast and it doesn’t matter if you are judge by national courts or UN you get a what you deserve very fast. But the national court have become more and more complex year over year only because government regulations and new laws that are passed and change with every president thing that you will stop in a libertarian environment

[@hectorsito3395]

It’s just an example of how things could work without the government imposing its legal system. Maybe you can come up with a better system (without imposing anything, that’s the challenge).

[@swagulationstation5278]

Libertarians be like: We DO NOT live in a society

[@crabbieappleton]

George Constanza would like to disagree.

[@EastofVictoriaPark]

@@crabbieappleton Kyrie would agree.

[@dranelemakol]

Well capitalism is a way of organising society

[@templarw20]

That is the basis of every Libertarian argument.

[@cheese5728]

Statists think society should be based around force and compulsion. Libertarians don’t

[@cruelsuit1939]

No man is an island. Except the Isle of Man. You can't separate yourself from the rest of humanity in space or time. You can't say you are not responsible for the condition of others, and at the same time insist on benefiting from the suffering of other human beings. We are all products of the past. We are all made by the same machine. You can't say your success is your own, and another man's failure is his own.

[@Someguy1103]

+cruelsuit1 If a man walks into a job interview knowingly dressed like he is auditioning for the "best of wal-mart customers volume 4" on youtube, it is his fault he failed.

[@michaelbrent6099]

Kim Jong-FUN wow that's me converted

[@anthonya5525]

Damn, that’s deep.

[@deborahhoffman7394]

cruelsuit1 You are right. It is only logic. However, these right wingers are so selfish, they have creates ideologies around their own greed and selfishness and try to justify it to the rest of the world through the seduction of materialism.

[@joshualocicero6799]

Wrong my success is only my own

[@taputapu2619]

So when the descendents of former slaves "own" the plantations they were forced to work on he has no issue with the government forcing the current owners to surrender their land. When Native Americans might have a claim to his land he suddenly wants to say that it's an entirely different situation and Natives somehow only own .5%. Total consistency.

[@nukiradio]

Yeah. Libertarian priorities are full of lies

[@fyimediaworld]

I get it now. Libertarian is just another word for fantasy fiction writer.

[@GypsyScot1]

Fantasy fiction has fewer plot holes

[@Aritul]

A poor fantasy fiction writer.

[@danielhazard9040]

I am genuinely horrified that this guy is a professor anywhere other than his mothers basement.

[@rumco]

Kudos to Sam for being really good in this interview, challenging Block on a very difficult topic without being smug.

[@mehrshadvr4]

Native Americans used to do seasonal migration so I'm pretty sure they own most of the land

[@bassplayer8815]

Especially considering the amount was roughly 90 million in Central and North America with another 90 in South America so that's a lot more people walking around

[@stevejoseph4514]

Never before have I heard such a long winded and boring defense of basically what comes down to feudalism. I hope Block wakes up one day in his 80's and realize he wasted his whole life defending an ideology that was promoted by billionaire elites for the sole purpose of defending their property rights...

[@s3rp]

This Libertarian World sounds like Feudal Europe / Japan where you had Lords and Ladies with basically personaly armies , courts etc only without titles ( that might come with time ) . There's allways a couple of terrible people who will game any system and quite frankly this one would be incredibly easy to abuse

[@jjoohhhnn]

and then there's the problem of, in america, there is already such INSANE wealth inequality. You think people like Bezos or any nightmarish chairperson would be at such an enormous advantage beginning in this new 'equal' society.

[@SandhillCrane42]

In a libertarian society, we settle things in THUNDERDOME!!!

[@jeremiahsaxton8967]

TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVES

[@randomkiliinterviews9453]

Is that from Escape from New York ?

[@SandhillCrane42]

@@randomkiliinterviews9453 Ha, no but you have very discerning taste. I think it's the one called Beyond Thunderdome with Tina Turner and Mel Gibson. The Mad Max movie.

[@superpoochable]

Actually makes more sense than every piece of literature on libertarianism. But they wouldn't have the stones to do so.

