If they ever come at you with their opinions about how everything you respect in society is just a “social construct” based solely on your “privilege”, remind them that all their policies and theories about society are social constructs based solely on their privilege.
The description of Socialism cannibalizing Capital reminds me of a description of an incident immediately following the Cuban Revolution. Two jeeps full of revolutionaries showed up at an American-owned cattle ranch to inform the manager that the business had now been nationalized, and pointed out the largest animal and said it was to be butchered for a celebratory BBQ for his twelve men. The manager tried to explain it was a prize breeding bull worth some $17,000 (1950s dollars) of new state property. El Commandante nodded and then ordered his men to open up on the beast with machine guns, then ordered the shaking manager to go find thirteen steaks worth of undamaged meat. The cattle ranch, of course, was dead empty within six months.
I’m not sure I ever heard of this place but these lectures really scratch me where I itch. It’s pretty surprising how much has changed in institutions of higher learning in the past 15 years.
The problem is you can't use numbers in the way you do. You can't prove that capital produces anything. The real value of capitalism comes from the promotion of modern industries. Once you start using industry and trade to destroy others industry and trade to keep your own you become reactionary.
Much appreciated as my mom was still in the womb 1926 as my Christian Mennonite family left southern Russia for more freedom in Canada. It hurts to know what is happening here in the west I am 63
“The government” isn’t actually the problem here. The problem is a pernicious set of ideas that has taken hold and is spreading like a virus throughout the population, and the primary super spreaders of that virus are academia and journalism. Government is just doing what government always does, which is responding to the will of the people in order for the politicians who comprise it to secure another term for themselves.
Excellent lecture, a lot of insight and essentially describes the chaos we've been seeing play out to a t. I knew it had to be deliberate, it's just too absurd.
“I saw the destruction of society as the one and only solution. A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and creation of new ones by the revolutionaries” - Gyorgy Lukacs (one of the guys he spoke of)
To learn more about about Gramsci, Marcuse, et al... Go to the channel called New Discourses by James Lindsay. He goes on depth on their writing and how ridiculous and destructive their ideas are.
@@wesscotchdog9078 _" when they come to my door I'll..." and I interrupt and say ..."_ ...get told to get my suitcases ready to go on a camping trip to Auschwitzland
but they are censoring everything so NO it's not the fascist or fascism Dr delorenzo is talking about it's just pure marxism and leftists censoring anything that is right wing they never censor leftist agenda contents
Trade is win-win. The working class is a Marxist idea. Trade has greatly benefited Americans. The conservative support of Leftist economic controls hurts Americans.
@@ericjohnson2024 Conservatism is a rationalization for sacrificing mans independent mind to a blood-drenched mystical fantasy called the nation. Only individuals are important. The nation is not important.
@@Alex_Fahey Your mystical politics is noted. Nations are many people thought of as one. Nations are abstractions ,not concrete realities. Nations represent nothing and nobody. Only individuals are real.
You teach better ideas to rational people. You ignore Marxists. If there are no rational people, there is no hope. But conservatives have no ideas, only emotions.
Interesting story. I attempted to be a rural mail carrier. It's a really difficult job. The last mile has room for more efficiency. The rest of system seems astonishingly efficient.
There should be only one tax. That Tax is a tariff (a tax or duty to be paid on a imports ) If they are taxing your income you are a slave part of the year.
Right libertarians are right about most things except their prohibition against self defense against the state. We will not win using only ideas. Criminals can't be persuaded using words.
Las Vegas is not avoiding Building Homes because Nevada controls too much government land. That's absurd. It's because of what happened during the Great Recession when they couldn't give houses away. Developers are gun-shy in Vegas
The destruction of what already exists is necessary because it correctly sucks; isn't sustainable, doesn't value either life, humanity, or individual rights. That's nothing to do with what happens to replace it.
I like to work but if somone said they would pay me more money to stay at home I would stay at home and pursue my interests . It may not be right but why would I keep destroying my body at a shipbuilding plant if somone would pay me more money to stay home.
@PF King Nice reductionism. No, socially liberal policies are not inherently costly. Those would be economically liberal policies. A socially liberal position would be something like, “homosexuality is perfectly acceptable and we should not be criminalizing or otherwise persecuting these people for their sexual orientation.” Does that cost money? If anything it probably saves money, since enforcing laws and state persecution of individuals consumes resources.
At 24:44 he says he Frankfurt School was originally called "The Institute for Marxism" - I don't think that is true. As far as I have ever seen the Frankfurt school was called "Institute for Social Research". It was indeed Marxist. Funded (as usual and of course) by a wealthy student who inherited his wealth. BTW - Wikipedia now has their page on "cultural Marxism" titled "Cultural Marxism Conspiracy Theory"
@@mtlicq Are you saying you think it was in fact called the Institute for Marxism or are you just saying that as a general statement? I have thought for awhile that there should be a coordinated effort to scan in old books and A) keep the physical copy! B) keep the physical copy in very safe places C) share them widely so they are widely dispersed in some format that makes them hard to modify. It is a scary thought how much of history and historical thoughts and ideas can be changed in an instant now.
@@jeffa847 Good morning Jeff. I was just saying a general statement. And nothing beats physical books. I know those nice intentions about scanning books (Google was doing that, --- but you KNOW, they can and will censor or alter parts and/or throw in their own or some invasive narrative! if not now, then in the future) B) keeping the physical copy --- aka keeping it from people to see what it really said, and having them rely on their scanned version - with their chosen edits, C) Share them widely --- so the majority of people who do read the scanned, edited or twisted e-copies will think that was the original. So much history and historical thoughts and ideas have already been selectively hidden, changed, censored, forbidden, biased, and propagandized with the narrative of some agenda, right from the beginning. Incomplete truths, bias, and selected 'facts' out of context, virtually make for untruth. It is nothing new, and the history books we have and know and are pushed on us in school fit that description to a T.
The problem is that CATO institute wants to express its views to the detriment of any other views. A matter which classical liberalism solves it by abolishing coercion by lawful means. You cannot give a corporation the rights of an individual because its not a person.
Rights are a moral view of freedom in society. They are not given or taken. Individuals, alone or in a corporation, have rights. Individuals have the right to peaceably support or weaken any ideas they choose.
@@urielwizzy4680 Individuals have a right to peaceably produce and trade, whether alone or w/others. Joining a group does not end ones rights. A corp is individuals relating, not a mystic thing above and beyond individuals. The Leftist hatred of corps is a sleazy attack on individual rights, not basically on corps. Corps are the most productive organization, thus the Leftist hatred. Leftists hate life.
