Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘debate’

Here is a summary I prepared of Stephan Kinsella’s April 27, 2014 non-debate with Jan Helfeld on minarchism vs. anarchy.

I have preserved the foul language that Kinsella used, to get a full picture of his anger issues and irrationality about a topic that demands rationality.

10m – Ad hominem by Kinsella, refers to “God damn Randian state”
14m – Helfeld Disputes that state is a criminal organization
– Mentions necessity of gang warfare under anarchism – Kinsella gets annoyed
15m – Kinsella’s rude, saying “you’re reading something?”
17m – Domestic and foreign criminals checked by power of state
– Kinsella interrupts again, Jan gets mad, Kinsella says “Jesus Christ”
18m – Gang warfare in every city
19m – Town receiving an extortion letter
21m – Disagreements over punishments
– Kinsella interrupts again, saying his time should be up
23m – Helfeld says he doesn’t want to follow rules, like most anarchists
– Feuds and vendettas
– What happens if you can’t trust contracts will be enforced?
24m – Kinsella interrupts again
26m – Gets annoyed again when asks Helfeld two questions, does the state commit aggression, and is it justified?
27m – Kinsella said “Fuck the format”
– No aggression when people agree to have a govt to protect their rights
29m – Helfeld said everyone is born into a system, with govt or not – says implied contract
30m – Helfeld claims he’s not a statist, Kinsella says he is
33m – Slavery in constitution
34m – Kinsella says “fuck the judge” to Helfeld saying don’t tell the judge he’s against govt
35m – U.S. showed benefit of limited govt
36m – Kinsella says this is ridiculous, re: each asking 12 questions of each other
37m – Says as an anarchist, that’s “bullshit”
38m – Kinsella says it’s irrelevant what Jan thinks now, saying “be a big boy”
– Says he can’t be civilized with this guy
– Saying interrupting is less than taxing — saying Jan is a statist
39m – Jan called Molyneux mollynukes
40m – Kinsella arrogant in responding to no, that it’s not ok to initiate force
41m – Asked is it ok to take water from someone by force — Kinsella asked, “what’s the relevance of the question?”
– Said it’s a “bullshit question”
42m – Kinsella says he doesn’t know what to do
43m – Jan says that he doesn’t realize that under duress, he can violate rights
44m – Ad hominem calling Jan “a washed up lawyer”
– Called him a loser, saying he doesn’t even pronounce ad hominem properly
45m – Called him a “craven coward defender of the state,” saying he’s raising certain issues in order to justify the state
47m – Helfeld said Larken Rose said, in a debate, that he would die in that situation [drowning and if someone in a boat next to him wouldn’t let him on]
– Said he might have been one of the few who would, whereas most who say they would do so, wouldn’t
48m – Kinsella said “Fuck no,” re: Jan’s behaviour
49m – Says “it’s disagreeable to tax by you motherfuckers,” to Jan
– Said “you are nothing”, being a statist
50m – Kinsella said to the moderator before that he had previously been a minarchist and a Randian
51m – Kinsella said to Jan, “you better think it through, motherfucker”
52m – Jan laughing
53m – Jan says there are two cases — if dispute resolution groups have nukes, or not, asking what would you do if Putin has nukes
57m – Jan says he would violate rights to save his life if he had to hang onto a boat
1h5m – Kinsella says non-aggression principle should be a model for laws in a society
– Says he doesn’t know if he would steal to survive
1h7m – Kinsella said statist libertarians are old wave, and he can’t wait for them to die out
1h8m – Kinsella called the Founding Fathers racist, bigoted slave owners
1h15m – Funny echo on Jan’s side
1h16m – Kinsella says he’s not opposed to govt, he’s opposed to the state
1h19m – Will criminal gangs attack others they perceive as weaker
1h21m – Kinsella says he no longer has any interest in talking
1h23m – Kinsella said “you’re idiots”
1h24m – Helfeld said this system is better than gang warfare
1h26m – Helfeld says he doesn’t support taxation for redistribution of wealth, and Kinsella says “they take my taxes every April 16th, motherfucker”
1h27m – Kinsella said he’s probably paid more in taxes in one year than Helfeld has in his entire life
1h28m – Kinsella calls Jan a fake, fraud and liar
1h30m – Kinsella said Jan is welcome to his opinion and “to shut the fuck up for a second”
1h31m – Called Jan his enemy
1h33m – Called Jan a “washed up loser”
– Said “Fuck off, bye”

Read Full Post »

Tom Woods

Tom Woods

Anthony Migchels

Anthony Migchels

That is the question I have subsequent to my public and private offer to Tom Woods to moderate a debate between himself and Anthony Migchels of Real Currencies.