[@MintyFarts]

Statutory rape laws arent completely arbitrary. They are informed by average neurological development and culture. We are capable of revising laws based on information rather than declaring arbitrary rules made to benefit certain people in declaring property rights.

[@FTJan]

One thing that always breaks libertarian's viewpoints: money. How are you going to stop people from buying the police/militias/courts/people to forge documents saying you're the legitimate owner of (property) to their benefit?

[@ExploreGamesAndMore]

Combining this interview with the last one, in his version of Libertarianism: 1. You could employ someone to work your land for $1/hr 2. That person now owns your land.

[@oliviervdb2622]

You get to own a land by mixing your labour with it only if the land is previously unowned (homesteading). If you are employed, your employer "buys your labour" and retains ownership of the land the labour gets mixed with.

[@ExploreGamesAndMore]

Olivier vdb There isn't any unowned land.

[@blader45bc]

Lol. Maybe with some creative editing.

[@tacotikki251]

FrecklyCash1488 the government actually owns the land. Also if you hire me to work your land nothing stops me from saying it’s my land. I mean everyone around has only seen me working the land. Only thing you could do is bring your army to fight mine.

[@ivandafoe5451]

@@FC-88 The uninhabitable part.

[@Nebukadnezzer]

This is sheer nonsense. There's really no other way to describe it.

[@erockreinhardt6815]

Walter's explanation of the court systems is the most hilarious thing I have heard in years. It's breathtaking.

[@hectorsito3395]

I guess you can come up with better examples of how to solve disputes WITHOUT imposing the rules like the government does with its current justice system.

[@camh.04]

@@hectorsito3395 A court that doesn't have the authority to impose rules isn't a court, it's just a fancy debate stage with no real world consequences.

[@carrias1]

“This isn’t feudalism, this is substantially worse than feudalism”

[@oldgymrat71]

Libertarians usually get ridiculous when taking their positions to the end point.

[@wyoboy01]

Like how they equate sex with property rights? Good to know where they stand on that.

[@oldgymrat71]

@moz zo ah! A less than cogent response, Moz.

[@ivandafoe5451]

Usually? The only way they avoid getting ridiculous is if they end the discussion before taking their positions to the end point.

[@batmanb8194]

except the end point was and is a world government, which made sam look ridiculous

[@evanb4189]

Going to war over any property dispute doesn't really seem to live up to his "non-aggression" principle

[@stevejoseph4514]

people in 2020 should look back at these libertarians who got stomped on by sam, and realize how insane they actually are

[@TehkNinja]

Sam might speak intelligently but that doesn't make him intelligent. The government is not the solution to things the free market is.

[@XXCoeusXX]

@@TehkNinja Yeah, since when is vocabulary, comprehension, and processing logic a measure of intelligence? roflmao

[@StoveToTheFace]

@@XXCoeusXX He/she subscribed to the Daily Wire and Kirk logic need not apply to people like him/her. Edit: Dom Izzo, Some OAN woman, Tim Pool... Check out his subs it's very interesting.

[@williamjameslehy1341]

​@@TehkNinjaan argument made via baseless assertion (i.e. most if not all right-libertarian arguments) can be dismissed in the same manner.

[@TehkNinja]

@williamjameslehy1341 how is it baseless? You just have confirmation bias because he is on your side. I'm not alt-right either. Not being a liberal doesn't not make you alt-right. That there is a baseless accusation.

[@yourneighborhoodfriendlyme4242]

I'm only 12 minutes in and i just couldn't be having more fun! In Block's very first topic (courts), the proposed solutions are immediate pandemonium, chaos, and post-apocalyptic. Can't wait to see what he says next!

[@lilmsgs]

Walter Block doesn't realize he's losing and how ridiculous his libertarian-reality is.

[@dranelemakol]

Wait why

[@lilmsgs]

@@dranelemakol Were you asking for an analysis of the hour long debate?

