Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Tom "The Surgeon" Woods

If you haven't yet listened to the Tom Woods interview of bleeding heart libertarian, Matt Zwolinski, be sure you do.

Tom is masterful in this interview at slicing away at the contradictions of bleeding heart libertarians, and the deeper he gets into the interview the deeper the more blood is sucked out of them.

It is really quite shocking to understand where the logic of bleeding heart libertarianism ultimately leads.

 -RW

3 comments:

  1. A little off topic, but seeing Tom's name here reminds me that I first heard of EPJ on his show. Kind of a moment of reflection but it's been a long strange trip.

    2007 Liberal watching Democracy now > Ron Paul supporter > Co-worker gave me The creature from Jekyll Island and For a New Liberty > Found Tom Woods watching Mises Institute vids > Became hard core TW show follower where I heard about EPJ...now I come here everyday lol

    Can't wait to listen to this episode in the morning before work, will def check it out!

    ReplyDelete
  2. The questions/answers after the 53:00 mark really hit hard.

    I just can't see my way past Matt Zwolinski calling for a world government in an attempt to right the wrongs of the past. It seems to go hand in hand with minarchism.

    I remember having a brief discussion on moral positivism with someone here before and I haven't thought about it enough yet....but asking any form of government, which itself would exist on a global basis only via NAP violations, to then moderate its NAP violations and become a "fair" mediator/arbitrator in determining not only who is deserving of a B.I.G.(though Matt Zwolinski waffles here) but how everyone else pays for it...is...well...already a failed experiment. We see it everywhere.

    He's calling himself a libertarian that wants a global government, but with minimal interference in our lives, to redistribute a certain amount of wealth on the basis of past crimes.

    Does this really sound like a reasonable way for society to function? For humans to interact with each other?

    Ugh...I just can't abide, to quote The Dude.

    The experiment has been done over and over through out history and it always ends the same. His global "minimal" government would create 10 problems for each one it solves.

    You don't even need another person to accept the NAP to be able to practice it, sure, it would be ideal if everyone could voluntarily accept that premise, but it's not necessary. So, I have trouble getting my head around the idea moral positivism is necessary, especially in the context of the fact that morality itself has subjective elements.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One of the great things about Tom Woods is how respectful he is to his guest, even as he smoothly but surely annihilates his arguments.

    ReplyDelete