_Ra: I am Ra. The possibility/probabilities exist for situations in which great portions of your continent and the globe in general might be involved in the type of warfare which you might liken to guerrilla warfare._ _The ideal of freedom from the so-called invading force of either the controlled fascism or the equally controlled social common ownership of all things would stimulate great quantities of contemplation upon the great polarization implicit in the contrast between freedom and control._ _In this scenario which is being considered at this time/space nexus the idea of obliterating valuable sites and personnel would not be considered an useful one. Other weapons would be used which do not destroy as your nuclear arms would._ _In this on-going struggle the light of freedom would burn within the mind/body/spirit complexes capable of such polarization._ _Lacking the opportunity for overt expression of the love of freedom, the seeking for inner knowledge would take root aided by those of the Brothers and Sisters of Sorrow which remember their calling upon this sphere._ Questioner: Are you saying then that this possible condition of war would be much more greatly spread across the surface of the globe than anything we have experienced in the past and therefore touch a larger percentage of the population in this form of catalyst? _Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. There are those now experimenting with one of the major weapons of this scenario, that is the so-called psychotronic group of devices which are being experimentally used to cause such alterations in wind and weather as will result in eventual famine. If this program is not countered and proves experimentally satisfactory, the methods in this scenario would be made public. There would then be what those whom you call Russians hope to be a bloodless invasion of their personnel in this and every land deemed valuable. However, the peoples of your culture have little propensity for bloodless surrender._ *LAW OF ONE RA MATERIAL (1982)*
If you have one big windfall year then you income average your taxes.. You are allowed to pay the average tax of the last 3 years. Of course. You can only do that every 3 years. That's what people that win the lottery or get a big court settlement do.
i have discovered the nature of money that would provoke the gold and cryptocurrencies market crash. If you buy put options on gold and with your influence make my theory on money known provoking the gold market crash you would become rich. Being everything else the same a country with no gold is wealthier than a country with gold that protects the mineral inside a vault. Being everything else the same imagine a country with a baker, a fishmonger and a singer with no gold and another with a baker, a fishmonger and a guard to protect gold inside a vault. Which one lives better? Which one is wealthier? The country with no gold is wealthier because the baker and fishmonger get entertained by the singer for their money but the country with gold have to work to pay the guard to protect a mineral that offers no wellbeing or wealth because is useless inside a vault. An analogy would be an innocent kid after saving his pocket money buys a bicycle and his father tells him that he can store the bicycle in a garage unused to sell it in the future, but the rent of the garage would cost him some of his pocket money or he can use and enjoy the bicycle. Which option would the kid choose? There is not benefit in buying to sell because no value is added. Do you understand? The gold becomes wealth when is used, sparing the cost of protection. Because gold is increasingly more expensive to dig out as there is less underground and is increasingly cheaper as there is more on offer overground there would be a point when nobody would be mining the mineral. How much cost the taxpayers to protect gold? Cryptocurrencies are a number but money is transferable debt, a number and a name. Who would sell last? Socialist or capitalist country?
Question? How do we the people compete with automation and generate income? Capitalism does have many fine points. There are many examples of what I see as Monopolies that have the ability and means to either completely automate or reduce the workforce substantially. Here and within the UNITED STATES one man/woman can own (twitter) controlling interest in a necessity, life sustaining product, or good.
@richbright540 You make machines work for you, and machines need maintenance and so on. But machines are expensive and the people who maintain them are expensive. So businesses do it slow except when governments force that. Next, education improves, noone expected that calculus, geometry, trigonometry, algebra can be taught to students in highschool, that programming would be easier with high-level programming languages, etc. And finally you have things we don't expect we will need, for example mining rare earth metals become more important with high-tech stuff, and many people now eat stuff that used to be for rich people only so chefs now have more jobs, those kinds of things. The same way people when agriculture became easier became tradesmen and worked in making clothes, construction, and manufacturing, which benefit those same people who later buy houses, buy clothes, buy more food, etc.
It's not forced labour! Some one has to pay for the army to maintain the status of the US globally which is the one that allows the perpetual growth! Along with the special operations, bribing governments etc, apart from the police, the roads, the universities etc. If all the above are gone then don't worry, the government will give you back your portion of Yellowstone because you won't have anything else! Regarding the capital destruction after WW2 I think but I m not sure, that no country was left with any kind of wealth except the US! So the socialists took over, created country wealth by taking care their citizens until Thatcher-like politicians took that wealth and gave it to some individuals! Individuals who still belong to that 1% that has the 90% of the wealth! I don't care if someone is a billion times richer than myself, but I care about the uncontrollable power they accumulate because of that wealth!!!
"...is to dethrone God..." 🤔 If God exists, this would be impossible. If God doesn't exist....well, this would be equally impossible. Had a habit for nonsensical statements, didn't he, old Karl....
Funny how we are happy dig into the history of socialism, but not into the history of libertarianism. Henry George was the first great critic of marxist socialism, but Henry George is supressed by the Mises Inst. If we are really interested in countering socialism, we can't be censoring ourselves.
As a Nature enthusiast I support government ownership of some land to preserve natural beauty because once you go in and develop, you can never get it back. A 100 acre nature preserve will never be as profitable as a 100 acre housing development. But this has its limits, I doubt there’s much worth preserving in the suburbs of Las Vegas. I doubt they’re like Tampa where patches of undeveloped wetlands in the urban areas help with flood control
Correct. Honestly felt this lecture was just filled with weirdly biased worn out rhetoric. Speaker barely talks about the policy of socialism and instead speaks boogymen and misapplied language. Quite disappointing that this is the best the misses group has to offer.
Or imperialism -> Neoliberalism-> communism Why else would everyone invade land to make the native people cheap labor so the landlords, politicians, and corporations keep all the money? Makes sense if there was only a single 14% tax on new non-essential goods while everything else is tax free and every other tax is abolished, including income tax. Anarchy seems to be the only way...
The Mises Institute has become very dull with everyboby repeating the same lectures. But DiLorenzo and Woods are the only ones trying to come up with new materials
I get your point but at the same time, think about this. How many people do you know who still can't even sit through and read Haziltt's Economics in One Lesson? More and more, I'm of the impression that a few people knowing a lot won't change as much as many more people even understanding the basics. Until we're on the same page about taxation, government subsidies, effect of automation on jobs in the long run, occupational licensing, rent control, minimum wage, etc, talking about more advanced things has a low ROI. That being said I do think that the content being covered in these lectures can be compressed a lot more.
