Fallacy Friday with an Anarchist Episode 4 – Christians must submit to government? Pt. 2


Logical Anarchy Today – Fallacy Friday with an Anarchist Episode 4 – Christians must submit to government? Pt. 2

This is part two of Jon tackling the fallacy that Christians must completely submit to their governments. This is a common message preached form the pulpit and it is riddled with fallacies. So join Jon, you should enjoy this episode even if you completely disagree with the Christian religion.

Support the show on patreon! You can find a transcript of this episode for supporting listeners there!

You can also support the show at no extra cost to you, by using our link to Amazon to make your purchases!

You can add this podcast to your own podcast subscription app by using the following address
http://shoutengine.com/FallacyFridaywithanAnarchist.xml


6 Reasons Why Rejecting the NAP is Stupid

I have been seeing this article posted by Neo-Conservative Douche-Face Austin Petersen. You know that guy that pretends to be a libertarian but actually loves government and and calls anyone that disagrees with him a “Beta male”? He runs that crappy site “The Statist Republic”… Wait, it’s actually called “The Libertarian Republic.” It’s that place that is totally bogged down with ads, click bait, and other such garbage but it’s passed off as a legitimate source of political and economic opinion. Ringing any bells? Well, this article from that cesspool has been floating around and it is causing a lot of damage. I’ve seen many “libertarian” outlets re-posting it and agreeing with it. Quite honestly, I am sick and tired of statism sneaking into libertarian thought under the guise of “pragmatism”. Sometimes it gets the point where I want nothing to do with the name “libertarian” because I see it going the way of the word “liberal”. It’s being taken over by statists.

I don’t know what the deal is with this. Do these philosophic dregs seek to gain popularity by offering some form of “libertarian thought” that is about as “libertarian” as “liberals” are “classical liberals”? If this movement is to gain ground and keep momentum, we need to keep the philosophy pure and without logical inconsistencies. If we don’t, our movement is destined to go the way of “Classical Liberalism”.

1. Parent’s Don’t Have the Right to Starve Their Children

So let us tackle this poor excuse for logical argumentation. The first point made is that somehow, the NAP allows parents to starve their children so long as they do not keep their children from finding food elsewhere… They also argue that anyone that “trespasses” on the parents property to feed the child is subject to having “defensive force” used against them. WHAT?! This is a clear strawman if I ever did see one. The author is clearly and purposefully distorting the views held by those that believe in the NAP. Let us use an example to show how this argument is pulled completely out of the author’s rectal cavity.

Scenario 1: You wander into my house, I tell you to leave. Perhaps I point a weapon at you or I simply raise my voice. You back out of my house and leave my property. No harm done.

Scenario 2: I invite you on my private plane with me. After we are about 3,000 feet in the air, I accuse you of trespassing and tell you to leave. You reach for a parachute but I say “that’s stealing” and then I throw you out of the plane to your death.

Which scenario is most like the scenario described by the author of this idiotic article? If you said scenario 2, good job. Parents, when engaging in the risky behavior of sex without contraception, and then abuse the children that come about by their risky behavior, are like the psychotic man inviting people onto his private jet and then hurling them out of it because they are “trespassing” (rape is a different scenario all together which leads to the whole “abortion” debate which is too big for here, but I don’t think the author was referring to this). Children rely on their parents for their very lives, so to “invite” a child into existence and then abuse that child, that had no say or control in coming into existence in the first place, is an act of aggression. This should be common sense and I shouldn’t have to explain that.

2. Death to Litter Bugs?

My God, this person is a moron. They argue that since pollution is an act that violates the NAP, we must therefore kill all litter bugs. Again… WHAT?! Stephan Molyneux gives us the” YAD principle” in his own refutation of this idiotic article. You can click here to see it. The “YAD” principle stands for “You’re a Dick” meaning, “yeah, they littered on your property, but you’re a dick for blowing the guys head off because of that”. This of course means that, should this litter bug killer come to trial, no one would side with him and he would most definitely be punished for his grotesque misuse of “defensive force”. Again, this should be common sense.

3. Hurt Feelings are Aggression

I feel like I am getting less intelligent with each point in this “argument”. Notice they offer no quotation from advocates of the NAP. They just assume that those of us that advocate for it are like the whiny leftist feminists that have “safe rooms” on college campuses. This is just a flat out lie. The NAP is clear that a person’s body and physical property are the only things that can actually be violated. Everything else is a matter of preference, including how gentle I want to be with your feelings.

