Four year journey to Voluntaryism through Information Addiction

[FreddyFreeman]

Hi there FTL! I just discovered your show a few weeks ago and have been listening to about 4 episodes a day since. Recently you aired an episode in which you were talking about Internet/Information addiction that really piqued my interest. Ian had listed the signs to look for in information addiction and like him many of those signs applied to me.

You see, about 4 years ago I stumbled upon a YouTube clip of Ron Paul during the 2008 Republican Primary debates. It was the classic clip of him debating Rudy Julliani where he's trying to convey the idea that terrorists didn't attack us because we're free and prosperous, they attacked us because we'd been over there. It was the first time I'd ever heard that and the reaction from the debate audience as well as from Julliani indicated to me that he wasn't saying this to be popular or win votes, but because maybe it was the truth.

That one YouTube clip started my Information addiction. Suddenly I had to read/watch/listen to everything I could find on the Internet regarding why the terrorists had actually attacked us. This led to discovering things like Austrian Economics, Murray Rothbard, monetary policy, the Federal Reserve, the Free State Project and ultimately, four years later, Voluntaryism. In each of these topics I would try to approach them with an unbiased, skeptical and critical fashion, and in every one they held up to scrutiny.

So, my question to Ian, Mark or anyone on this board is, Do you think the majority of people who may be predisposed to information addiction will inevitably discover Voluntaryism? Did anyone here come about Voluntaryism the way I did and if so did it take you just as long to reach the conclusion that this is the only fair, just, moral, reasoned approach to (self) governance?

[Diogenes The Cynic]

Sadly, no because of cognitive bias, and confirmation bias.

People don't generally challenge their trusted beliefs. And those beliefs are jammed down throats at a pretty early age.

[alaric89]

I guess I could concede that information addiction combined with principles would lead most to a voluntary-ish mindset yeah. Information addiction in a psychopath, not so much.

[freeAgent]

No, I don't think so.  I've read and learned about these topics and am still more minarchist.  I have not seen what I would consider a plausible or desirable anarchist/voluntaryist solutions for a criminal justice system or for other so-called public goods like roads, and utility distribution.  I'm open to there being possible solutions, but I am not convinced they're there, so I'd prefer to let someone else experiment with anarchism/voluntaryism before I advocate for or believe in it.

[alaric89]

^^ Psssst. See what I mean?

[Cognitive Dissident]

...and the truth shall set you free...

Wouldn't it be nice if that were true?  Maybe it's a start...I mean...you can't get what you want 'til you know what you want.

Oh, and in answer to your question (sort of), I came to principled liberty (anarchism, voluntaryism, radical free markets, etc.) through libertarianism, and came to that by discovering that just because some people wrote some shit down about how you've got rights, doesn't mean a government was put here to protect them, or even cares to.  Eventually, the myriad examples lead the sane person to deduce that the state was never intended to protect rights in the first place, having to first violate them to exist.  Still, it was hard to lose the addiction to "small government."  I read a compelling argument that the market could provide better security than the state (alternatives to cops and courts, and military.)  That was the last gasp of the state in my principled mind.  After all, if the state isn't even the best answer for defense from other states, what could it possibly be good for?

[freeAgent]

^^ Psssst. See what I mean?

So I'm a psychopath?

[Turd Ferguson]

I think everyone here is a little nuts in one way or another. Including myself.



Psycho? Nah.

[FreddyFreeman]

Hey What's the frequency, Kenneth?, I'd like to know more about the argument for private security that led to the last dying breath of minarchy for you. Got any links? I've heard some fairly compelling arguments for private police/defense. That was one of my hang ups regarding minarchy over vountaryism as well. Ultimately it came down to the argument I've heard from both FTL and Adam Kokesh that just because you don't know how the cotton will be picked doesn't mean you shouldn't end slavery.(sorry I'm paraphrasing and am fairly sure I haven't phrased it nearly as eloquently as others have)
That doesn't mean, however that I'm not curious how certain things might work. One of the big questions I'm pondering now is the role of prisons in a fully voluntary community. I understand that most people shouldn't be locked in a cage, particularly for victimless crimes. I also agree with (I believe it was Rothbard who said) it doesn't make sense to charge a victim with the costs of imprisoning the criminal. In that case it makes sense for the criminal to pay restitution to the victim. But what about the truly hardcore rapist, murderer, child molester? Especially the ones that are repeat offenders? I understand those types are just a tiny fraction of the general public, but are there prisons for these individuals in a Voluntaryist society?

[alaric89]

^^ Psssst. See what I mean?

So I'm a psychopath?

Oh no. Your just fine.

*backs slowly away....*

[Cognitive Dissident]

Hey What's the frequency, Kenneth?, I'd like to know more about the argument for private security that led to the last dying breath of minarchy for you. Got any links? I've heard some fairly compelling arguments for private police/defense. That was one of my hang ups regarding minarchy over vountaryism as well. Ultimately it came down to the argument I've heard from both FTL and Adam Kokesh that just because you don't know how the cotton will be picked doesn't mean you shouldn't end slavery.(sorry I'm paraphrasing and am fairly sure I haven't phrased it nearly as eloquently as others have)
That doesn't mean, however that I'm not curious how certain things might work. One of the big questions I'm pondering now is the role of prisons in a fully voluntary community. I understand that most people shouldn't be locked in a cage, particularly for victimless crimes. I also agree with (I believe it was Rothbard who said) it doesn't make sense to charge a victim with the costs of imprisoning the criminal. In that case it makes sense for the criminal to pay restitution to the victim. But what about the truly hardcore rapist, murderer, child molester? Especially the ones that are repeat offenders? I understand those types are just a tiny fraction of the general public, but are there prisons for these individuals in a Voluntaryist society?

Figures I'd be on the frigging iPod in a restaurant when I read this. You know, I have looked for that paper online about four times since reading it around 2003, even asked the guy I thought sent me the link, but I've never found it since then. I recognized the importance of it too long after the fact, I guess.

Since I'm on the iPod, I'll wait until I get home to consider a better response. In short, I really do wish I had a link to that paper. Maybe I'll take another shot at finding it again.