The Frankford Jews sound just like Elon Omar who comes here from Somalia and complains about our country being racist when she makes six figures working as a congresswoman
This guy is great. The constitution says to be a senator is 9 years as a "citizen of the United states" representatives 7 years and President is 14 years. Judges --- no requirement to be a "citizen of the united states" United states is an instrumentality of the states and limited to the federal lands where the states gave the lands for the instrumentality to do work- build forts. Building forts was to be done by public works but staffed by the.... citizens of the united states who applied for citizenship in federal courts. Get it---- the congress and president had to be officers on the annexed lands, those annexed lands were for forts, those forts were for defenCe, in order to become a member or officer of the united states you had to live on the federal lands, federal lands are lands of the instrumentality called United states. After being on the lands and working as a citizen of the US they could be elected to congress or presidency. The judges are not citizens of the US because they construe the constitution in favor of the sovereign or in favor of the independent states. That was the balance and check on the power of the congress and feds. Otherwise you have judges a party in a case in their own favor. Which is unlawful and illegal, and unconstitutional. President is executive of "the united states of America" . AND commander in chief of "the united states" land and naval forces. It makes sense that to be commander of the military you would have military experience. 14 years to be exact. Thats the way the military works. Blacks law describes types of states, among them 1. Independent state (sovereign) 2. Dependent state (non sovereign) Independent states created an instrumentality, a dependent state the federal instrumentality. That instrumentality created smaller dependent states inside the independent states. That which you create you control. The independent states gave up rights to make law on those lands annexed "purchased" to/by the feds for defence. You cannot have a dual loyalty. One man cannot have two masters. The stars on the flag represents dependent states that is military reservations. That is because it is a flag of the "united states" not united states of American. Dependent states are military reservations. People forget not to take into account only the words on the paper but the intention of the words on the paper. Early case law said- if a ship is abandoned by some of the crew and the rest of the crew brings it to port, the crew members may keep the ships cargo. But if a ship is abandoned but one man remains due to sickness and the ship by luck comes into port without the aid of the sick man, the sick man cannot keep the cargo, he did nothing, he did not work, he did not choose, it was luck. Therefore the sick man lost his case to keep the cargo. He didn't "earn" it. We dont only look to the letter of the law we look to the intent. The intent of the constitution was to give some lands to an instrumentality that would be ran by people who lived and worked on those particular lands. They had to become citizens of those lands. The states chose them. The federal courts accepted their applications to become citizens. They start their time as military officers and eventually with required time become representatives, senators (seniors) and commander in chief (president). The intent is to do their works collectively to keep the country - America, safe. The united states is not a country. There are case laws that show this to be true. There are reports that show this to be true. If you understand that when the feds issue a command to a non sovereign military state they issue it to a creation of its own, the forts, not the private civilians, not the individual people of the sovereign state. Commands are issued from a master to a subject or servant government cannot issue commands to people not on the federal lands. I have made several FOIA requests for a form that documents where the federal areas are in the independent states as well as the cession of jurisdiction for each location. Example- forts are jurisdictional code 1. Which means feds make the law for those lands because they were "purchased" for defenCe purposes. Land that federal banks sit on are of a lesser jurisdictional code, meaning non- constitutional, without exclusive jurisdiction, meaning no authority. Forms showing jurisdiction are from 1962, These are kept by GSA and they admit that the forms exist, have been filled out and filed, however they will not admit to where they are kept. I will keep asking. Any of us not on federal lands are not required to get a license of any kind, register our business, (unless doing business directly with government on a federal land or contracting with the feds to provide a service to federal military) none are required to do census, get birth certificate, or any other thing. Most of what they say are laws are not even laws. Laws must have a positive law citation. Feds issue "commands" to the military. Feds ASK to contract with the rest of us. Can, may (are not imperatives, not commands). Federal forms when used by federal corporations are "solicitations" and "advertisements" no one is required to file one, to fill one, etc. they do not comply with the ideas of "federalism." Therefore they are voluntary. The independent states that created the federal government were taken over by Lincoln during the civil war by military force. He made them dependent to the united states. He took the sovereignty and crushed it. So you had sovereign states created the fed. The fed decimate the country during the civil war. Took the capitols of the sovereign people by military force. Brought sovereign people and states under it and called them STATE OF... so basically an employee took over the corporation by military force. The united states was paid to build and run forts and took over the people who paid them to build and run the forts. Once you understand it, its pretty simple. They know that some of us know. I believe that this knowledge will hit a point where it will become like a bull running toward a cliff. Nothing will stop it, when the time comes things will change quickly. Be ready
Excellently done and i'm giving you 5 gold stars! Great job bringing these very important facts/concepts up. They get no where near the attention and study they absolutely should have.
@@larkohiya He’s not though. He may be going into great detail about socialism but he’s 100% correct about these race and identity Marxists. I’m assuming you haven’t read Marcuse’s “repressive tolerance” or Kimberly Crenshaw’s “Mapping the Margins”. What about Freire’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”? You are either an idiot or a liar.
The income tax thing made me chuckle. The root of all taxes was land. Go back thousands of years, if you occupied land that the state controlled they'd charge you tax. Meaning they forced you to do something productive with that land or guess what? They'd seize it! Then they'd find someone else who would do something productive with it! And you'd count yourself lucky if you didn't die in jail to boot! The root of currencies even goes to this. The government's army (the purpose of government, common defense) requires food obviously. So taxing grain / food stuffs is a natural solution. But the government also needs other things from construction labor to weapons. This poses a problem as the government would then have to take that grain and find a buyer who happened to produce the things that they actually need. The solution? Charge people tax payable in government scripts. Currency. You sell something to the government that it needs be it grain, weapons, clothing whatever and you get some currency. The gov will slowly push until you can only pay your taxes in those scripts we call currency and bam suddenly it has value. You need those scripts or the government will drive you out for being a free loader! Probably the single most important economic invention in history, currency has it's roots in property taxes which if you really boil it down means forced labor, labor originally intended to fund the common defense of society. And no, you gold standard loons outside of this cauldron gold would have never been valued like it has been. It's an utterly completely useless metal until the digital revolution. The Aztecs who hadn't used gold as a currency (and yet were so advanced they built aqueducts rivaling Rome's) called gold "gods excrement" or a "beautiful waste." Basically pretty garbage. Gold and Silver found their values because governments could sit on the mines, control the supply and therefore regulate the currency supply. Right down to choosing a script that was quite difficult to counterfeit.
@@lordknows8907 The original government coming to your house was the government formed to keep the raiders out and keep them from killing you and enslaving your women. Usually these governments were constituted from the union of several great families, also known as tribes. The families agreed essentially to surrender autonomy of their property (and therefore their labor) in order to fund the common defense. In Athens these founding families were called "Eupatridae" meaning "the well born." The structure they formed by surrendering their property and labor for the common defense (while at the same time sharing authority over those resources) created a structure so successful that "petty families" were increasingly able to thrive in the environment under them. Basically one didn't have to belong to a great familial tribe to succeed. It's important to note in this early environment the wealthy family-tribes provided the common defense. We can see this in early Rome too as one needed to be so wealthy in order to buy the equipment to join certain ranks of the army. Anyway in the Athens example the structure the great families put together became so successful at helping the common low born that those of petty (or no) families made up the majority of society. This caused instability until Athens transitioned from Tribal despotism to formal state and with the end of the familial defense of the property came the creation of currency and taxes to make the new unit of society, what Romans called the plebs pay for the common defense as well.
@@colonel__klink7548 I feel we are so far from that now. Nothing that was started back then with the right intent is what I feel like goes on now thank you for your response
@@jasonleveck8546 pure fantasy is looking at ancient history, a world in which people were continually struggling to survive and actually believing, seriously believing that people constantly on the edge of survival would trade what little surplus they had for literally useless silver and gold. The only value of gold is it cannot be counterfeit and is so rare a military authority could control the mines. In other words gold's only value was for a STATE to form a currency.
Would you donate land to the public? Much land is locked up not by ownership but by questionable zoning rules. Private owners are not allowed to develop their land, but on the other hand they are not encouraged with low taxes to voluntarily conserve it.