[@dranelemakol]

@@lilmsgs one or two points will do

[@BruhWhyDidTheyChangeThis]

@@dranelemakol idk if losing is a word to be used in this situation but I do think that in general the libertarian world view requires too much cooperation from every individual, requires a lot of faith that things will just work out, requires a utopian setting where there is no war, famine, disease. It kind of is a simplistic mindset of wishing things would work a certain way but creates more problems than it solves. In a modern world we would not be able to support a population or what we currently have under what would become feudalism or total corporate control. The transition would leave millions dead and millions more in poverty. The system that we have today does need fixing and changing but it relies on a very codependent population and everyone doing their part. In situations like covid or Texas freeze we see that to be even more true.

[@dranelemakol]

@@BruhWhyDidTheyChangeThis Libertarians don't argue for the merits of corporate feudalism because we don't believe a free market society looks like that. Regarding cooperation, that's what capitalism is for. It's a certain way of cooperation between people, one which recognizes each individual's right to decide for himself whether to work with others and what to do with the contributions of others to him. That's it. The system's simplicity allows for infinite flexibility against all sorts of problems. People can form all sorts of institutions by themselves, from unions to friendly societies to insurance companies to legislative bodies. Companies and co-ops are part of this, but in no way the limit.

[@mickb9678]

42:00: Sam: "it seems arbitrary." Block: "there is a system here if you look at it sympathetically...". THERE IT IS! Libertarian does well under sympathetic analysis. It does not survive critical analysis. Students of Walter Block should get a refund on their $.

[@Blakeberry99]

and they would need mental therapy counseling...

[@TheEvolver311]

Magic and sorcery function just fine when utilizing sympathetic nature logic

[@davidandersson7642]

Let a Libertarian talk long enough and they'll always end up complaining about Age of Consent laws.

[@caitrappel1532]

Ugh. I loathe professors like this guy that love to play off their pedagogic condescension like they're the second coming of Socrates. Rather than conceding that their logic may be inferior to that of their opponent, they never acknowledge them as such-- instead, always reducing them to their "student". It's this super manipulative cerebral power dynamic that gets old pretty quick. If they were to say, "Wow. You know, those are fine points you raise--potentially inarguable, in fact, and in considering your claim, my theories may not actually stand the test of logic", they would be relinquishing their dominance as Teacher. So instead, they just pat them on the head and say "What an impressively bright student you are for asking such insightful questions! See? Now we're doing philosophy!"

[@boarder6246]

Brilliant comment. 🤘

[@aaroncarson1770]

Yes. When people talk about "the Socratic method" they're usually talking about a civil form of argument, but when I think of Socrates, I think of his relationship with Plato, and how there was literal and figurative rogering going on.

[@llamasarus1]

"Rather than concede that their logic may be inferior to that of their opponent, they never ack......." Who would enter a debate doing that?

[@johnnytwotimes7854]

@@llamasarus1 someone attempting to have an intellectual debate, not one of sport

[@armstrem]

I love how the only time it feels like Walter might be remotely intelligent is when Sam asks him a question beginning with the compliment "Professor!"

[@boarder6246]

This guy convinced me I’m not a libertarian. He shouldn’t be a professor.

[@NN-sp9tu]

Good

[@KravenTheHaunter]

Walter Block just used Ephebophilia to justify homesteading property. That's the most AnCap sentence I've ever typed.

[@hectorsito3395]

He used it to exemplify the continuum problem…

[@b.6.7.f.h.]

“Libertarians believe in defensive violence, not offensive violence.” No, you actually have no say in what kind of violence rules in a system as well-devised as the imaginary state of nature. Whether I plant crops on a piece of land (an absurd, unworkable, archaic standard) or just kill the former owner, who’s going to decide which of my property is legitimate? He seems to think we’re in some kind of frontier society. The more these people explain, the less sense they make. Natives cultivated and used the entire country. Is he saying that just because population density was below an arbitrary level, we can drive them out and systematically destroy their cultures? 10 square miles i Arizona? What is he even talking about? Who decides? Illegitimate things are just allowed to happen, his talk of justice in any sense is absurd.

