Careercow Stefan Molyneux and the free domain Radio podcast - NOT AN ARGUMENT

[Doctor Placebo]

While I think nobody really states it outright I feel like there is this idea floating around that free market and free speech are linked, maybe even one comes from the other. But in reality they have nothing in common asides of both terms having "free" in their name.

Nope, they're definitely linked. A prime example that happened recently is JK Rowling vs the troonerati. All these institutions and stooges were REEE'ing at her and she didn't back down. Then her publisher said "Fuck you, we're not firing her, she stacks paper" to everyone who tried to pressure them. That was only possible because we have a somewhat free market. Hence we have somewhat free speech. Yeah it's been eroded to hell, but the system doesn't get its way 100% of the time. When people refer to someone being an absolute madman because they have "fuck you money" that's something that's only possible in a free market.

Now imagine the same situation in a captive economy. The government or the megacorporation that runs everything says "Trans women are women." JK says "They're actually not tho." She goes to a gulag for reeducation or the megacorp fires her from working anywhere, bans her from the internet, closes her bank account and seizes all of her assets. No one has "fuck you money." Everyone can be destroyed in an instant. There are no companies that can go rogue and say they're hiring this person despite being problematic.

This is a major reason why socialism and communism are a shit. Not just because they don't work economically, but because once you centralize the economy with any single source and destroy the concept of private property, whoever holds the keys to all the property and goods can crush any opposing voice.

TL;DR: the free market doesn't guarantee free speech, but no free market sure as fuck guarantees no free speech.

 

[GranDuke]

And in Eastern Europe you can say that gays are satanic and if you "stack paper" then nothing will happen to you either, but I'm not sure if anyone is going to claim that free market is stronger there than in USA or UK. Almost as if this depends on something else.

By the way, important people in Soviet era also could say and do more than ordinary people.

 

[BigO]

By the way, important people in Soviet era also could say and do more than ordinary people.

Dude, that's not true at all. Artists and musicians for example had to be very much in line with the Communist Party or they could risk execution/deportation.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

Dude, that's not true at all. Artists and musicians for example had to be very much in line with the Communist Party or they could risk execution/deportation.

Artists and musicians weren't important people in Communist Russia, any more than a steelworker or line soldier. High-ranking KGB officials, for example could be as degenerate and nihilistic as they wanted. This is what is meant by "important people".

 

[Lemmingwise]

https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1280679072444678150

http://archive.md/z12tI

View attachment 1434671

Stefan Molyneux has done this before, so I'm not doubting that he did it again. Doesn't matter that hundreds of other twitter channels do it too (Ryan Holiday wrote a book about how to do it and how common it is).

Again, we know that since he was banned in a wave of politically expedient bannings, that this was not the root cause, this was simply the dirt they used when they wanted to remove him.

pic related of when he accidently made a comment with his own account.

 

[Big Nasty]

This is a major reason why socialism and communism are a shit. Not just because they don't work economically, but because once you centralize the economy with any single source and destroy the concept of private property, whoever holds the keys to all the property and goods can crush any opposing voice.

TL;DR: the free market doesn't guarantee free speech, but no free market sure as fuck guarantees no free speech.

It is important to remember that not all captive or planned economies are socialist. The concept of a "banana republic", i.e. a country that is dependent on exporting a very specific type of product to a monopoly buyer, is very much a capitalist thing.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

And in Eastern Europe you can say that gays are satanic and if you "stack paper" then nothing will happen to you either, but I'm not sure if anyone is going to claim that free market is stronger there than in USA or UK. Almost as if this depends on something else.

That's a complete false equivalency. You can trash talk the gays in Eastern Europe because Eastern European culture and government isn't comparable to the west and isn't very fond of gays. It's like saying I can bash Trump. Of course I can. The current year zeitgeist in the west supports it. We're talking about the ability to voice true dissident, opposition opinions, not opinions that are popular and supported where you are. Those don't need to be protected. They're promoted by the power structure.

It is important to remember that not all captive or planned economies are socialist. The concept of a "banana republic", i.e. a country that is dependent on exporting a very specific type of product to a monopoly buyer, is very much a capitalist thing.

Yes, that's why in the previous paragraph I referred to captive economies, not just communist or socialist ones. But communism and socialism are by far the most popular ways to push for captive economies.

 

[Cypher]

JUST

 

[The Pink Panther]

JUST

View attachment 1460779

Old man dying in the grave he laid for himself.

 

[Grog]

Watched his "so I got banned from YouTube" video on BitChute, and predictably he says the reason he was banned was because he spoke against COMMUNISM.

Yeah I'm sure Google, Amazon, Paypal, etc. are just itching to overthrow the capitalists and redistribute their own wealth among the workers.

 

[TheImportantFart]

JUST

View attachment 1460779

I'm not sure what's sadder. This, or the video where Baked Alaska wandered round the car park at In N' Out Burger whining to randos about being banned from Twitter.

Should've taken a leaf out of Laura Loomer's book and chained himself to YouTube HQ since he praised that stunt so much.

 

[GranDuke]

Watched his "so I got banned from YouTube" video on BitChute, and predictably he says the reason he was banned was because he spoke against COMMUNISM.

Yeah I'm sure Google, Amazon, Paypal, etc. are just itching to overthrow the capitalists and redistribute their own wealth among the workers.