I’m astounded 😳 Thomas Sowell is not in along with y’all. Considering he’s got an Economics degree also. And he’s admitted that he was a Marxist to start with? He would be a great Attribute your cause. All day long Yahoo
@@robertabell9182 Oh sure, I definitely think he should be mentioned. Honestly if there were any one person for whom I could wave a magic wand and have everyone in America read all their work, it would be Sowell. He is an absolute treasure chest of life-altering wisdom and understanding.
So I agree with almost all Mises philosophy. What has set America on it's path to freedom is our written Constitution. This guy seems to disparage the one written thing that sets us onto freedom's path is the Constitution. So how am I wrong here? His addendum's seem to agree with the Democratic Party to ruin or disparage our Constitution and we Conservatives love the Constitution. This sets me apart from this seeming professor. Making me think he is one of the elite paid handsomely for his elitism. Not that I am against the elite like the gated community parasite sucking elites in the NE but how is the Constitution the only written word that spells out freedom of speech. Huh?
I don’t think he was disparaging the constitution at all, I think he was just pointing out that merely writing something down does not in itself force the people running the government to follow the rules it outlines. He was saying it takes more than simply having it in writing; you need norms, and checks and balances, and a people united by a common ethos, etc, to keep the government honest and make sure they actually adhere to what’s written.
The Const. set the stage for a new gov't or central gov't. Jefferson in my opinion and studies was correct, when he said the confederacy needed only to be "prettied up" and that it would function perfectly well. This new central gov't, as Patrick Henry correctly stated now "had to the power to tax and the sword to enforce it."
I just find perplexing how free-marketeers have the usual talking point of "there is too much polarization! we have to talk our differences! we must keep discourse civil!", but when talking about their political adversaries there is absolutely zero nuance "yeah this guys are evil people basically down to destroy civilization". This kind of speech just fuels cultural wars, hatred, and the possibility of physical conflict (not that the far-left has done better, they engage in all sorts of bullying practices, but you can't pretend to have the moral high-ground when you are engaging in the same kind of good guys/evil guys dichotomy)
2024: The left has now used invented laws to persecute the opposing candidate, has removed him from the ballot in several states, and has jailed peaceful protestors. They are the bad guys.
I would only add... the Age of Enlightenment produced the Constitution, the Reformation produced the Age of Enlightenment, the two things go together. the idea of individuality and individual liberty, wouldn't have gained popularity without first the Protestant idea of the individual relationship with God and the spiritual importance of individual free will. religion, at it's worst produces brainwashed robots religion, at it's best produces industrious, stable and compassionate individuals. politics, at it's worst produces a society of fear and insecurity that turns people into mindless robots politics, at it's best produces a society of industrious, stable and compassionate individuals. I'm sorry Ayn Rand, but you can't leave religion out of the picture. can non-Jeudo-Christians be lovers of freedom and liberty? yes, of course it isn't about which religious tradition you follow or were born into, or if you follow none and were born into none, it's only about the level of self-reflection and self-analysis the produces the awareness that others are individuals and have to be free to make their own choices and that any government that denies this is illegitimate.
He is confused. The problems he cites - destructionism - did not arise from socialism but from capitalism. Capitalism relied on racism and parasitic relationships with nature. The destruction around the world is from the fossil fuel industry and now we are transforming the energy system into a mineral energy system causing further environmental destruction. I looked up propaganda in the dictionary and found a picture of DiLorenzo. Tons of rhetoric and very short on facts or data. If you cannot get enough staff to work for you, then you are NOT paying a living wage.
If they ever come at you with their opinions about how everything you respect in society is just a “social construct” based solely on your “privilege”, remind them that all their policies and theories about society are social constructs based solely on their privilege.
Damn dude.
The description of Socialism cannibalizing Capital reminds me of a description of an incident immediately following the Cuban Revolution. Two jeeps full of revolutionaries showed up at an American-owned cattle ranch to inform the manager that the business had now been nationalized, and pointed out the largest animal and said it was to be butchered for a celebratory BBQ for his twelve men. The manager tried to explain it was a prize breeding bull worth some $17,000 (1950s dollars) of new state property. El Commandante nodded and then ordered his men to open up on the beast with machine guns, then ordered the shaking manager to go find thirteen steaks worth of undamaged meat.
The cattle ranch, of course, was dead empty within six months.
I wish the "silent majority" would stop being silent.
It’s easy to anonymously speak out on the comments section of a CZcams video but much more bold and consequential to speak out in public.
People over the years became soft. Not much courage these day's
If you are a landlord they are taking your property without compensation.
If they get into power far enough, a person is very fortunate if that's all they do.
i'm glad mises institute started talking about cultural marxism
breitbart, the man himself, talked about this many, many years ago!
I think they have been at least a little on the Human Action Podcast too
Yes they need to fight this rise of Marxism.
read The Culture of Critique by prof mcdonald
“To be more safe they at length become willing to be less free" Alexander Hamilton
I’m not sure I ever heard of this place but these lectures really scratch me where I itch. It’s pretty surprising how much has changed in institutions of higher learning in the past 15 years.
"The great march through the institutions"
Mises institute is such a value anchor for this generation. Thank you
The problem is you can't use numbers in the way you do. You can't prove that capital produces anything. The real value of capitalism comes from the promotion of modern industries. Once you start using industry and trade to destroy others industry and trade to keep your own you become reactionary.
Much appreciated as my mom was still in the womb 1926 as my Christian Mennonite family left southern Russia for more freedom in Canada.
It hurts to know what is happening here in the west
I am 63
I agree with you Vern
The people need to unite. Division is a tool. The biggest threat to a totalitarian government is a United and independent thinking people.
“The government” isn’t actually the problem here. The problem is a pernicious set of ideas that has taken hold and is spreading like a virus throughout the population, and the primary super spreaders of that virus are academia and journalism. Government is just doing what government always does, which is responding to the will of the people in order for the politicians who comprise it to secure another term for themselves.
Where’s that country-it’s not 🇺🇸
Prof DiLorenzo is brilliant - and easy to listen to. He's right up there with Thomas Sowell and Victor Davis Hansen.
Agreed, although VDH comes across as more elevated, and Sowell having a bit more charm/charisma. I like all three a lot!
Don't forget about Walter Williams!
One of the Institutes' finest speakers. Great ideas need great presenters. More please!
Highest Praise to Minister of Economic Truth!!!!!!
Dr. Tom Dilorenzo is one of the greats. I always appreciate his lectures. Great book references is many of them.
Excellent lecture, a lot of insight and essentially describes the chaos we've been seeing play out to a t. I knew it had to be deliberate, it's just too absurd.
“I saw the destruction of society as the one and only solution. A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and creation of new ones by the revolutionaries” - Gyorgy Lukacs (one of the guys he spoke of)
To learn more about about Gramsci, Marcuse, et al... Go to the channel called New Discourses by James Lindsay. He goes on depth on their writing and how ridiculous and destructive their ideas are.
Will do.
The state owns all land in the US. Rent is simply renamed property tax.