[@g.boychev9355]

"No, you actually have no say in what kind of violence rules in a system as well-devised as the imaginary state of nature." - Exactly. Reality does not consist of abstract principles, it consists of real people with the very real capacity of harming each other. To argue against a system government on the grounds that it is violent and inefficient (which, granted, it sometimes is) and suggest to replace it with a system where civil war could erupt merely as a result of a property dispute is ludicrous. To admit that and still argue for statelessness as a positive, progressive alternative is plain incoherent. Some deontology, Kant must be turning in his grave.

[@antonsterlin9720]

Why do you hate liberty?

[@lisaratley4858]

The idiocy, monstrousness, and delusional mind of this PROFESSOR ruins the argument that ‘professors and universities are liberal’ on the right.

[@hungrydave1977]

This is a much better debate than the first one, mainly because Block actually lets Sam get a word in this time

[@lollard]

Private courts... Competing on a court market... Like... I'm just speechless at how dumb and asinine that is. I don't think I've ever heard a more braindead political theory in my life.

[@hectorsito3395]

Yeah, super dumb. Not like countries competing one with another, all of them with its own court system… Superinsane. Maybe the video should start with a few words describing the core of Libertarianism. So we understand what he is trying to comunicate with his examples.

[@lj1643]

libertarians imagine themselves playing minecraft IRL

[@NN-sp9tu]

LOL this comment cracked me up. This dude probably runs a roleplaying Minecraft server with a convoluted court system and land ownership based on farming and thinks it translates perfectly into real life

[@jzoobs]

Very in love with the idea of comparing property rights with age of consent laws. Very cool. Very cool.

[@rgaud8]

Coolest thing I’ve heard all day.

[@antenna_prolly]

He could have at least gone with 17 and then cited some states where it's like 16 to illustrate his point, but instead left himself open in the worst way.

[@TheJonnyEnglish]

12:00 Sam's face during the bit about the pen being mightier then the sword is my spirit animal

[@bassplayer8815]

It got much worse around the 40 minute mark with the 15 yr old

[@santaclauseking]

I haven't seen this debate but I saw part 1. Walter Block doesn't grasp reality.

[@TehkNinja]

Statist don't grasp reality.

[@skooch5769]

Its absolutely insane this dude was allowed to teach economics

[@SignedDiamond]

If only we just had courts that could make judgements of other courts. We could call it some sort of Ultimate or Supreme Court. It’s crazy that a process like that hasn’t been considered.

[@mercedeswalt6621]

That ideas so crazy, it just might work!

[@hectorsito3395]

If only you understood that he is explaining how the government is not necessary to get the same (or better) service that the Supreme Court offers…

[@barkwhoop8052]

THERE👏🏼ARE NO👏🏼TREES👏🏼ON THE MOON👏🏼

[@caleb8060]

😂

[@bob_carmody]

Libertarians always fall apart within two questions. Sam's Missile Of Logic destroys them every time. The courts system sounds like Kafka.

[@52flyingbicycles]

The court system sounds like feudalism with extra steps

[@973reggie]

Dude this court deal is absolutely insanity..

[@yoboi267]

bahaha sam's face when he was explaining courts

[@Aritul]

@trollnerd Thanks!

[@jonporter1233]

I'll take you to court C, if you say anything bad again.

[@Dante-420]

"I'm a professor; I'm never supposed to answer questions exactly or on point." Hm, that doesn't quite match up with my experience...

[@proudfootz]

Listening to Professor Block is like listening to someone describe last weekend's Dungeons & Dragons game.

[@lemon93]

And yet somehow dnd is still a better and more productive action then try and make a anarchist court system viable

[@zach-rac]

As someone who's sat through quite a few of my friend's re-tellings, this is much worse I would have to say.

