11 votes

Julie Borowski on Anarchism - Part 2

Julie Borowski from FreedomWorks on: No government vs. limited government, police vs. no police and anarchism. Part 2. See part 1 here: Is Julie Borowsky an Anarchist?


http://youtu.be/jttVNDmtVVw

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Simple question:

In anarcho-capitalist society, is a defendant in a dispute guaranteed a lawyer if he or she cannot pay for one? If yes, who pays for it?

Ron Paul Revolution is spreading around the world: Freedom and Prosperity TV: libertarian network of alternative media in Western Balkans

Under a rational legal system

That only deals with violations of people and their property, would lawyers be necessary?

Thanks for the offered answer...

And I might add this: in a rational society we would not have crime... but sadly we don't have rational people to make that utopia a reality. Please explain briefly that 'rational legal system,' what makes it possible, and how it would not need lawyers. Much appreciated.

Ron Paul Revolution is spreading around the world: Freedom and Prosperity TV: libertarian network of alternative media in Western Balkans

Are Governments not Gangs

If you look at the world as a whole are the governments of each country not equal to the gangs that Jan mentions. And are not most people in these countries afraid of them as they get bigger and more corrupt.

Do your best have no expectations

anarchism is not just the

anarchism is not just the absence of a centralized political power, it is a recognition of supremacy of the individuals. Gangs don't recognize individual rights, are just small scale "nations". I doubt there will be tomahawks or large scale warfares in anachism.

Jan this is a very good interview - you were polite and helpful

I liked how you informed her. This motivated me to watch part 1.

Those of you criticizing Jan for asking the same question over and over again are missing the point. He is trying to get Julie to express her principles ... which appears she's not able to do. I like Julie and I think she should review this interview and learn from it. If you cannot express your principles then logically, people will assume you don't have any and you are a typical politician.

I believe Julie has principles, but has not taken the the time to define them. Not saying this because I think I know more than Julie, but if she is going to be in the public eye and giving interviews, then you need to be able to define your principles, just like Ron Paul does. He has certain principles (constitution, limited government) and his actions and statements follow from them. This way one can be consistent.

My advice to Julie would be to write down every question Jan asked, then write down an answer, based on what your core beliefs are. Saying "I'm a practical person" or "I don't see it in my lifetime" can lead into your answers, but are not answers themselves.

I give Julie credit for putting herself out there, and Jan for (hopefully) helping Julie to see she needs to be able to express her principles in a consistent manner.

Jan Helfeld's picture

Thank you for your support and comment

Thank you for your support and comment.

Jan Helfeld

Not "unable..." She is UNWILLING!

She has a view on the questions he asks. BUT SHE IS UNWILLING to give him ammo. She doesn't want to get trapped or cornered like she has seen in other interviews by Jan. And she doesn't want to bring the topic up at this time.

Jan Helfeld's picture

Thank you for your analysis and support.

Thank you for your analysis and support.

Jan Helfeld

Jan Helfeld's picture

criminal gangs would be incentivized to get military hardware

Under anarchism, criminal gangs would be incentivized to get military hardware to extort money from unaffiliated individuals and weak security agencies. Everybody would escalate and create a mini arms race everywhere.

Jan Helfeld

Respectfully: Criminal gangs are already incentivsed to get

military hardware to extort from the unaffiliated individuals.

One gangs's name is "The US government." There are other gangs to. Some of their names are, the EU, the UK government etc. There are sub gangs as well. Some of those gang names are called Republican and Democrat. I'd prefer that gangs don't have the government's big stick and war lords like Obama and Bush don't have access to the "button". With or without government you are going to see gangs or individuals seeking to control/have power over others. After everything we've seen with the election system and how congress and the rest of the gov operates, it's quite staggering to me to see so many even on the DP still clinging to antiquated ideas. Especially you Jan. It is quite surprising that an intellectual person like yourself is still stuck on this minarchism thing. I would have thought someone of your intelligence would have "seen the light" a long time ago in this regard.

Any arguments against anarchism are easily refuted by doing a couple of simple things.

1) Being honest with one's self and taking NAP to its logical ends.

2) LOOK AROUND. The US founders created the most limited government known to man (according to many at least). And credit to them for being so ahead of their time. But look what it turned into. A hybrid form of fascism. And that is pretty much the mold for most governments it seems. To think that some how we could go back to, or even start a government that can't be co-opted by soociopaths is insane. And I don't mean that in a derogatory sense. But the definition fits. We keep trying to prop up these Utopias known as government thinking we are going to get anything different. Over time have things gotten better, yes. But that is not because of government, its gotten better despite government in my opinion. Its gotten better because people have gotten better at understanding the importance of non aggression.

I don't claim to know the answers or to know what kind of social "structure" is needed (if any) to ensure freedom and equality. But it doesn't take much reseach to know that the existing gangs (the US gov and many other governments) have killed far more individuals then all the Warlords and evil mercenaries combined.

Jan, I luv you man. You have some of the most epic interviews of all time. And I will continue to watch and enjoy your honey badger like tenacity with these snakes. But I do hope you can make the transition soon. I hope it doesn't take more removal of rights and more wars for you to see uncorrupted government is a utpian pipe dream. When all the idealist retire.....you are left with the sharks.

Respectfully, nothing you can say or do is going to change the mind of an Anarchist. Once they are down that consistent path there is no turning back. I know of NO real anarchist that ever went back to statism. And no Noam Chomksy is not a real Anarchist imo lol. Maybe they are out there, but I am confident there are more people switching to Anarchism then the other way around. And the more governments fail and destroy, the more people are coming to our side. So my recommendation would be to stop fuelling this infighting among Libertarians and libertarians. I would like to ask you to once again make posts that bring us together.