4. Keep Aiming That Gun At Me, I’m Still Going To Stand Here

Guys, I don’t know if I can keep going. This author argues that the rest of world does not acknowledge the NAP so we shouldn’t either. That’s the gist of this point. Seriously. That’s like saying everyone is putting electric egg beaters down their throats and turning them on, so we should too. I mean, come on, we have to have a “philosophy that conforms to reality” right? The idea that the collective wisdom dictates absolutes is a completely idiotic and dangerous philosophy. I recall a certain regime pulling that one circa 1933…

They then us a David Friedman argument:

“what if I merely run the risk of shooting you by putting one bullet in a six-shot revolver, spinning the cylinder, aiming it at your head, and squeezing the trigger? What if it is not one bullet but five?”

Hey guys, let’s take the most idiotic and extreme example to argue our completely idiotic idea. Why would you put a gun in someones face and then say, “I’m not committing violence against you unless I pull the trigger and a bullet happens to come out and burrow in your brain.” Refer to the “You’re a Dick” principle mentioned above. If you point a gun at someone for no reason, and they maybe disarm you and hurt you in the process, are you seriously going to try and say you are the victim? Pointing a gun at someone is nothing like the potential danger we put each other in when we are driving on the road or anything else like that. To say otherwise is to clearly ignore common sense and logic in order to prove a point you know is fallacious. Just admit that you like statism and you are not a libertarian. That is just so much easier to swallow than completely idiotic arguments.

No only that what what is the purpose of pointing a gun at someone’s face? Often times when we are put in mutual danger, both parties have voluntarily put themselves there for some purpose. Take driving as an example. I know driving is dangerous but I put myself in that environment because I value other things more than safety at that moment. So what is the purpose both parties have for both pointing a gun at someone and voluntarily allowing a loaded gun to be put in your face? If it’s just to make a stupid point about how much you love government, just come out and say that.

5. Keep Printing Money Fed!

I just have to get through this one and one more, and I’m done. I hope you guys appreciate what I do for you. Consider entering Amazon through our link or supporting us on patreon. We would really appreciate it.

They say that fraud is not aggression… Let that sink in. Taking your property under false pretenses is not aggression. Am I reading an article on The Onion or is this guy just a complete moron? I’m going to go with moron. They then say that inflation is aggression, or is it? They accuse us of not clearly defining this aspect. Well, lets see here. If the government points guns at everyone and forces them to use a fraudulent system, is that aggression? It sure sounds like it. It’s not that no one clearly defined this, it’s that the author is stupid.

6. Despotic Definition of Property Rights

Yes. Last one. This was draining guys.

The author again works in extremes. Person A is walking along and then person B jumps out of the bushes and clubs them on the head. They then argue that whoever is in the right depends on who’s property it occurred on. Again refer to the YAD principle mentioned above. If someone stumbles onto your property and you immediately use the maximum amount of force to “defend” yourself, everyone realizes that you are no longer actually defending yourself. I can’t believe this has to be argued or is up for debate.

As I said, I am sick of statism entering this movement under the guise of pragmatism. You cannot gut everything that makes libertarian thought unique and continue to call yourself a “libertarian” in the process. The idiots at the Libertarian Republic are neo-conservatives masquerading as libertarians and lovers of liberty. The fact that they want to argue that there are some cases when you have to initiate violence for no reason, shows that they never understood this philosophy in the first place.

On Austin’s FB profile he says the following:

“Not only is aggression not a bad thing, aggression can actually be a good thing like in sports, hunting, war, and mating. Oh, that’s not what you meant? You mean, not everyone defines things as you want them to? Now you see the problem.”

Is the aggression in sports the same kind of aggression we are talking about here? We are talking about defending yourself because you have involuntarily been thrown into a violent situation. Combative and “aggressive” sports are not actually “violent” because all parties involved have voluntarily put themselves there. Austin isn’t a complete idiot. He knows what he is doing. He is purposefully twisting logic and reason to suite his needs, and that’s to make more money with his click bait ad whore site I’d say.

Fallacy Friday with an Anarchist Podcast – Episode 3, “Christians must submit to Government? Pt 1”


Logical Anarchy Today – Fallacy Friday with an Anarchist Episode 3 – Christians must submit to government? Pt. 1

In this episode, Jon tackles part 1 of 2 on a controversial topic that Christians must support their governments. The history and theology doesn’t add up to that though. The idea that Christians must be good patriots is a statist lie.

Check out this article on Why Christians should use bitcoin.

Anarchism and Christianity

Support the show on patreon! You can find a transcript of this episode for supporting listeners there!

You can also support the show at no extra cost to you, by using our link to Amazon to make your purchases!

You can add this podcast to your own podcast subscription app by using the following address
http://shoutengine.com/FallacyFridaywithanAnarchist.xml


Xenophobic Rightwingers


You have to love the xenophobic nature of “conservatives” that “love capitalism.” Enjoy.

