Search the Community

Scott Adams recently made some insanely idiotic claims which not only directly contradict core edicts for FDR but also promote a demonstrably damaging way of thinking. I'm not exaggerating. If you don't care to bother yourself with the video he makes the following fallacies: - assumes kids raised in the same family are raised identically - states that because the outcome of bad parenting is not always bad people then bad parenting has no effect on the outcome of kids - implies that laws that protect kids are detrimental to kids - says he has a scientific basis for it without quoting a single study - implies he knows more about raising kids that most people, him being a literal cuck who didn't even bother to properly raise his adopted children - says abusive alcoholic parents love their kids - blames unruly kid behavior on the kids themselves - direct quote:: "THE ABSOLUTE WORST WAY TO RAISE A CHILD IS WITH BOTH PARENTS AT HOME" - implies good parenting and having money are the same thing - families (homes) are destroyed b bad teenagers and not bad parents - laughs at how fathers used to "beat the shit out of" their sons and had no repercussions - implies the laws against "getting physical" with children are detrimental; says spanking is "little stuff" - says bullying has more of a detrimental effects on kids than bad parenting - says we should make a registrar for underage kids So when is the debate happening? Surely his perspective is far more damaging that Kokesh's intransigent libertarian/ancap ideals. "The Truth About ..." series has always taken shots (valid critiques imo) on sacred cows some of which were regarding their abysmal parenting practices. What we have here in Scott Adams is a right-wing/alt-media sacred cow that fits the series AND is also alive. Milo was pilloried by both sides, both friends and enemies, and he almost faded into obscurity but ultimately realized the errors of his ways, apologized, and got his career on track again. Will Scott Adams do the same? Or a better question still: Will Scott Adams be pushed into the same corner by us who are oh so virtuous with our principles?

Bolshevim was funded by Wall Street. We all know that, so no news there. But, that is not all that Communism and Capitalism have in common. Those on "The Left" AND those on "The Right", point-blank refuse to accept the further FACT, that banks NEVER "lend" money to any purported "borrower", ever! Instead, banks merely fraudulently claim to be "lending money" to the defrauded "borrower", who in fact, is THE SOLE "creator" of the money used for the purported "bank loan". If a bank ever did "lend out money" to any client, they would certainly demand a "receipt" for the sum they loaned out, no? But no such "contractual" documentation is ever required or mutually signed. Instead of a "bi-lateral contract", the purported "borrower" is asked only to sign a "uni-lateral agreement" to repay a demanded sum of money each month. No bank of course even CAN insist a "borrower" sign a "contract", accepting the money that the bank has "loaned to them" ("$xxx.xxx") because to do so, would be fraudulent, because bank know, that banks NEVER LEND OUT MONEY! How can that assertion be proved? By the fact that both the FED and The Bank of England insist that all "loans" are "brand new money", that has never been in circulation before, prior to it being created (BY THE PURPORTED BORROWER!) for the loan! The fact is, that money can never be "loaned into existence" anyway! As I like to say "A bank can't loan, what it doesn't first own!" You can't steal your neighbors lawn mower, and then "lend" it to your neighbor on the other side of you. That would be fraud. But that is precisely what banks do to their loan clients. They wait until the "borrower" has signed an "agreement", which empowers the loan, which was merely "a figure on paper" until that "money-creating" signature was applied to the agreement. Secondly, a Bank's "reserves", despite what Stefan keeps on insisting, are NEVER used to "loan to borrowers". That is simply untrue! A banks' reserves are only a notional figure, used to calculate the "fig leaf" limit that a bank can theoretically "lend out", even though they never "lend out money", and will keep stealing as much money as their clients qualify to borrow ... from themselves. Thirdly, we come to the unavoidable consequence of these first two fraudulent deceptions. Becase banks take NO RISK in NOT lending any money to anyone, they then have ZERO justification in charging ANY interest on the sums involved !! The entire specious argumant that banks are somehow "justified" in demanding under threats, and extracting usury/interest from clients, utterly fails, when it is understood that they "TAKE NO RISK", because they "MAKE NO LOAN !! This truth of course, is what the entire Libertarian and Mises.org Austrian School of Economics do NOT want you to focus on! Why? Because in reality, as much as they make great arguments for personal choice, they simultaneously also "provide covering fire" for the banks, aiding and abetting them in defrauding the world, via every single loan and mortgage that are fraudulently transacted. As an aside, I have several times left comments on some of Stefan's videos, whenever he repeats the lie that "banks lend money from deposits", but they are never replied to. Now I know that is perhaps to be expected, but hopefully someone on the forum here, can show me the error in my assertions. Thank you in advance.