Nope, read a title document
Not at all. That's insane
@@wesscotchdog9078 so what's your thoughts. Pretty much over. I'm asking soberly
@@4Mikes4Mindset4 What does this mean asking sobriety ?
@@wesscotchdog9078 _" when they come to my door I'll..." and I interrupt and say ..."_ ...get told to get my suitcases ready to go on a camping trip to Auschwitzland
CZcams isn’t all bad if it’s allowing these gems to stay un-censored! 💪🏻
... for now. Gotta start mirroring this stuff on new platforms if they aren’t doing it themselves.
@@jsan2548 YT isn't that worried about Mises lectures, as they come off as esoteric.
but they are censoring everything so NO it's not the fascist or fascism Dr delorenzo is talking about it's just pure marxism and leftists censoring anything that is right wing they never censor leftist agenda contents
Looking forward to Prof DiLorenzo's new book on economics.
Neoliberal economics (outsourcing, etc) are a big reason for the resurgence of communism. The working class has been disenfranchised.
Free Trade has shipped the jobs overseas and Libertarians wonder why Socialism is on the rise.
Trade is win-win. The working class is a Marxist idea. Trade has greatly benefited Americans. The conservative support of Leftist economic controls hurts Americans.
@@ericjohnson2024 Conservatism is a rationalization for sacrificing mans independent mind to a blood-drenched mystical fantasy called the nation. Only individuals are important. The nation is not important.
@@TeaParty1776 The nation as a representative of a coalition of individuals must be important if individuals are important.
@@Alex_Fahey Your mystical politics is noted. Nations are many people thought of as one. Nations are abstractions ,not concrete realities. Nations represent nothing and nobody. Only individuals are real.
How do you counter cultural Marxism with ideas? When they are impossible to reach with reason and logic.
You approach those who have not yet absorbed such ideas.
You keep your powder dry for the inevitable implosion.
They are not taught to reason, a fair amount of people can't cross the street safely .
Nietzsche had the answer.
You teach better ideas to rational people. You ignore Marxists. If there are no rational people, there is no hope. But conservatives have no ideas, only emotions.
Simply put: don't eat your seed corn.
Interesting story. I attempted to be a rural mail carrier. It's a really difficult job. The last mile has room for more efficiency. The rest of system seems astonishingly efficient.
I only listened to Tom Woods but this guy is pretty good too.
Woods has had him on the podcast before.
There should be only one tax. That Tax is a tariff (a tax or duty to be paid on a imports ) If they are taxing your income you are a slave part of the year.
The cancer is in the universities and that tumor cannot be cut out!
It can.
Saying it like it is with regards to BLM is a sign of strength.
37:25; "...pulling a gun on the government is the dumbest thing you could do....", said Thomas Paine, kowtowing to King George.
Great discussion!
That was enlightening.
Excellent talk!
This should be on the Nightly News
Great lecture
we need a minister of common sense
Thank you
All obvious to the most casual sentient observer.
Hamilton was shot 47 years too late.
@@ericrodwell8706 Thomas Sankara is now a "hero" as well?
@@SimGunther Yes if not for what he did after killing Che
@@ericrodwell8706 Aaron Burr's life should be made into a movie!!
@@ericrodwell8706 what did they do?
@@lordknows8907 what did they do? Lord knows
Ghost writer’s! By next summer even fewer will reading!
Pod Casts are the Key!
MWM
Are you aware that today's example of your presentation on evil Socialim is Spain? Pls come to Europe and help open eyes.
Right libertarians are right about most things except their prohibition against self defense against the state. We will not win using only ideas. Criminals can't be persuaded using words.
Yea! I am a graduate of University of Rochester, 1971.
Las Vegas is not avoiding Building Homes because Nevada controls too much government land. That's absurd. It's because of what happened during the Great Recession when they couldn't give houses away. Developers are gun-shy in Vegas
The destruction of what already exists is necessary because it correctly sucks; isn't sustainable, doesn't value either life, humanity, or individual rights. That's nothing to do with what happens to replace it.
@havenbastion Spoken like a Westerner who has no gratitude for their nice things in life, nice.
Victor Orban Is a total badass
I like to work but if somone said they would pay me more money to stay at home I would stay at home and pursue my interests . It may not be right but why would I keep destroying my body at a shipbuilding plant if somone would pay me more money to stay home.
I would do the same and quit my engineering job.
Herbert Marcuse
Libertarians remain the main voice of reason…which many don’t listen to, sadly.
@PF King Nice reductionism. No, socially liberal policies are not inherently costly. Those would be economically liberal policies. A socially liberal position would be something like, “homosexuality is perfectly acceptable and we should not be criminalizing or otherwise persecuting these people for their sexual orientation.” Does that cost money? If anything it probably saves money, since enforcing laws and state persecution of individuals consumes resources.
was the man with 11 kids RadLib by any chance?
Defund the Universities!
Algorithm comment
Droopy Whiner
At 24:44 he says he Frankfurt School was originally called "The Institute for Marxism" - I don't think that is true. As far as I have ever seen the Frankfurt school was called "Institute for Social Research".
It was indeed Marxist.
Funded (as usual and of course) by a wealthy student who inherited his wealth.
BTW - Wikipedia now has their page on "cultural Marxism" titled "Cultural Marxism Conspiracy Theory"
@Jeff A - There is reason you / we should not rely on online sources of Ïnformation, get and keep old physical books. Don't burn books!
@@mtlicq Are you saying you think it was in fact called the Institute for Marxism or are you just saying that as a general statement?
I have thought for awhile that there should be a coordinated effort to scan in old books and A) keep the physical copy! B) keep the physical copy in very safe places C) share them widely so they are widely dispersed in some format that makes them hard to modify.
It is a scary thought how much of history and historical thoughts and ideas can be changed in an instant now.
@@jeffa847 Good morning Jeff. I was just saying a general statement. And nothing beats physical books. I know those nice intentions about scanning books (Google was doing that, --- but you KNOW, they can and will censor or alter parts and/or throw in their own or some invasive narrative! if not now, then in the future) B) keeping the physical copy --- aka keeping it from people to see what it really said, and having them rely on their scanned version - with their chosen edits, C) Share them widely --- so the majority of people who do read the scanned, edited or twisted e-copies will think that was the original. So much history and historical thoughts and ideas have already been selectively hidden, changed, censored, forbidden, biased, and propagandized with the narrative of some agenda, right from the beginning. Incomplete truths, bias, and selected 'facts' out of context, virtually make for untruth. It is nothing new, and the history books we have and know and are pushed on us in school fit that description to a T.
There is no law forcing us to pay federal income tax! Look it up…
👍👍
The problem is that CATO institute wants to express its views to the detriment of any other views. A matter which classical liberalism solves it by abolishing coercion by lawful means. You cannot give a corporation the rights of an individual because its not a person.
Rights are a moral view of freedom in society. They are not given or taken. Individuals, alone or in a corporation, have rights. Individuals have the right to peaceably support or weaken any ideas they choose.