[@Jefferson-ly5qe]

Imagine a DnD game where you disagree and shop around through 13 different private courts

[@jonathanrubin9094]

Classic Libertarian logic: we advocate for the non aggression principle....except of course when we envision a utopian society wherein marauding gangs with the most money and the biggest armies dictate and resolve matters. I can't think of anything more aggressive than arbitrating matters based solely on this type of system. If you want to see this in action, I suggest the good professor visit Somalia where they have tried this with the predictable results of chaos, bloodshed, and anarchy controlled by warlords and gangs.

[@seamusinmusic]

Somalia was doing ok until the US paid Ethiopia to go in and destroy it.

[@hectorsito3395]

And that’s why INSIDE of Libertarianism you can find people who advocate for a small government (minarchists).

[@52flyingbicycles]

“The international community is a great example of anarcho capitalism in action!” (Looks at international community) (Looks at international community before UN) Yeeeeaaaaaahhh I’m gonna pass on it then

[@jacquesfrancois2033]

Every time he says, "That's a good point Sam, that's a debate within Libertarian ideas", what he means is "I don't have an answer for that, but that would be conceding the point, so I'm going to muddy it instead."

[@briangaines3693]

I can’t believe this person is a professor and allowed to educate college students. This whole court system and his idea of how crime should be dealt with is just completely outrageous. This system with private courts and private police agencies would be so insane and turn minor traffic tickets over a traffic ticket a potential war

[@RoninDave]

His homesteading idea was pretty corny. So much of this libertarian paradise envisioned here is a bunch of corn, courts, and private armies and the hope everyone will play nice. I think I'll pass on this neo-feudalism, thanks. Once was enough.

[@RoninDave]

dvide yeah except how that is pretty much the opposite of feudalism

[@devourerofbabies]

dvide This post is a good example of right wing Libertardians twisting definitions. Of course, you're forced to do that because if you spoke plainly, you'd have to own up to the plainly horrible nature of your ideology.

[@karljohn2145]

dvide the Federal Government should own all the land. i have no problem with that.

[@devourerofbabies]

karl john Libertarians make me want to be a Stalinist.

[@devourerofbabies]

Zach Taylor Except that you're leaving one very important thing out: feudalism was a system of pure private property. The entire country was the private property of the king. The king's law was simply an exercise of his absolute property rights.

[@ztkm1]

Did I miss the part where he explained the libertarian way to provide a private court with an incentive to rule according to the law, and to make that incentive stronger than the incentive to "help" the people who pay them?

[@ivandafoe5451]

If he had admitted that fact then his whole court-house of cards would have instantly collapsed.

[@52flyingbicycles]

All the courts in the entire world will align with a single judicial ideology because that’s how a competitive market works and anything otherwise starts looking like a bunch of feudal states. Actually, come to think of it, all the courts in the world sharing an ideology and collaborating on military activity also sounds pretty state-y 😱

[@ianhunter14]

There’s no difference between how a business acts and how a person acts under the law? -So basically it isn’t wrong for me to get drunk with my friends at work. Whatever I can do at home, I can do at work according to this logic.

[@tribalwarfair3221]

can you imagine a world where you consider possessions purchased with labor your private property and then wonder how private property can exist in a set of principles that are based on non-aggression in nature. i guess my question is how did you get your private property without aggression?!?!

[@QuadirAli]

this libertarian shit is absolutely ridiculous! concerning property rights... Native American: my culture says all I have to do is X to own said property. White Settler: But my culture says all I have to do is Y to own said property. To answer this dispute, the professor (assuming himself for the sake of argument to be a member of the white settler's lineage) just casually dismissed the opposing culture's assertion outright as "too bad"...meaning, his culture wins by default! LOL Doesn't this further contradict that whole Court A, Court B paradigm the professor originally setup regarding competing claims?! smfh

[@yummymunchkin]

I'm Jewish but honestly he brings up Jews so frequently to totally distract from Sam's questions. The worst is that he talks about cultivating the land as a means to claim ownership to legitimize how land was taken to form Israel. I'm not anti-Israel or against its formation but that's part of the argument that justified homesteading there. The issue is that that's definitely a moment in history that has played a large part in how his theoretical views have been formed.