Disclaimer: I'm making this post out of intrigue, I wish no harm to the people mentioned in this post or to anyone affiliated with FDR. I assume that all this is probably a coincidence. I was web surfing and out of complete coincidence (seemingly not connected to FDR) stumbled upon these websites. Archive.org confirms these websites are older than the freedomain radio websites or podcasts or Stefan's personal blog. In fact morelife.org can be tracked as far back as 1998 when they were in early development, and selfsip.org - 2003. This symbol was first used no later than 2001. morelife.org selfsip.org https://twitter.com/paulwakfer https://twitter.com/KittyAntonik The Self-Sovereign Individual Project: A program to achieve freedom from government coercion for those who understand it, want it and are responsible enough to live it On the morelife website: "Cognitive therapy will not be effective for a person who merely reads written material or listens to a speaker describe the model of interaction between the listed five areas of life, because these are too passive. Instead, active participation on the part of the reader of books on the cognitive model or as a client/patient of a cognitive therapist is essential for progress toward increasing happiness." Paul Wakfer ("Kitty" on the left): Born on the 26th of February, 1938. Holds a Master of Arts in Applied Mathematics (MA, U of Toronto, 1960) Is a former computer consultant, teacher and entrepreneur (1973-1990) During Paul's post-graduate studies at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, at New York University (Washington Square) in 1961, he enrolled in an extra curricular course from The American School of Economics. It was while attending these lectures on freedom oriented economics (by such notables as Ludwig von Mises and Henry Hazlitt), that he overheard a conversation about The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, then read it and eventually everything associated with her. Since 1972 Paul has been an independent scholar in the philosophy of freedom reading widely and deeply from the works of the classical liberal thinkers and more contemporary libertarians writers. This has enabled Paul to progress from his original views of childhood that an oligarchy of the wisest should govern, to a full recognition that only the individual can judge what is in her/his own best interest and that an individual's goal of seeking to maximize his lifetime happiness will produce a complete and consistent set of rules of social order which will promote and allow this goal to be sought in a conflict-free manner by all rational individuals. Social Meta-Needs (SMN), published in 2004: Social Meta-Needs are those Environmental Attributes of and within Society, common to all individuals, which facilitate the highest possible attainment of Lifetime Happiness by each. The basis of Social Meta-Needs is to be found in the ethical egoism of the individual human, which implies that seeking to optimally increase his Lifetime Happiness by means of optimizing his Benefit/Harm Estimations and consequent Chosen Actions, must be his ultimate purpose. Social Meta-Needs are not ends in themselves, but rather the conditions and tools of Social InterRelationships - the Social means needed to be common to all individuals so that each individual can best attain his ends. A bit about Kitty: Kitty Antonik Wakfer (born April 6, 1945 and also known as Kitty and Katherine Antonik; formerly with last name Raastad and Antonik-Raastad; with other Internet Forum Usernames "Kitty" and "KittyA" and "KittyAW") formerly practiced as a registered nurse and later as a mechanical engineer; she has been an avid reader of science fact and fiction since her youth. As a nurse for 13 years, Kitty worked in the areas of emergency care, obstetrical, pre- and post-surgical, geriatric, psychiatric, and home-health finding the most satisfaction in the latter which allowed her to utilize her strong patient advocate skills. She returned to university level studies (moving to engineering from nursing) and after graduation from the University of Arizona (BSME 1983) she was employed at the then Motorola Government Electronics Group (sold to General Dynamics after her departure). Kitty spent more than 16 years in the mechanical design of space-borne electronic hardware, most notably the GPS Block IIR and Block IIF Crosslink Data Transponders. In this role she was responsible for the mechanical integrity of the units, specifically their performance after launch and deployment. In conjunction with the various electronic engineers and designers, Kitty's responsibilities included the design of the numerous printed circuit boards, their manufacture by outside vendors, and interfacing with in-house assembly services. In addition she was responsible for various analyses, customer presentations, vendor reviews, mechanical testing, and overseeing a team of project mechanical designers. Kitty's pro-freedom philosophy had its earliest formal introduction with the reading of Ayn Rand's Anthem at age 16, the same year that Paul was reading The Fountainhead for the first time. Over the years she read all the works of Rand and many of those of Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt, Milton Friedman, Paul Johnson, Thomas Sowell and other 20th century writers on economic and personal actions. She has more recently enlarged her knowledge of the moral basis of human interactions by reading many of the writings of earlier writers such as Henry David Thoreau, Lysander Spooner, Jeremy Bentham, Herbert Spencer, and others whose writings either served as philosophical foundations for the US founding fathers or who wrote critiques in the years following the federalization of the US government.