@@TeaParty1776 Individuals not corporations
@@urielwizzy4680 Individuals have a right to peaceably produce and trade, whether alone or w/others. Joining a group does not end ones rights. A corp is individuals relating, not a mystic thing above and beyond individuals. The Leftist hatred of corps is a sleazy attack on individual rights, not basically on corps. Corps are the most productive organization, thus the Leftist hatred. Leftists hate life.
@@TeaParty1776 yeah whatever you say ahahahahah
@@urielwizzy4680 Another victim of modern "education" w/emotion in place of mind.
Happy 50th anniversary of leaving the gold standard today!
Remember, its just a temporary suspension. Lol
_Ra: I am Ra. The possibility/probabilities exist for situations in which great portions of your continent and the globe in general might be involved in the type of warfare which you might liken to guerrilla warfare._
_The ideal of freedom from the so-called invading force of either the controlled fascism or the equally controlled social common ownership of all things would stimulate great quantities of contemplation upon the great polarization implicit in the contrast between freedom and control._
_In this scenario which is being considered at this time/space nexus the idea of obliterating valuable sites and personnel would not be considered an useful one. Other weapons would be used which do not destroy as your nuclear arms would._
_In this on-going struggle the light of freedom would burn within the mind/body/spirit complexes capable of such polarization._
_Lacking the opportunity for overt expression of the love of freedom, the seeking for inner knowledge would take root aided by those of the Brothers and Sisters of Sorrow which remember their calling upon this sphere._
Questioner: Are you saying then that this possible condition of war would be much more greatly spread across the surface of the globe than anything we have experienced in the past and therefore touch a larger percentage of the population in this form of catalyst?
_Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. There are those now experimenting with one of the major weapons of this scenario, that is the so-called psychotronic group of devices which are being experimentally used to cause such alterations in wind and weather as will result in eventual famine. If this program is not countered and proves experimentally satisfactory, the methods in this scenario would be made public. There would then be what those whom you call Russians hope to be a bloodless invasion of their personnel in this and every land deemed valuable. However, the peoples of your culture have little propensity for bloodless surrender._
*LAW OF ONE RA MATERIAL (1982)*
If you have one big windfall year then you income average your taxes.. You are allowed to pay the average tax of the last 3 years. Of course. You can only do that every 3 years. That's what people that win the lottery or get a big court settlement do.
Was Erich Fromm a Marxist? I know he was a member of the Frankfurt School. But also an esteemed psychologist.
Frankfurt=Freud+Marx.
Marxist of course. Typical Marxist in disguise. Nonsense like everything else leftist.
Tom is like your drunk uncle at Thanksgiving
i have discovered the nature of money that would provoke the gold and cryptocurrencies market crash. If you buy put options on gold and with your influence make my theory on money known provoking the gold market crash you would become rich. Being everything else the same a country with no gold is wealthier than a country with gold that protects the mineral inside a vault. Being everything else the same imagine a country with a baker, a fishmonger and a singer with no gold and another with a baker, a fishmonger and a guard to protect gold inside a vault. Which one lives better? Which one is wealthier? The country with no gold is wealthier because the baker and fishmonger get entertained by the singer for their money but the country with gold have to work to pay the guard to protect a mineral that offers no wellbeing or wealth because is useless inside a vault. An analogy would be an innocent kid after saving his pocket money buys a bicycle and his father tells him that he can store the bicycle in a garage unused to sell it in the future, but the rent of the garage would cost him some of his pocket money or he can use and enjoy the bicycle. Which option would the kid choose? There is not benefit in buying to sell because no value is added. Do you understand? The gold becomes wealth when is used, sparing the cost of protection. Because gold is increasingly more expensive to dig out as there is less underground and is increasingly cheaper as there is more on offer overground there would be a point when nobody would be mining the mineral. How much cost the taxpayers to protect gold? Cryptocurrencies are a number but money is transferable debt, a number and a name. Who would sell last? Socialist or capitalist country?
War Damn Mises
Question? How do we the people compete with automation and generate income? Capitalism does have many fine points. There are many examples of what I see as Monopolies that have the ability and means to either completely automate or reduce the workforce substantially. Here and within the UNITED STATES one man/woman can own (twitter) controlling interest in a necessity, life sustaining product, or good.
@richbright540 You make machines work for you, and machines need maintenance and so on. But machines are expensive and the people who maintain them are expensive. So businesses do it slow except when governments force that.
Next, education improves, noone expected that calculus, geometry, trigonometry, algebra can be taught to students in highschool, that programming would be easier with high-level programming languages, etc.
And finally you have things we don't expect we will need, for example mining rare earth metals become more important with high-tech stuff, and many people now eat stuff that used to be for rich people only so chefs now have more jobs, those kinds of things.
The same way people when agriculture became easier became tradesmen and worked in making clothes, construction, and manufacturing, which benefit those same people who later buy houses, buy clothes, buy more food, etc.
It's not forced labour! Some one has to pay for the army to maintain the status of the US globally which is the one that allows the perpetual growth! Along with the special operations, bribing governments etc, apart from the police, the roads, the universities etc.
If all the above are gone then don't worry, the government will give you back your portion of Yellowstone because you won't have anything else!
Regarding the capital destruction after WW2 I think but I m not sure, that no country was left with any kind of wealth except the US! So the socialists took over, created country wealth by taking care their citizens until Thatcher-like politicians took that wealth and gave it to some individuals! Individuals who still belong to that 1% that has the 90% of the wealth! I don't care if someone is a billion times richer than myself, but I care about the uncontrollable power they accumulate because of that wealth!!!
"My object in life is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism." Karl Marx
Why though?
Communism, exactly like traditional religiion, is a mystical ideal.
"...is to dethrone God..." 🤔
If God exists, this would be impossible.
If God doesn't exist....well, this would be equally impossible.
Had a habit for nonsensical statements, didn't he, old Karl....
Hungry poor man :-)))
Funny how we are happy dig into the history of socialism, but not into the history of libertarianism. Henry George was the first great critic of marxist socialism, but Henry George is supressed by the Mises Inst. If we are really interested in countering socialism, we can't be censoring ourselves.
What are you even talking about? Henry George has been discussed exhaustively by Mises scholars.
@@jakelm4256 and?
As a Nature enthusiast I support government ownership of some land to preserve natural beauty because once you go in and develop, you can never get it back. A 100 acre nature preserve will never be as profitable as a 100 acre housing development. But this has its limits, I doubt there’s much worth preserving in the suburbs of Las Vegas. I doubt they’re like Tampa where patches of undeveloped wetlands in the urban areas help with flood control
2 minutes in, and I'm thinking: this guy is not advancing the cause. No pathos detectable..
hahah when he measured god vs joe biden
Swedish welfare system is not comparable to USA.
Except they both have it, robustly.
when will America end social security? very inefficient system
Karl Marx also said the way to communism is Democracy -> Socialism -> Communism
or
Anarchy -> Communism
Barbarism* -- > Communism
Correct. Honestly felt this lecture was just filled with weirdly biased worn out rhetoric. Speaker barely talks about the policy of socialism and instead speaks boogymen and misapplied language. Quite disappointing that this is the best the misses group has to offer.