[@maksimilijan5029]

i cultivate labor-power, i do the work, therefore i should own the means of production.

[@Zoe-sh2hm]

I was NOT ready for the Courtworld discussion, this was incredible.

[@cmack17]

This Walter Block guy gets funnier every time I revisit this video. Courts on top of courts! 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@HobokenSquatCobbler]

Sort of like appellate, superior, appeals and supreme courts that plaintiffs repeatedly climb the ladder of in our *current* system, you mean? Yeah: simply ridiculous.

[@zackcolbourne6921]

​@@HobokenSquatCobblerThe fact that those four courts are arranged to have a specific relationship and can't just gun the other court down over disagreements makes the two situations 100% different.

[@mercedeswalt6621]

9:07 These “courts” just feel like an extended version of “he said, she said,”.

[@jafafa]

All of this sounds like it boils down to "whoever can buy the biggest army wins."

[@ivandafoe5451]

It's right there in front of him and somehow he can see it.

[@hectorsito3395]

Non Aggression Principle. What don’t you understand?

[@jafafa]

@@hectorsito3395 That's just dandy because as we all know, people stand 100% behind their principles. Until they don't. Then you're fucked.

[@hectorsito3395]

@@jafafa Libertarianism is not assuming everyone will stand by their principles. Why would it consider violence as an option to protect you then? Why would self-defense be an exception to the non-aggression principle then?

[@haagsman15]

In the first debate, Walter states there are 150 countries in the world. In this debate he claims there are 250! There are 195.

[@Speederzzz]

Well depends on what you see as a country

[@silat13]

Hey Hey Hey,Sam Sam. Be quiet. Let me talk. Which is higher, 1 billion or zero? 1 billion is correct. Now you know the answer. The minimum wage will bring the rapture. Libertarian philosophy will make sense when PolakFury does. In other words, that would be NEVER.

[@devourerofbabies]

Removing the minimum wage will raise wages. Removing the EPA will clean up pollution. Removing laws will eliminate chaos. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

[@karljohn2145]

libertarianism is simply a philosophy of justifiable, acceptable, respectable selfishness. it's a philosophy of ME, MINE & I. i owe nothing to anyone, and i am the center of my own universe.

[@devourerofbabies]

karl john Even if that were true, it's a counterproductive means to that end. Libertarianism would only be any good for the guy who ends up as the king of the hill, and only for so long as he can maintain his position.

[@dadagan8815]

Hey Hey Hey, Sam Sam. Be quiet. Let me talk. which is higher? $0.25 per hour or zero I think you'll find that 25 cents an hour is better than zero. and slavery was better than zero in fact slaves were happy.

[@tortuga7160]

All it does is transfer the decision making from the government (where we have some say with votes) completely to private wealth (where we have no say)

[@MrCanoemountain]

Libertarianism is all academic as it will never see the sun and ultimately academic masturbation. Dr. Block is a clear example of this in this example of mental circle jerk. How many times has he recited those little examples over the last 50 years as a prof? Keep knocking them down Sam. RIP Michael.

[@joeybwalsh]

You can tell by listening to someone that they are living in their head. This is an example of that.

[@lzylightnin]

Being a libertarian requires you to be something like a dungeon master in D+D. You get to choose your favorite rules for a fantasy world that never existed and nobody would probably ever want to live in... then you go and argue with other nerds about which dungeon master picked the best rules and spun the best tale.

[@HasansProducer]

Classic. I love being a libertarian and ur wrong

[@CorndogMaker]

Jeff Bezos took my wallet, I mean *his* wallet...from me- legally. My wallet is his now. According to him, and his court, and his massive army.

