Will a National Divorce Lead to More Individual Liberty?
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 02. 2024
- Ryan McMaken debates Jonathan Casey at LibertyCon. Recorded in Washington, DC, on 4 February 2024.
Ryan McMaken (Mises.org/McMaken) is executive editor at the Mises Institute and co-hosts the Radio Rothbard podcast (Mises.org/RothPod) and War, Economy, and State podcast (Mises.org/WES).
Jonathan Casey is a small business owner based in Dallas, Texas. He is the Chair of the Libertarian Party Classical Liberal Caucus, and founder of Project Liberal.
Students For Liberty’s LibertyCon is the largest international pro-liberty gathering in the world. For more information, visit LibertyCon.com
Ryan killed it. Jonathan’s motto was: freedom requires central planning. You see, without men with bullhorns telling us what to do, we might decide to be unfree, so we must be bound together in a union where central planners can ensure we remain free.
McMaken for the win!
Yea this other guy didn't seem prepared maybe. He repeated essentially the same argument over and over but we got some actual critical thinking from McMaken
Yes it will, and I favor increasing decentralization on principle. I will keep advocating for it regardless of if something like a national divorce happens in my lifetime because it is the plain truth. I think it needs to be made more clear to the populist right that the opposite of political globalism is not nationalism, it is secessionism. The clarity that libertarians have to offer on subjects like this is part of the reason the villainous Klaus Schwab types seem to be seething about us. With all the global economic turmoil ahead, breaking up over-centralization will become more possible and it is what is best for humanity.
The right to free association(and disassociation) is in fact a significant part of Liberty. Denying this does not increase liberty.
Agreed
Ryan's beard is just spectacular.
Jonathan’s inability to answer questions was impressive.
hi praxben
Ryan mopped the floor with this guy.
This is philosophy and intellect versus feelings
This is like the MLB vs the Little League.
Mises libertarians once again proving how much smarter they are to LP libertarians.
The LP was taken over by the Mises Caucus in 2022. Casey here is a clown and irrelevant in the LP
Johnathan has left the LP since the mises caucus won
@@thefredkalis he couldn't take the embarrassment 🤣
McMaken's arguments are much more persuasive.
We are better off balkanizing
Better or worse I think that is our future
I reckon it'll happen whether we like it or not. Unfortunately if a domestic armed conflict is to happen it'll be a shitshow no matter what
01:27 📚 Ryan McMaken argues for the affirmative, emphasizing the right to self-determination and challenging the notion of a mystical union in the United States.
05:09 🌐 McMaken connects the concept of secession to the Declaration of Independence, highlighting historical examples and asserting that the breakup of large states can lead to increased freedom and economic development.
07:14 🌍 McMaken argues that smaller states, facing the threat of further secession, tend to be more open to trade, migration, and economic development, advocating against state building and centralization of power.
08:24 🏛 Jonathan Casey argues against the idea of a national divorce, expressing concerns about the impact on individual liberty due to the imposition of borders, trade barriers, and restrictions on movement.
10:20 🚧 Casey criticizes the idea of national divorce, pointing out potential negative effects on individual liberty, such as forced relocation, and emphasizes the importance of having plans in place for political decentralization.
11:44 🗺 Casey challenges the feasibility of national divorce, questioning where the lines would be drawn and how it would address the real cultural divide between rural and urban areas in the United States.
16:11 🌐 Casey argues that national divorce doesn't necessarily lead to further decentralization, citing examples where countries joined international organizations like NATO or the European Union instead.
18:56 🌍 McMaken questions the assumption that the United States is the correct level of government, suggesting the possibility of giving more power to international organizations like the United Nations to monitor human rights violations within the U.S.
19:10 🌐 Ryan argues that the international criminal court should not try Americans, emphasizing the importance of local self-determination.
21:33 🏛 Ryan advocates for the right of double secession, allowing regions and municipalities to break off from central government, citing historical contributions to capitalist growth.
22:58 🤔 Jonathan expresses concerns about secession without a plan to protect individual liberties, citing potential issues with immigration laws and the Fourth Amendment.
24:37 🌐 Ryan contends that localism can be achieved without national divorce, suggesting passing laws that assign responsibilities to states while maintaining a unified constitution.
29:55 💡 Jonathan questions the assumption that smaller states would necessarily lead to free trade, expressing skepticism about the potential benefits of a national divorce.
32:55 🌍 Ryan argues that empirical data shows smaller countries, driven by survival, tend to compete by embracing free trade and lower taxes, regardless of their stated ideologies.