Or imperialism -> Neoliberalism-> communism
Why else would everyone invade land to make the native people cheap labor so the landlords, politicians, and corporations keep all the money? Makes sense if there was only a single 14% tax on new non-essential goods while everything else is tax free and every other tax is abolished, including income tax. Anarchy seems to be the only way...
And as the sowjetunion has shown: socialism -> capitalism.....
@@dualfluidreactor Only aftèr a bloody and violent revolution
The Mises Institute has become very dull with everyboby repeating the same lectures.
But DiLorenzo and Woods are the only ones trying to come up with new materials
I agree. Sad but true, I don't think this will help the Institute grow very much...
They are weak half the time.
This is a repeated lecture by Tom, too.
@@sebastianenriquefernandezv7996 I watch time to time time but now I follow the New Austrian school with Antal Fekete and Keith Weiner
I get your point but at the same time, think about this. How many people do you know who still can't even sit through and read Haziltt's Economics in One Lesson?
More and more, I'm of the impression that a few people knowing a lot won't change as much as many more people even understanding the basics.
Until we're on the same page about taxation, government subsidies, effect of automation on jobs in the long run, occupational licensing, rent control, minimum wage, etc, talking about more advanced things has a low ROI.
That being said I do think that the content being covered in these lectures can be compressed a lot more.
The Frankford Jews sound just like Elon Omar who comes here from Somalia and complains about our country being racist when she makes six figures working as a congresswoman
This guy is great.
The constitution says to be a senator is 9 years as a "citizen of the United states" representatives 7 years and President is 14 years. Judges --- no requirement to be a "citizen of the united states"
United states is an instrumentality of the states and limited to the federal lands where the states gave the lands for the instrumentality to do work- build forts.
Building forts was to be done by public works but staffed by the.... citizens of the united states who applied for citizenship in federal courts.
Get it---- the congress and president had to be officers on the annexed lands, those annexed lands were for forts, those forts were for defenCe, in order to become a member or officer of the united states you had to live on the federal lands, federal lands are lands of the instrumentality called United states. After being on the lands and working as a citizen of the US they could be elected to congress or presidency.
The judges are not citizens of the US because they construe the constitution in favor of the sovereign or in favor of the independent states. That was the balance and check on the power of the congress and feds. Otherwise you have judges a party in a case in their own favor. Which is unlawful and illegal, and unconstitutional.
President is executive of "the united states of America" . AND commander in chief of "the united states" land and naval forces. It makes sense that to be commander of the military you would have military experience. 14 years to be exact. Thats the way the military works.
Blacks law describes types of states, among them 1. Independent state (sovereign) 2. Dependent state (non sovereign)
Independent states created an instrumentality, a dependent state the federal instrumentality. That instrumentality created smaller dependent states inside the independent states. That which you create you control. The independent states gave up rights to make law on those lands annexed "purchased" to/by the feds for defence. You cannot have a dual loyalty. One man cannot have two masters.
The stars on the flag represents dependent states that is military reservations. That is because it is a flag of the "united states" not united states of American. Dependent states are military reservations.
People forget not to take into account only the words on the paper but the intention of the words on the paper.
Early case law said- if a ship is abandoned by some of the crew and the rest of the crew brings it to port, the crew members may keep the ships cargo. But if a ship is abandoned but one man remains due to sickness and the ship by luck comes into port without the aid of the sick man, the sick man cannot keep the cargo, he did nothing, he did not work, he did not choose, it was luck. Therefore the sick man lost his case to keep the cargo. He didn't "earn" it. We dont only look to the letter of the law we look to the intent.
The intent of the constitution was to give some lands to an instrumentality that would be ran by people who lived and worked on those particular lands. They had to become citizens of those lands. The states chose them. The federal courts accepted their applications to become citizens. They start their time as military officers and eventually with required time become representatives, senators (seniors) and commander in chief (president). The intent is to do their works collectively to keep the country - America, safe.
The united states is not a country.
There are case laws that show this to be true.
There are reports that show this to be true.
If you understand that when the feds issue a command to a non sovereign military state they issue it to a creation of its own, the forts, not the private civilians, not the individual people of the sovereign state. Commands are issued from a master to a subject or servant government cannot issue commands to people not on the federal lands.
I have made several FOIA requests for a form that documents where the federal areas are in the independent states as well as the cession of jurisdiction for each location. Example- forts are jurisdictional code 1. Which means feds make the law for those lands because they were "purchased" for defenCe purposes.
Land that federal banks sit on are of a lesser jurisdictional code, meaning non- constitutional, without exclusive jurisdiction, meaning no authority.
Forms showing jurisdiction are from 1962, These are kept by GSA and they admit that the forms exist, have been filled out and filed, however they will not admit to where they are kept. I will keep asking.
Any of us not on federal lands are not required to get a license of any kind, register our business, (unless doing business directly with government on a federal land or contracting with the feds to provide a service to federal military) none are required to do census, get birth certificate, or any other thing.
Most of what they say are laws are not even laws.
Laws must have a positive law citation.
Feds issue "commands" to the military.
Feds ASK to contract with the rest of us. Can, may (are not imperatives, not commands).
Federal forms when used by federal corporations are "solicitations" and "advertisements" no one is required to file one, to fill one, etc. they do not comply with the ideas of "federalism." Therefore they are voluntary.
The independent states that created the federal government were taken over by Lincoln during the civil war by military force. He made them dependent to the united states. He took the sovereignty and crushed it.
So you had sovereign states created the fed. The fed decimate the country during the civil war. Took the capitols of the sovereign people by military force. Brought sovereign people and states under it and called them STATE OF... so basically an employee took over the corporation by military force. The united states was paid to build and run forts and took over the people who paid them to build and run the forts.
Once you understand it, its pretty simple.
They know that some of us know.
I believe that this knowledge will hit a point where it will become like a bull running toward a cliff. Nothing will stop it, when the time comes things will change quickly. Be ready
Excellently done and i'm giving you 5 gold stars! Great job bringing these very important facts/concepts up. They get no where near the attention and study they absolutely should have.
Grom-she = Gramsci. Just being a pettifogger 😉
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Thank you. Really questioning why these guys dishonest
@@larkohiya He’s not though. He may be going into great detail about socialism but he’s 100% correct about these race and identity Marxists. I’m assuming you haven’t read Marcuse’s “repressive tolerance” or Kimberly Crenshaw’s “Mapping the Margins”. What about Freire’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”? You are either an idiot or a liar.
I’m pretty sure you can start referring to it as fact instead of theory after all this.