[@TehkNinja]

That already happens. The rich use their money to influence government its called lobbyists

[@blackmichael75]

I always cringe when I hear the term "anarcho-capitalist". It's such a contradiction in terms, that flies in the face of literally all of anarchist history. What happens if the workers in your factory go on strike? "Well, I'd send in the troops/cops/private security force". There goes your anarchism then and your non-aggression principle then, since you've initiated and tried to monopolise force. "But the striking workers initiated force". Did they? Did they initiate force or did the people who monopolized land and means of production in the first place initiate force? The anarcho-capitalists claim that they eschew force and the state, but they still want to retain capitalism, the economic form that historically involved force and the state. The main problem with this kind of philosophy is that it is ahistorical. It does not care about the actual historical origins of actually existing capitalism and the actual existing distribution of property, and it doesn't notice that actually existing capitalism originated in force and the violation of the very principles which they profess to believe in as first principles!

[@tylerhurson8515]

It depends on where the workers are protesting. If they have hijacked the factory owner's land to protest, then the factory owner has the right to remove them by force, since the workers have initiated force against his property. Remember that force is defined as the violation of property. Trespassing is a form of initiated force. Removing a trespasser is not. Capitalism is the system of free trade with respect for property. Pure capitalism has never been implemented. It is pure capitalism that ancaps advocate, not a mostly free mixed economy (that is what utilitarian/constitutionalist libertarians advocate). We advocate a system that has not yet existed. That's why we tend to reject historical examples.

[@devourerofbabies]

_The main problem with this kind of philosophy is that it is ahistorical. It does not care about the actual historical origins of actually existing capitalism and the actual existing distribution of property,_ That's a devastating criticism, especially the point about actually existing property distribution.

[@blackmichael75]

Hans W That's why I don't advocate for statism.

[@blackmichael75]

Hans W Under capitalism, you are, to all intents and purposes, compelled to work for a boss. Your need to eat and survive compels you. It is not a free and fair exchange, because one party to the transaction has more power, and also monopolises all the means of life, so others are forced to hire themselves out to him.

[@blackmichael75]

Hans W What if I don't want to work for a boss, or be someone else's boss? What if both of those options are equally unattractive to me?

[@jefftravilla]

This is so much better than the first one. How to make a libertarian look silly? Just let them talk.

[@thomasgriffiths6758]

Walter Block debates like a 5 year old trying to debate whether Superman or Mighty Mouse would win in a fight. Hypotheticals based on a warped sense of reality.

[@SeanLaMontagne]

Why am I submitting myself to the second part...

[@Webfra14]

Because 6 is greater than 4 maybe...?

[@gehrmanfirsthunter8646]

I thought Hasan was joking when he talked about Libertarians and age of consent laws, but goddamn, he wasn't.

[@Drew99GT]

This is the problem with libertarians; their arguments are always in some theoretical realm devoid of history and the fact that human beings are an innately predatory/political/violent creature in a state of nature. That is the history of humans; we fight amongst ourselves and I'd say, at least for the most part in the developed western world, we've made progress. That progress has been because of the philosophy of classic liberalism, and classic liberalism, where you like it or not, has been adjudicated via constitutional democracies and mixed capitalistic/socialist societies via representative GOVERNMENTS. This guy basically thinks everyone should be their own little government and there shouldn't be a central meeting place, if you will, to adjudicate human conflict. The part about his "what should have happened" with slavery is pure fantasy. What he thinks should have happened DIDN'T, and it's taken representative democracy and a constitutional GOVERNMENT to enact the civil rights acts etc. The reason humans are in the place they are currently (western democracies; ie the developed world) is that WE ALREADY TRIED Mr. Blacks methods and they didn't work because the strongman will always win! If you have private courts (which I'd argue, a lawyer is essentially your private court or representation 0 we already kind of have that) with private police, you end up with Hitler all over again. The political brilliant charismatic sociopath will always rule. Thy basically still do, but at least the peons have some say in our affairs.

[@tylerhurson8515]

***** Human beings are not violent by nature. There are peaceful human beings in this world; human beings who prefer negotiation to force.