As I disclosed at the start of my March 31, 2013 interview with Anthony Migchels, Tom Woods didn’t accept, and the reasons weren’t because he was concerned I wasn’t a worthy moderator, or that Anthony Migchels wasn’t a worthy debater, or that he wasn’t available at the proposed time.

Tom Woods supports a debate between fellow Austrian School supporter Bob Murphy and Paul Krugman.

Just as Paul Krugman may not be interested in giving a platform to his critics in the Austrian School, perhaps Tom Woods is also not interested in giving a platform to a well-researched, voluntary, interest-free currency reformer such as Anthony Migchels.

For more on Tom Woods, see my articles:

Tom Woods responded to my comments on his article, The Greenbackers’ Fake Quote Industry and Austrian School supporter Tom Woods admits gold has no intrinsic value

For more on Anthony Migchels, see my most popular interview ever, with Anthony Migchels, about the elite origins of the Austrian School.

Read Full Post »

Founder and chairperson of the Free and Equal Elections Foundation, Christina Tobin, will be a guest on Exposing Faux Capitalism with Jason Erb on October 21 from 2 to 3 PM Eastern to discuss the upcoming debate.

Read Full Post »

John Turmel, the Guinness Book of World Records holder for the most contested elections, and proponent of an “Argentine Solution” for our debt woes, roasts the organizers who kicked him out of a corporate-controlled Kitchener-Waterloo byelection debate after he called for a floor vote for the inclusion of all candidates.

You can find my September 2, 2012 inteview of him here, on Exposing Faux Capitalism, starting in the second hour.

Read Full Post »

On February 1, 2012, I guest hosted Crash! Are You Ready?, and set the stage for the February 8, 2012 Dr. Peter Duesberg-Dr. Stan Monteith debate on whether HIV is a bioweapon.

I also covered my articles on globalist kingpin Zbigniew Brzezinski warning against an Israeli attack on Iran, and my open letter to Coast to Coast AM producers that may have resulted in Benjamin Fulford’s scheduled appearance on Coast to Coast AM being cancelled, and concluded with a discussion of The Daily Bell’s citation of a quotation from J.P. Morgan that “gold is money, and nothing else.”

Read Full Post »

Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada

Reading the online version of Canada’s most widely read newspaper, The Toronto Star, on April 14th, I saw the headline, “Hébert: Debates keep Harper on road to majority.

I was struck by that headline, since nothing I had read up to that point seemed to indicate that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government was headed for a majority government on election day.

When I read the article itself, it told a very different story than the impression given by the headline.

It started with:

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper comes out of the televised debates with his ambition for a governing majority intact.

Every national party leader has the ambition of forming a majority government, no matter how low he/she is in the polls.

It went on to say the following things that further distanced the text of the article from the impression given by the headline:

As for Harper, his majority is hardly in the bag.

The risk-adverse Conservative campaign could move prematurely into low gear — as it did in 2004 — causing the party to fail to cover the extra mile to a majority.

But the debates do pave the way for a final push to propel the party to the safe side of the majority line on May 2.

After reading the article, I came away with the clear impression that the headline was deliberately designed to rally the Star’s relatively Liberal and NDP-leaning readership into supporting the Liberals in the next election, who would otherwise be more relaxed if they figured the Conservatives were going to form a third minority government, as pre-election campaign poll numbers showed.

Read Full Post »

In this 2009 debate with 2004 Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik, Stefan Molyneux, an advocate of voluntaryism, made a statement that I find very worthy of further examination.

Namely, that the most free societies produce such prosperity that they become the most tyrannical. His argument is that immense political and economic freedom bring extraordinary economic prosperity, and the corresponding wealth generated is used to control government and use it as a tool for profit and a weapon against political enemies.

Read Full Post »