35:01 👍 Jonathan acknowledges the importance of discussions and learning from opposing views, highlighting the need to localize government responsibilities within the existing system.
36:11 🌐 Ryan criticizes the interventionist approach to foreign countries with objectionable practices, advocating for alternative methods without coercion.
37:47 🗽 Ryan suggests exploring a road map for independence, proposing a mechanism similar to the Swiss Constitution where citizens affirmatively vote every 19 years on their desire to remain in the United States.
39:17 🌐 Jonathan emphasizes the importance of influencing political culture and spreading the message to protect individual liberty, regardless of the size of the government, expressing concerns about the potential dangers of a national divorce.
I support divorce. For the reason of not protecting liberty, but avoiding authoritarianism.
Jonathan and his type are for world government but never say it in those terms
Vote texit. For Texans Freedom
Aren't you afraid of civil war?
@@stanislavfrul6339 I’m afraid of my grandkids living under communism. Joe Biden has shown us how quick you can destroy a country. I will die for Texas and there are a million more like me
texans wont vote for texit.
the left and right are statists at heart.
"You could pass a law that says States are now responsible for this"
Ummmm. Look up the 10th Amendment.
why did Jonathan start yelling
Right...three huzzahs for McMaken!
Ryan's position summarized: To support peoples' individual human rights, we should respect those rights.
Jonathan's position summarized: To support peoples' individual human rights, we need to trample those rights, in order to force people to have rights against their will.
We should support unilateral peaceful political separation the same way we support free speech and for the same reasons.
As with speech, we may agree or vehemently disagree with how they wish to setup their new polity, but we should support their right to establish it.
*THEN* we should argue with them for how they should improve their fledgling system.
But supporting a people's right to separate ONLY on the condition that we agree with how they will setup their system is no different than supporting someone's free speech, as long as we agree with what they will say.
Casey lost me the second he tried to expand the definition of "individual liberty" beyond following the non-aggression principle.
I already disliked his takes on X/Twitter, but I was determined to hear him out nonetheless. Casey does not hate the State.
Not a fan of Casey and this certainly didn't change my mind.
Who thought this Reason guy was up for a debate?
That last idea from McMaken in his closing remarks about opting in to get data is great. Just need to normalize this conversation. The fact that it happened at all was a slight win for McMaken but his words finished the job
McMaken's book is killer
Painful.
mr. radio rothbard
And yes, people DO move to be with like-minded people, including politically. Look at the moves away from leftist states to conservative states! You also see the reverse, but in much smaller numbers.
Kind of some silly blindspots. At 14:40 Ryan directly says that when a Plebiscite forms and wants to break away they need to negotiate how; which is exactly what Jonathan is getting at regarding the need to specify a plan.
Aside from that; the option of seccession needs to be real, regardless of how actual seccesion would effect liberty. The threat of market competition is neerly as good as actual competition. Which is why appearent monopolies (based on economic factors, not gov mandates) will still offer reasonable value to customers.
Ryan wins simply because of the beard! And for wearing a suit. But national divorce isn't just for the better, it's in our future.
You need to have plan in place .... I am a central planner... I'm for liberty and I trust the market will find an optimal outcome..... but not without a plan that needs to be imposed.
How do we know who has the correct central plan? And what do we do with people who don't agree with it?
I want my rights respected in all 50 states under the US Constitution, and I want the Federal Government to stop being a degenerative parasite that gives no true benefit to the people. That should be the goal.
lol
oh, youre serious.
Great debate. I listen to Ryan weekly and have never heard Jonathan before but both made great points and I'm more confused than ever lol
So how do you stop the diversitarians from flooding into the breakaway parts of the country and ruining those as well?
Does this Cato dude seem a little too effeminate to take him seriously?
The world is returning to the paradigm of extensive growth, when the most important factor of economic growth will again be the potential of growth of production of renewable resources (not necessarily renewable energy) PER CAPITA. In a post-crisis world economic growth in the states of East and West Coasts will be weak or nonexistent, therefore, if the US disintegrates those states will cease to be the republics and turn into oligarchies or autocracies, while the states of Midwest (most notably, underdeveloped and underpopulated Idaho, Montana, Wyoming) will demonstrate an economic growth that will allow them to preserve republican regimes. On the other hand, the US will not disintegrate if the military come to power and abolish federalism and universal voting rights. For further reading I recommend an article by Vladimir Stus "On the likelihood and scenarios of disintegration of USA"
Rayan win , black shirt Bolshevik can get lost.
No , but it will lead to more safety
Not to thrilled with either of these guys.
Too
🤡@@doctorcrafts
Ryan can rap.