I have made an illustration featuring Stefan as a Marvel-esque superhero because why not. Enjoy

Stefan, You want to engage with people... I'm telling you, you can engage with people BETTER!!! 1) Put ads on your videos 2) Film your videos in an actual set. Don't put a blank, white, wall and your handsome face as the only thing I am seeing. 3) Get decent lighting. These are things that I am demanding as a subscriber of over 6 years! If you want to spread your message, stop creating crap for people to watch (no criticism here regarding the substantive message) and start generating revenue so that you can increase your viewership. Get real!!! My preferential suggestions: 1) Paint your wall a bold color. 2) Adjust lighting so it illuminates one side of your face more than the other. 3) Put framed pictures of philosophers who influenced your life on the wall behind you. 4) Use studio lights to illuminate those pictures exclusively while keeping the painted wall in shadow. 5) Place the camera so the pictures behind you are slightly out of focus but still recognizable while your head and shoulders are perfectly in focus. 6) Put a sofa with some pillows in the background, under the framed pictures, in order to demonstrate that your channel is a place of comfort for your viewers. 7) Use rope light behind the couch to illuminate the frame of the sofa so that it is easily visible for your audience. These changes will dramatically increase your number of subscribers. PUT ADS ON YOUR VIDEOS TO FUND THIS!!!!!!!!!

I created this sketch animation to promote Freedomain Radio. The narration by Stef is from the end of the call-in show titled "FDR 3148: Being Clubbed By An Inert Brain". I apologize in advance for the grainy video quality. If this video is well-received I hope to do more projects of this sort in higher definition. If you can help out by sharing the video online, I would very much appreciate that.

Howdy folks, I just posted a video responce to this video (in favor of too) on my blog. See what you think... http://coffeechat.webs.com/apps/videos/videos/show/18771179-upb-vs-rights

I like It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia because of the memorable characters, unique humor and just outright bizarre mentality of the show. Favorite character is probably Mac. Do you like the show? If you do, favorite character? If you haven't seen it yet, it's available on Netflix and season 10 starts on January 14 at 10PM EST on FXX in the United States at least. Thanks for reading and have a great day!

Source: http://www.pcgamer.com/peta-launching-its-own-animal-utopia-minecraft-server/ DIRECT Source: http://www.peta.org/blog/peta-coming-minecraft/ So maybe you heard of PETA or the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. They are an animal rights organization (as you can tell by the title) who ironically, don't really help animals. In fact, they euthanize animals*, quite frequently, for almost anything... Well, anyway, PETA has been known to target video games for many stupid reasons. Examples would be (a few times) for targeting Nintendo for "promoting animal abuse" in the Pokémon franchise or for the Tanooki suit that Mario can use in Super Mario 3D Land. I could go on all day but I won't because I'm going off topic. PETA today has launched their own Minecraft server featuring well... here's to quote PETA on what the server will be like: "True to PETA’s mission—and unlike on other Minecraft servers—no animals, not even digital ones, can be harmed on our dedicated Minecraft server! Visitors to PETA’s custom-made digital island can explore vast expanses of landscapes where the animals of Minecraft roam free. They can also visit extensive vegetable and flower gardens, walk through a fantastic re-creation of PETA’s HQ, and discover an abandoned and decaying slaughterhouse." Read more: http://www.peta.org/blog/peta-coming-minecraft/#ixzz3JACRiMRx OH SPARE THE DIGITAL ANIMALS! DON'T SLAY THEM WITH YOUR MOUSE AND KEYBOARD! I think that is a continuing example of the extremeism and lunacy that PETA showcases to the public. Also, just yesterday, PETA supposedly took a family dog and murdered it**. Well, I'm going to end this post right here. Let me know what you think and have a beautiful day! * = Sources http://www.petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html http://rt.com/usa/peta-shelters-animals-killing-975/ http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/peta-finds-itself-on-receiving-end-of-others-anger.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 ** = Source http://www.huffingtonpost.com/douglas-anthony-cooper/peta-steals-and-kills-lit_b_6156196.html

It's only a matter of time before these two get together. I know Stef has already called him out. But before they meet, here they are being talked about in Hitler's Bunker.