Jan. there still unanswered questions on the debate post.

I am patiently waiting for you to answer the question.

Séamusín

Dear Jan...

Even serious libertarians do not warm up to you in interviews. And asking the same question 20 times when she already said "no answer" each time is just stubborn and a waste of screen time.

And perhaps instead of blundering your way through an interview where NO QUESTIONS GET ANSWERED, perhaps you should introduce the topic to the interviewee so that they can at least tell you if they plan on answering, so that you don't waste time.

Jan Helfeld's picture

I asked her what she wanted to talk about

Before the interview I asked her what she wanted to talk about. See the start of Part 1 .
PS More than 2 million libertarians or others have seen my Harry Reid interview on you tube. Warm enough?

Jan Helfeld

Warm enough

"During your interviews!"

Not "judging by the view count." I watch your videos Jan, I was subscribed. And is Harry Reid a libertarian?

Because I said "even libertarians (the interviewee) don't warm up to you during the interviews."

HE is lame

Slaves need masters and he is a slave.

He lives as a coward afraid of this tyrant or that, the government is the tyrant that he likes the best but his greater fear that gangs will come and get him is exactly the same as government but to a much lesser degree.

I say dud I am free if a gang comes for me then I have my family my neighbors and any other free people who wills take a stand with me against your gang or government.

So put what ever scary stupid term upon it anarchist or barbarian or what ever, me I will just call it free, I was born free and I intend to live and die free. Not free because I am protected by a gang or a government get out of your little box. Stop advocating cowardly slavery.

sovereign

Jan Helfeld's picture

Good luck protecting your self against a tomahawk missile

Good luck protecting your self, your family and friends against a tomahawk missile. What is your plan when you get the extortion note to pay or be bombed?

Jan Helfeld

Yah my freedom is that important.

I stand up to cowards who join gangs to feel strong and control. What exactly is there to fear about your missile?

So I ask you this. Freedom?

sovereign

Jan Helfeld's picture

The explosion!

The explosion!

Jan Helfeld

Anarchists Arise

Dear anarchists of the DP, there are many of us. Please come out and be vocal on the topic of voluntarism. I have noticed an increase in the number of threads and the overall interest in the topic of anarchism. Please keep this trend going in the same direction and show everyone that we are numerous.

Jan Helfeld's picture

Yes, watch the debate no government vs. limited government

Yes, watch the debate no government vs. limited government and point out any flaw in my reasoning leading to my conclusion that anarchism leads to gang warfare.

Jan Helfeld

All we need

are elected sheriffs and his chosen deputies, all other police forces should be gone. In place of police forces and an unelected chief of police, we need to bring back citizen volunteer state militia's, but that would mean banning all gun regulations as well. So, we have a lot of work ahead of us and that should be our objective.

Jan Helfeld's picture

Thank you for your comment.

Thank you for your comment.

Jan Helfeld

Jan Helfeld's picture

Watch the debate I had with kinsela: no government vs. limited

Watch the debate I had with kinsela: no government vs. limited government

Jan Helfeld

Jan Helfeld's picture

You can see Part 1 Is Borowski an anarchist? at

You can see Part 1 Is Borowski an anarchist? at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT8LhzyTxAE

Jan Helfeld

Aye, there's the rub..

This was also put very well by Nelson Hultberg 'The Golden Mean'(in so many words - incredible book I highly recommend):

The political spectrum we as a culture have been conditioned to accept is totally and intentionally meant to *force* regulatory democracy as the only reasonable moderate center.

That's not the center. They want us to accept that as the center because thats where they get all their money printing, power centralizing rationalization from.

The true political spectrum is from Total Government on the extreme left - and No Government on the extreme right.

The middle is a limited Constitutional Republic.

Both extremes lead to evil. Only fighting to stay in the golden mean between them can we even have a chance at a peaceful, prosperous, just society.

He states his case way more eloquently of course and there's much more to the argument. But yeah ..

Jan Helfeld's picture

thanks for the explanation

thanks for the explanation

Jan Helfeld

Jan Helfeld's picture

Watch no government vs. limited government debate

Watch no government vs. limited government debate with Kinsela.

Jan Helfeld

So the answer to small gangs

So the answer to small gangs committing crimes against people is to have giant gangs committing genocide against entire populations?

Jan, government gangs also have gang warfare, its just we leave off the "gang" part.

As opposed to defense contractors who might strive toward peaceful solutions to confrontations in order to keep their expensive assets and personal from being expended at their own companies' expense; government military is using tax payer extorted money to pay for its bombs and troops and is thusly incentivised to go to war and expend their assets so they can get budget increases.

When small gangs fight, dozens might die, and citizens have a good chance of defending themselves with reasonable household armaments (especially when they band together as per Nevada).

When governments fight, billions die and citizens armed only with rifles are nearly helpless against their sophisticated weaponry.

In the race toward overwhelming firepower, modern governments now have the power to wipe all life off the planet with nuclear war.

Ah, but we want "small" government. I wonder how we can expect to maintain this small controlled government today, given the intellectual capacity of your average voter when the US government was already out of control before Thomas Jefferson was in his grave?

Governments cannot be controlled. They are too dangerous to be allowed to exist. As for "gangs" I think the Nevada Ranch is a good example of people rising up against injustice without the need of any government.

If smaller governments are better, than the smallest form of government is self-governance. So I hope Julie is a anarcho-capitalist. I certainly am.

Jan Helfeld's picture

How can DROS defend us against tyrants with nukes?

How can DROS defend us against tyrants with nukes?

Jan Helfeld