The American people have demanded for years that the fed government faithfully enforce our nation’s immigration laws. End #SanctuaryCities

— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) October 20, 2015

@SenTedCruz hey Ted, closed borders a socialist policy. If you truly favored a free market, you wouldn’t have a problem with open borders.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 20, 2015

@grinder881 they absolutely do. A free economy is happy to have workers move freely. Read a book.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 I recommend anything by Ludwig Von Mises. Particularly “liberalism”.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon SIR I have a BBA, I have read plenty of books. I’m all for importing talented workers, BUT I don’t want illegals in my country

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 “There cannot be the slightest doubt that migration barriers diminish the productivity of human labor.” -Ludwig Von Mises

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Capitalism is about voluntary exchange. But is it capitalism if you cannot exchange with certain people?

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Imagine how badly productivity would hurt if barriers between states here were as draconian as national borders.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon Do U have any clue how porous on borders are that are allowing all these criminals into the USA that rape/kill/rob our citizens

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 wait a minute. Every single one is a rapist and killer? That is absolutely false.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon Whomever this guy is didn’t take into account that illegal aliens who BREAK THE LAW crossing the border kill the legal citizens

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 legal citizens kill other citizens. In fact, violent crime is at an all time low since 93. You’re scared of the boodeyman.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 actually homicides are at an all time low. Just clarification.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon I NEVER said all illegals R rapist & killers, but without a doubt 100% of illegals are BREAKING the law of the USA

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 again, imagine if the borders between states were as strict. It would hurt economic activity.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon https://t.co/I3yM6WwSCL Should this lady be scared?

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Again, American citizens do this to each other. What’s your point?

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon My point is this crime NEVER had to happen or would have happened 2 THIS lady if USA secured its border & didn’t allow illegals

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 you sound like a liberal saying “if we ban guns, those mass shootings would never have happened.”

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon SIR I’m NOT a liberal whatsoever.It’s really inexplicable & quite befuddling why U think its OK 4 illegals to kill USA citizens

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 nice strawman. When did I say it was ok to kill? Try refuting what I actually say.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 let’s get at this another way. Who does coming here “illegaly” hurt? Just the act of coming here, no physical crime yet.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 by physical crime I mean violent crime we both can agree is wrong.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Changing where you live does not physically harm another person or their property therefore no “illegal” activity as occured.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 A crime only occurs if you harm someone else’s person or property. You are locking people up before a crime occurs.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon If you are trespassing that is a crime.

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Oh, so if I own my own property and in turn rent it out to a “Illegal” immigrant, they are still trespassing?

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon Illegals coming here puts the USA further into debt. A huge percentage of illegals are put on welfare/food stamps.

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Well welfare shouldn’t exist in the first place. It’s socialism.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon Because a person owns property & doesn’t want trespassers illegally on his land doesn’t mean he’s a liberal.

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 So keep people off your property. You have no right to tell others who they can and can’t have on theirs.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon If U don’t want to ban people’s movements then let all the illegals into your house. Make sure your doors are unlocked.

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 My house isn’t big enough. It doesn’t make economic sense for me. But if does for someone else, more power to them.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon I agree w/ U on welfare, however U don’t think that democrats are willingly giving people all this welfare to get future votes

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Voting and government are pointless. I’m anarcho capitalist. I don’t believe anyone has the right to rule over others.

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon If U know they are illegals & you aide them then you are helping a criminal.

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon If you are aiding & abetting criminals then you yourself are a criminal.

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Again, no true law has been broken if there is no victim. Who is the victim in illegal immigration?

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015

@AnarchyEcon SIR I respectfully say that this is going absolutely nowhere & I’m done having this dialogue. I will NOT respond. Please stop!

— Mark Reif (@grinder881) October 21, 2015

@grinder881 Don’t be mad, be mad the people that feed you illogical political rhetoric. I take it you have never encountered an AnCap before

— Logical Anarchy (@AnarchyEcon) October 21, 2015


Why Christians Should Embrace Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies

Christianity used to have a long and respected history of defying government (and a less admirable history of being it’s tool). There are characters from the Bible and people after, that remained skeptical of government and government’s manipulation of currency. What happened?

Juan de Mariana took on the Spanish monarchy and even defended the concept of regicide (the killing of the king) for the sake of sound money and liberty.1 He would go one to write many treatises on economic thought and sound currency. Samuel warned (in 1 Samuel 8:10-18) the Hebrews of how a king would steal from them and oppress them. He encouraged the the ancient Hebrews to stay in their anarchic state.2 Leo Tolstoy was an anarchist himself who said: “Government is an association of men who do violence to the rest of us.”3 How did the Christian religion, a religion who’s true believers and followers were always at odds with the State (and sometimes martyred by it), become the convoluted cauldron of hate and warmongering that it is today? It is actually very disgraceful to see “devout” men and women from both the left and the right act as instruments of, and play party to, “an association of men who do violence to the rest of us.”