[@Drew99GT]

I agree, most individual humans are peaceful, but on the aggregate, when you look at the history of human politics/economics etc., I don't think you can come away with any conclusion BUT that humans as a species are violent by nature, in a state of nature. Waring tribes, religious wars, the world wars of the 20th century etc. What's the old saying.........one human being is a rational non violent person, but masses of people with different ideologies kill each other by the millions historically. Classic liberalism, the rule of law, and government by the people is what has changed that in the developed world.

[@eduardom.8766]

whyamimrpink78 You're wrong on the 14th Amendment serving as a means of banning discrimination. Post reconstruction the South went into a prolonged period of Jim Crow. This being said, whether or not the constitution is being violated is a matter of whether or not someone believes the constitution is maleable or not. I.e., whether or not someone really and truly believes our lives should be governed by practical norms that are over two hundred years old. If you, as I do, believe that the constitution is subject to change/is a "living" document, then the argument that it is being violated falls apart. What's troublesome/frustrating about conservatives who complain about liberal members of the judiciary is that conservatives have grossly expanded particular areas of the constitution, yet they write these expansions off as being inherent within the original intent of the constitution; e.g., corporations are legally considered to be people, and it's clear the framers intended no such thing, but I don't see Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Kennedy complaining. (At least liberal members of the judiciary are upfront about the fact that they are actively interpreting the constitution to meet novel and modern demands; conservative justices, on the other hand, pretend like their decisions are somehow justified by the original text, and this is nonsense.)

[@bd9267]

Libertarians use practical arguments.

[@jonathanjones770]

What's scary about a guy like this is that he's actually thought this all through in detail, understands the implications, and yet he still stands by the anarcho-capitalist position. This guy is a psychopath. The fact that he's an educator is the cherry on top of the shit-sundae that is this man

[@hectorsito3395]

He stands for a system he has long thought about, which is based in the Non Aggression Principle. And you listen for the first time some condensed answers and consider him a psychopath?

[@2cleverbyhalf]

Native Americans hunted and gathered over large territories, so because they did not alter the land they didn't "own" it? This system of doing things is highly prejudicial to native lifeways and is eurocentric. If we went with how native peoples made their living off the land they should retain all of their hunting grounds, not just the places that they farmed.

[@adoctorsbro]

Sam's face when the other guy is talking about the age of consent is hilarious!

[@sjaguilar79]

Thanks for the discussion. Invite Professor Walter Block back.

[@imaresurcher]

this is what walter block gets paid for, 6 figures a year tenured at a university. this

[@antenna_prolly]

'Murica

[@allyabernathy4098]

dude getting your wallet stolen is bad enough, can you imagine having to then go through multiple courts and private police stations to get it back?

[@eightboll]

At least he conducted himself like an adult this time, but still full of it...

[@chrismills7703]

In Walter blocks world, a simple petty theft results in war. And he thinks this is morally right somehow?

[@MNL54321]

The thing that fucks with my head the most about Libertarians is the fact that they, for the most part, unilaterally believe less regulation would result in better outcomes for society. Like, anyone who has spent more than 1 hour researching what happens when large corporations do not have to deal with regulation would think it was categorically insane to do so

[@PokeChampionHQ]

God damn this guy can talk a whole lot of none sense

[@CharlesAmericanus]

That's why he chose the profession that he did. I would love to see the value of Block's "knowledge" would be in his ideal "totally free even if it destroys society" market.

[@FrantiC119]

I was amazed he was invited back after how much of a hissy fit he threw.

[@OsirisNeits]

That entire court explanation was mind numbingly stupid.

[@tianamaycry]

For real, even the mideval concept of trial by combat is more humane.

[@MRMOTOFOTO]

Awesome, we all have our own courts!!!

[@thaSHZA]

I got to say, Round 2 was a much more pleasant experience. I think whatever they talked about in between interviews really helped.

[@lisaratley4858]

His system of courts has more red tape than the current system! Good lord!

[@aspookyfox]

Q: How did the libertarian cross the road? A: He didn’t because there is no road.

[@daskew87]

very interesting conversation, i loved it

[@MHiggins]

This man is outlining Afghanistan and its system of government. Every village or town has a warlord with its own courts and law.