Freedomain Radio

We all know that the situation we face as individuals in the world right now is fairly dire. Much of the media has been consolidated and governments large and small are making moves to suppress our freedoms. I would like to believe that the shameless plundering of the politically connected is a sign that the system we know as statism is collapsing, but I am not so optimistic. What I do see is a massive transition occurring; a movement from an aging, diseased system to something fresh and tuned to the perceived desires of the unenlightened masses. Like a snake shedding it's skin, the governments of the world are shedding their old policies and enacting new ones in order to squash dissent. But it's still the same old snake.

What we have here is an opportunity, one that we must seize if we wish to make any forward progress for the foreseeable future. During times of transition governments are highly vulnerable, public opinion is not favorable and people are more receptive to new ideas as the status quo dissolves into the folds of history. The young generation is very active, my generation is genuinely concerned over the state of the world; but they are being hypnotized by the lies brought to them by the mass media. If this continues, it will be a great tragedy. We have a great tool on our side; it is novel and has yet to be corrupted by those in power, but this cannot last. We have the internet, the most ingenious system of communication that we have ever known. As it functions now, it is a nearly perfect example of an anarchic system. Individuals may publish the content they wish to share without worry of censorship (minus a few exceptions). The newspapers were the catalyst that shaped the American revolution, the internet must be the catalyst for the Anarchist revolution.

What we have now is a fractured community of anarchist thinkers, all we need to do is to look around on YouTube to find evidence for this. There are Bakunins, Goldmans, and Rothbards in spades out there; but they are drowned out in the noise. We need to set aside our petty differences; whether we're mutualists, individualist, collectivists, syndicallists, primitivists, or whatever. We all agree on the main goal; the abolishment of the state. That is the topic that we need to bring to the individual, rather than qibbling amongst ourselves over what type of economy we prefer. We are all for the end of sexism, racism, bigotry, abuse, violence, and exploitation. We are all for freedom; and if we truely care enough for freedom then we must put aside our differences and stand up for it.

I propose that we put our individual minds together to develop a cooperative relationship. We can pool our minds and resources together and emerge on the scene as a singular force to oppose the lies of the mass media and the governmental propaganda machine. If we can form a network of content producers and consumers we will stand a greater chance of reaching more people.

Anarchists are on the bleeding edge of the new media. The internet will become the standalone method of broadcast. Radio will be streaming internet audio, television will be on-demand, and print will transition to a digital format for e-book devices. If we don't come together soon as a substantial force, we will eventually be silenced and marginalized by the media conglomerate's total transition to the internet.

Now I know we are not all as gifted in the art of communication as Stefan Molyneux, but we can all contribute in some way to putting content out there that changes minds. Start writing, podcasting, or vlogging. Make music, art, anything; but produce it with the passion for freedom in your heart. Then lets load our collective truth into the mighty barrel of the shotgun of liberty and blast the lying, deceitful, and base purveyors of propaganda away. ARE YOU WITH ME!?!!?

I'm trying, I'm trying!  [:'(]

 The question that comes to my mind is more along the lines of why Stef is such a great communicator. Sure, some of it comes from his time in theater school, but I would surmise that the vast majority of his skill comes from the massive amount of self-work her did in the form of therapy and journaling (he's mentioned in podcasts that he has a 600 page book of just journal entries working through these theories).

What came out of that effort? Well, FDR! (just trying to be empirical here...hehe). This has IMO created an incredible opportunity for achieving real freedom. Stef was going through the process of figuring out his history and living consistently while also trying to invent the language in many ways (ie the MEcosystem). Of course, once the ideas have been discovered, the next person to take the journey doesn't have to go through the same difficulty because they have a reference point. An example of this would be anyone who tries to build upon the theory of relativity doesn't have to start from scratch.

Stef has mentioned that is was approx. a 20 year process for him to get to the point where he could create something like FDR. Now that he has laid out a plethora (can anyone say over 1500 podcasts?!) of examples of how to take shortcuts to get there, it doesn't have to take as long for us to find that real freedom that will truly change the world.