As an anarchist and a Christian myself, I believe in agorism. What is agorism? Agorism is a political philosophy that advocates for a society where all exchanges are voluntary by counter-economics. What is meant by “counter-economics” is all of the human actions, that do not harm others, that are made illegal by the state. It is a form of peaceful protest. A way to bring about change without violence. There is nothing more in line with the teachings of Jesus than that I think. One point of contention with Christians is the idea that Jesus said they must pay taxes. Mark 12:13-17 is often cited by preachers as “proof” that Jesus commanded us to pay taxes.2 Now, I have tackled this in an old article already. Check it out here if you are interested. Not only that but episodes 3 and 4 of “The Fallacy Friday Podcast” will be about Christianity and Anarchism (which is why I am writing this).

For this argument though, I want to assume that these preachers are correct. There is still a way to avoid the instituted plunder of the state even if we assume that taxation is in line with Christian theology. How you may ask (or maybe you don’t care, either way, good for you)? Jesus says, in his famous line, “Render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and give to God that which is God’s.” It seems pretty clear cut. But lets dissect this a bit. Prior to this line Jesus asks to see a coin. He asks “Who’s image is on this coin?” To which the people asking the question reply “Caesar’s”. It’s Caesar’s own minted coin so there for “it belongs to him” (or so the statist theologian would say). Again assuming this is true, what happens if you use a currency that does not have Caesar’s face plastered all over it? It no longer “bears his image” therefore does it belong to him? This is where bitcoin comes in.

Bitcoin can be a very confusing subject to navigate. The basics are relatively simple to understand though. The CoinDesk site explains it best: “Bitcoin is a form of digital currency, created and held electronically. No one controls it. Bitcoins aren’t printed, like dollars or euros – they’re produced by people, and increasingly businesses, running computers all around the world, using software that solves mathematical problems.”4 The solving of these mathematical problems is called “mining”. CoinDesk goes on to say “bitcoin’s most important characteristic, and the thing that makes it different to conventional money, is that it is decentralized. No single institution controls the bitcoin network. This puts some people at ease, because it means that a large bank can’t control their money.”4

It is decentralized. Caesar had a mint. Our modern Caesar, the US government, has the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve controls and monopolizes our money and the government, under threat of force, “encourages” us to use their currency. This benefits them at the expense of us because inflation becomes a “hidden tax” we as citizens must pay. Bitcoin is a way out. It is not regulated by government and is a market answer to a problem we face everyday. That problem being that our money, the US dollar, sucks. Not only that, but it is the only form of currency we can pay our taxes in. But this is a blessing in disguise. Bitcoin is a currency, decentralized and without Caesar’s image on it, that we as citizens can use for many everyday transactions. This is agorism in action.

Through Bitcoin, which keeps anonymity, Christians (and everyone else) can earn money, pay bills and do a host of other economic activities without the government knowing. The government has no right to know either, it’s your business, your money and it doesn’t have Caesar’s face on it. It doesn’t belong to him. So even if we assume that Christ commanded his followers to pay taxes, we have a new monetary system unavailable to the Christians of Jesus’ time. This means we do not have to fall prey to the predatory banking currently propped up by the US government and it’s crony friends. Bitcoin can be used to at least protect part of your wealth that you worked hard to earn (and government did nothing to earn a percentage of).

If you would like to join the Bitcoin community, I would encourage you to try coinbase. You can use our link here to do so. Otherwise, do some research and figure out which wallet is best for you. I also believe that Dark Wallet has a lot potential as well.

1. Woods, Tom. “Ep. 493 Juan De Mariana: Defender of Regicide, Ferocious Foe of Inflation, and Great Economist | Tom Woods.” Tom Woods. Tom Woods18, 18 Sept. 2015. Web. 14 Oct. 2015. <http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-493-juan-de-mariana-defender-of-regicide-ferocious-foe-of-inflation-and-great-economist/>.

2. “Zondervan NIV Study Bible Hardcover – 1 Oct 2002.” Zondervan NIV Study Bible: Amazon.co.uk: Kenneth L. (Edt) Barker, Not Applicable (Na ), Donald W. (ed Burdick: 9780310929550: Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2015.

3. Tolstoy, Leo. The Kingdom of God Is within You; Or, Christianity Not as a Mystical Doctrine but as a New Life Conception. London: Walter Scott, 1894. Print.

4. “What Is Bitcoin? – CoinDesk.” CoinDesk RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2015. <http://www.coindesk.com/information/what-is-bitcoin/>.

If you enjoy these podcasts and articles, please support us on Patreon!