I sometimes wonder if they don't ban people like him on purpose so that they would splinter any possible opposition with their retarded takes.

 

[Grog]

I sometimes wonder if they don't ban people like him on purpose so that they would splinter any possible opposition with their retarded takes.

They banned him but not for his libertarian views. I'm 100% sure what got him on the shitlist was the race stuff.
There's also the theory that the waves of bans in the last years have a more direct political motivation, supposedly because social media companies see these people as propagandists for the Trump campaign and they don't want him to win in 2020.
Could be both reasons, really.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

They banned him but not for his libertarian views. I'm 100% sure what got him on the shitlist was the race stuff.
There's also the theory that the waves of bans in the last years have a more direct political motivation, supposedly because social media companies see these people as propagandists for the Trump campaign and they don't want him to win in 2020.
Could be both reasons, really.

They banned him because a man screeching about eggs to every female celebrity that draws breath and mumbling about how ethnostates are actually great damages ad revenue. Youtube still thinks it can turn a profit at some point in history.

 

[Grog]

They banned him because a man screeching about eggs to every female celebrity that draws breath and mumbling about how ethnostates are actually great damages ad revenue. Youtube still thinks it can turn a profit at some point in history.

YouTube is a part of Google and they have all the money in the world that they could need for whatever they wanted. This stuff always has completely political motivations.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

YouTube is a part of Google and they have all the money in the world that they could need for whatever they wanted. This stuff always has completely political motivations.

Corporations aren't about "need", they're about "want".

 

[Doctor Placebo]

Artists and musicians weren't important people in Communist Russia, any more than a steelworker or line soldier. High-ranking KGB officials, for example could be as degenerate and nihilistic as they wanted. This is what is meant by "important people".

They could be as degenerate and nihilistic as they wanted... in private. But they better not criticize the Secretary General or mock the party line in public if they don't want to have a very fast, very steep fall.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

They could be as degenerate and nihilistic as they wanted... in private. But they better not criticize the Secretary General or mock the party line in public if they don't want to have a very fast, very steep fall.

Saying "the law doesn't apply to you if you don't get caught" is brain-dead.
A senior KGB officer could be caught in a whorehouse wanking off onto a copy of the Communist Manifesto while doing coke off a rent boy's asshole and walk away with little more than a finger-wagging if he was really good at killing "reactionaries".

 

[GranDuke]

That's a complete false equivalency. You can trash talk the gays in Eastern Europe because Eastern European culture and government isn't comparable to the west and isn't very fond of gays. It's like saying I can bash Trump. Of course I can. The current year zeitgeist in the west supports it. We're talking about the ability to voice true dissident, opposition opinions, not opinions that are popular and supported where you are. Those don't need to be protected. They're promoted by the power structure.

Thats kinda what I was talking about. Again, not much to do with capitalism. Rowling can say what she wants because she is part of the elite (at least she still is for the moment) and UK is not as settled culturally on trans thing as USA is. Whole protecting dissident speech thing is a bullshit, no state allows actions that can harm it, question is only how effective they are at stomping it out.

Something like Singapore is often mentioned as an example of capitalism at its best, go ahead and be a dissident there.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

Saying "the law doesn't apply to you if you don't get caught" is brain-dead.
A senior KGB officer could be caught in a whorehouse wanking off onto a copy of the Communist Manifesto while doing coke off a rent boy's asshole and walk away with little more than a finger-wagging if he was really good at killing "reactionaries".

Are you saying that doing coke and molesting a boy at a whorehouse is a form of free speech? You seem to have completely lost the plot. We're talking about political speech, not being a depraved weirdo in private, regardless of if you get caught or not. A senior KGB officer would still suffer consequences if he publicly criticized communism or the actions of the current regime.

Thats kinda what I was talking about. Again, not much to do with capitalism. Rowling can say what she wants because she is part of the elite (at least she still is for the moment) and UK is not as settled culturally on trans thing as USA is.

The powerful people of Britain, at least in media and entertainment, are as overwhelmingly down with the trans agenda as in the US. The Guardian ran an article shaming Rowling, someone vandalized a little monument to her in Edinburgh, every Harry Potter star issued a statement either condemning her or at least distancing themselves from her, etc. Maybe rural folks and working class blokes have a different opinion about it, but when it comes to British society's elite, it's obvious what the consensus is. It's not that different from the US at all.

Whole protecting dissident speech thing is a bullshit, no state allows actions that can harm it, question is only how effective they are at stomping it out.

You're so close to getting it. I agree. Now here's what you don't understand: capitalism makes governments a lot less effective at stamping out free speech. That's the point I've been making this whole time. That's why we're talking about capitalism, not the First Amendment.

Something like Singapore is often mentioned as an example of capitalism at its best, go ahead and be a dissident there.

People say Singapore is "good capitalism" in the sense that it makes people a lot of money and raises the standard of living. Yeah that's good, but it's an entirely different discussion based on an entirely different aspect of capitalism. Did I use Singapore as an example of what I'm talking about? What'd I say in my very first comment on this subject?

TL;DR: the free market doesn't guarantee free speech, but no free market sure as fuck guarantees no free speech.

My point was perfectly clear, but you both keep arguing against a strawman that I specifically rejected in my first comment on this. Something that doesn't work 100% of the time but works sometimes is still superior to something that works 0% of the time. I don't know how to explain it any more directly to you than that.