I am a Minarchist and I know some people here might hate me for it, but let me explain. This open letter is meant to be at least some point in history to be read by Stefan as I very much respect his opinion. Anyone else reading this please don't dislike the post if you think I am wrong, but rather state why by a reply. I am fully willing to change my views if someone can prove me wrong on this! Minarchism in my opinion is a safe way to a totally free society. At the moment the societies we live in have state regulations and public sector companies growing everywhere around it. Some things are at the moment dependent on the state, because the previous generations thought it would be a good idea to build an infrastructure that is based on the existence of the state. If we went immediately from the current society to the Libertarian model of society, we would risk a chaos. Many people are so used to be living in a state that it would be impossible for them to deal in such a situation. A peaceful transaction from Statism to Libertarianism can only be achieved by taking it slow. Starting from privatizing public sector, reducing government regulations and decreasing the size of the army. It will take many decades until we reach a point where we can safely shut down the government and begin a completely free society. An example of a government that is ready to be shut down would be a one that only provides basic legal system and the police. The only thing I am still wondering about is how can we transfer the legal system to the private sector? I mean there is a huge chance for it to become corrupt... But I believe it can all be figured out while we get there, the important thing right now is to get this started. I still believe that politics and voting are important because they are a way to change the world without causing panic or fear. Of course there are examples of peaceful revolutions but that is a huge risk to take. Also in Minarchism there is the option to stop and think again if everything goes to hell. So before you judge Minarchists, let me tell you this: We both have the same goal, we just want to be VERY careful while getting there. And all out revolution is a big risk and risks cost lives. This is my question to Stefan (if he ever reads this): I know that what you want is freedom, but there is a big risk. So what are you willing to bet on it? Your life, your friends lives, your relatives lives or even your daughters life? I do not mean to come out insulting this is just a question I SO DEEPLY want an answer to. I am yet to find a video on Stefan about this subject but if someone knows one then I would appreciate if you linked it to me. Again if you people think this question is insulting or too personal (I don't think it is but i have been wrong), then please tell me either via private message or via posting on the thread so I can take whatever actions are necessary. Thank you all for listening to me and I hope you do well. Markus FIN

I almost missed this great travel essay about his first day in Amsterdam. So I wanted to share it with the forum in case you were unaware of the essay as well. https://www.facebook.com/stefan.molyneux/posts/10152745569926679 "A Philosopher’s First Impressions of Amsterdam So I just spent my first day in Amsterdam, a lovely and typically chaotic European city, full of narrow legged hipsters with tight purple trousers and tween beards, women smoking and reading text messages while bicycling at Mach 12, and coffeehouses so tightly packed that it seems that no one can make it more than 18 feet before needing caffeine injections straight to the eyeballs. My first impression is that the people seem - underfed? Then I realized...."

Did a little portrait: But then curiosity took a hold of me and I wanted to see how much of a difference hair would make: Dunno if it's the fancy way I drew it but to me the hair just seems off-putting. Hope you like it.

Peter Joseph on Stefan Molyneux: "The Art of Nonsense" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cnuRRWZxSE Warning: fanaticism included Hey guys, this is my first topic. I really didn't want it to be about this but I think people should see. (So the more important topics come later ) Peter Joseph has let his Ego show in a pretty horrendous response to Stefan's review of the debate. This looks to be the start of a nice big flame war and the comment section is hot with abuse. Just a warning for people it contains obscene language if that's the kind of thing you like the avoid. You will get a clear picture of how the video continues purely from the first 120 seconds. I just want to know what did you think of: - The "debate" - Stephan's review - Peter Joseph's responses - Should Stefan reply to this, if so why/Why not? Or is it just the start of a useless flame war? Personally I don't like to see anybody going at it over anything, so I will not pressure anyone especially Stefan to reply to something like this. I don't think there's much to gain from it, as you pretty much can't use reason and logic with this type of emotional flaming. Take care all I hope to have some productive discussions soon. Cheers. PS. If this topic isn't permitted due to the whole flame war thing, I will gladly delete it.

I took my liberty to point out what ideas do I get during my plentiful listenings to Stefan's radio show. I think Stefan's great with psychological and philosophical themes, but when it comes to the economic system itself, I can see there's a work for me. I can't improve what is perfect, but I can show a mirror to what I think is flawed - but fun! I did my best to keep the comic strips tasteful and intelligent and maybe even funny. However, be sure I'll post them on many occasions when I need to illustrate a point, literally. I'll add more when I get any other ideas. 10 in the first day is good enough. Please mods, if you like the topic, make it sticky To all the offended parties I profusely apologize.

I wrote up a response to "Questions for Free-Market Moralists". David Gordon and Stefan Molyneux both beat me to it, but I think I've expanded on it a little further. It's harsh, I've never read something this bad and I couldn't help myself. =/ Anyways, the article is here, please tell me what you think.