The income tax thing made me chuckle. The root of all taxes was land. Go back thousands of years, if you occupied land that the state controlled they'd charge you tax. Meaning they forced you to do something productive with that land or guess what? They'd seize it! Then they'd find someone else who would do something productive with it! And you'd count yourself lucky if you didn't die in jail to boot! The root of currencies even goes to this. The government's army (the purpose of government, common defense) requires food obviously. So taxing grain / food stuffs is a natural solution. But the government also needs other things from construction labor to weapons. This poses a problem as the government would then have to take that grain and find a buyer who happened to produce the things that they actually need. The solution? Charge people tax payable in government scripts. Currency. You sell something to the government that it needs be it grain, weapons, clothing whatever and you get some currency. The gov will slowly push until you can only pay your taxes in those scripts we call currency and bam suddenly it has value. You need those scripts or the government will drive you out for being a free loader! Probably the single most important economic invention in history, currency has it's roots in property taxes which if you really boil it down means forced labor, labor originally intended to fund the common defense of society.
And no, you gold standard loons outside of this cauldron gold would have never been valued like it has been. It's an utterly completely useless metal until the digital revolution. The Aztecs who hadn't used gold as a currency (and yet were so advanced they built aqueducts rivaling Rome's) called gold "gods excrement" or a "beautiful waste." Basically pretty garbage. Gold and Silver found their values because governments could sit on the mines, control the supply and therefore regulate the currency supply. Right down to choosing a script that was quite difficult to counterfeit.
So what is the answer? Also who was the Governemt coming to your house ? That sounds like evil bad ppl
@@lordknows8907 The original government coming to your house was the government formed to keep the raiders out and keep them from killing you and enslaving your women. Usually these governments were constituted from the union of several great families, also known as tribes. The families agreed essentially to surrender autonomy of their property (and therefore their labor) in order to fund the common defense. In Athens these founding families were called "Eupatridae" meaning "the well born."
The structure they formed by surrendering their property and labor for the common defense (while at the same time sharing authority over those resources) created a structure so successful that "petty families" were increasingly able to thrive in the environment under them. Basically one didn't have to belong to a great familial tribe to succeed. It's important to note in this early environment the wealthy family-tribes provided the common defense. We can see this in early Rome too as one needed to be so wealthy in order to buy the equipment to join certain ranks of the army.
Anyway in the Athens example the structure the great families put together became so successful at helping the common low born that those of petty (or no) families made up the majority of society. This caused instability until Athens transitioned from Tribal despotism to formal state and with the end of the familial defense of the property came the creation of currency and taxes to make the new unit of society, what Romans called the plebs pay for the common defense as well.
@@colonel__klink7548 I feel we are so far from that now. Nothing that was started back then with the right intent is what I feel like goes on now thank you for your response
Keep telling yourself all of that bull shit and you might actually start to believe it. LMAO!
@@jasonleveck8546 pure fantasy is looking at ancient history, a world in which people were continually struggling to survive and actually believing, seriously believing that people constantly on the edge of survival would trade what little surplus they had for literally useless silver and gold.
The only value of gold is it cannot be counterfeit and is so rare a military authority could control the mines. In other words gold's only value was for a STATE to form a currency.
I love the public land in the West. Living in the eastern US is miserable because everything is private, so you can't enjoy the beauty.
A vast amount of eastern land is public. And it should all be private. You can enjoy the beauty by buying it w/your money.
Would you donate land to the public?
Much land is locked up not by ownership but by questionable zoning rules. Private owners are not allowed to develop their land, but on the other hand they are not encouraged with low taxes to voluntarily conserve it.
I’m astounded 😳 Thomas Sowell is not in along with y’all. Considering he’s got an Economics degree also. And he’s admitted that he was a Marxist to start with? He would be a great Attribute your cause. All day long Yahoo
Sowell is amazing but he’s also like 91 years old I believe. So I can’t really fault him for not speaking at events like these.
therainman777 I Understand my friend I just think the man still needs to be mentioned. All day long Yahoo
@@robertabell9182 Oh sure, I definitely think he should be mentioned. Honestly if there were any one person for whom I could wave a magic wand and have everyone in America read all their work, it would be Sowell. He is an absolute treasure chest of life-altering wisdom and understanding.
therainman777 True that all day long. Yahoo
So I agree with almost all Mises philosophy. What has set America on it's path to freedom is our written Constitution. This guy seems to disparage the one written thing that sets us onto freedom's path is the Constitution. So how am I wrong here? His addendum's seem to agree with the Democratic Party to ruin or disparage our Constitution and we Conservatives love the Constitution. This sets me apart from this seeming professor. Making me think he is one of the elite paid handsomely for his elitism. Not that I am against the elite like the gated community parasite sucking elites in the NE but how is the Constitution the only written word that spells out freedom of speech. Huh?
I don’t think he was disparaging the constitution at all, I think he was just pointing out that merely writing something down does not in itself force the people running the government to follow the rules it outlines. He was saying it takes more than simply having it in writing; you need norms, and checks and balances, and a people united by a common ethos, etc, to keep the government honest and make sure they actually adhere to what’s written.
The Const. set the stage for a new gov't or central gov't. Jefferson in my opinion and studies was correct, when he said the confederacy needed only to be "prettied up" and that it would function perfectly well. This new central gov't, as Patrick Henry correctly stated now "had to the power to tax and the sword to enforce it."
I just find perplexing how free-marketeers have the usual talking point of "there is too much polarization! we have to talk our differences! we must keep discourse civil!", but when talking about their political adversaries there is absolutely zero nuance "yeah this guys are evil people basically down to destroy civilization". This kind of speech just fuels cultural wars, hatred, and the possibility of physical conflict (not that the far-left has done better, they engage in all sorts of bullying practices, but you can't pretend to have the moral high-ground when you are engaging in the same kind of good guys/evil guys dichotomy)
2024: The left has now used invented laws to persecute the opposing candidate, has removed him from the ballot in several states, and has jailed peaceful protestors. They are the bad guys.
I would only add...
the Age of Enlightenment produced the Constitution, the Reformation produced the Age of Enlightenment, the two things go together.
the idea of individuality and individual liberty, wouldn't have gained popularity without first the Protestant idea of the individual relationship with God and the spiritual importance of individual free will.
religion, at it's worst produces brainwashed robots
religion, at it's best produces industrious, stable and compassionate individuals.
politics, at it's worst produces a society of fear and insecurity that turns people into mindless robots
politics, at it's best produces a society of industrious, stable and compassionate individuals.
I'm sorry Ayn Rand, but you can't leave religion out of the picture.
can non-Jeudo-Christians be lovers of freedom and liberty?
yes, of course
it isn't about which religious tradition you follow or were born into, or if you follow none and were born into none, it's only about the level of self-reflection and self-analysis the produces the awareness that others are individuals and have to be free to make their own choices and that any government that denies this is illegitimate.
This entire page is propaganda and that's why the comments are disabled under your capitalism video.
Cool story, marxist-trash.
These guys can't seem to present economic content without acting like 3rd graders. Why the attitude?
He is confused. The problems he cites - destructionism - did not arise from socialism but from capitalism. Capitalism relied on racism and parasitic relationships with nature. The destruction around the world is from the fossil fuel industry and now we are transforming the energy system into a mineral energy system causing further environmental destruction. I looked up propaganda in the dictionary and found a picture of DiLorenzo. Tons of rhetoric and very short on facts or data. If you cannot get enough staff to work for you, then you are NOT paying a living wage.