As I think you know (since you replied to my Twitter video), I do some videos from time to time. The reason I do not do them more often is because I really want to be in touch with the best of myself when putting arguments for freedom out on the internet to be seen by all. That way, I know that if someone has a problem with it, it is not my issue (or at least can be pretty confident that its not my issue ).

Writing in blogs, making videos, and making board posts can only help freedom in one way IMHO...it must be absolutely based on the joy of actually experiencing freedom. You can't fake freedom, that much is pretty clear. Easier said than done though, right? Its hard! It all starts with really exploring yourself, finding what you actually want out of this life, and living those values as much as possible. When you do that, it will inevitably be communicated through whatever medium is best for you to express yourself.

So! I'm with you, with the caviat that I don't think its something you can jump into without really having put in the time to figure out what freedom feels like in your own life. And hey, in the end that's much more important anyway. For most of us, all the government can really do is take our money. False positive obligations will bleed your soul dry, and hell, that's never going to communicate freedom.

Enormously well said Phil. I feel inspired! I look forward to viewing your podcasts and reading your blogs.

I agree; the better we know ourselves and the closer we are to achieving and understanding freedom, the better our content will be. There is no better way of improving our communications skill than practice however, I don't believe that we should let fear deter us from speaking out.

The main point of this thread was to gauge how people feel about forming a tight knit network of anarchist/philosophy based content. Like maybe Stefan and Stimulator over at SubMedia TV could form a relationship. Even though we might have different ideas about different topic areas, we all share the same basic goal. Let's focus on the main objective and then bicker about the details later.

Meh. Not really interested. How are we going to get funding for this super cool club you're talking about? Donations? And how can we expect donations if we don't keep the quality at the highest level possible? How can we expect high quality with the major inconsistencies in our collective 'philosophy' between the thinkers you mentioned? The amazing quality of Stef's work and his credibilty stems from his work to keep his conclusions and methodology consistent (with reality!) and working out the flaws. I agree that the internet provides us with a window of time that we must capitalize on to change the world for the better but we can't convince people with a comprimised product. All of this is just my oppinion.

Agitpropist your original post was charged and powerful but it proposes a concept that I believe will not defeat statism as an idea. We already have the argument from morality, we don't need to join up with collectivist. As you said the internet will hear us regardless of the size and power of the corperate media.

Ready to Roll, Baby

It's just a matter of time

In the end they all gonna know what time it is

---

"Gruntin from the Pulpit, as a caged beast in flesh" - The Fan

What a super cool club it would be indeed Johnathan! I agree that your concerns are valid but I don't share your pessimissim for the idea. You're right that talking alone is not going to change things but it is a necessary component of the struggle against the state. The more individuals who understand anarchism, the more potential individuals there will be to take actions which dis-empower the state. We need to get our ideas out there, people need to learn the truth.

Sure we need good quality content, but we don't all have to take it to the level of Stefan. We don't need to change occupations to professional broadcast philosophers; but we can each (those who are so inclined) take the time to write or record our thoughts on society, recent events, or whatever.

I'm not fantasizing about a network that can rival the likes of the present media conglomerates. What I propose is that us content producers develop a relationship under a common, loose knit organization. We can shout louder as a group.

 Well, all "left-libertarians" would be with you. If you're ready to start right now i would look around those type of websites to start recruiting.

-brad spangler/roderick t long

-molinari institute

-agorism.info and other agorist websites

-mutualist websites

-bureaucrash.social ==>agorist and left-libertarian groups (one is called "project meyham" for more "active individuals")

Ideas like yours get me very excited. Sometimes I do literature drops, but not much else.

Start a conversation/post discussing possible strategy?

While joining some sort of a cooperative club is by far not a bad idea I tend to believe that each individual should do what he/she does best in promotion of liberty and that this diversity can be more of a strength than a weakness. The movement would best operate by being exactly what it wants the world to be (be the change you want to see in the world). If you advocate a free market then your movement should be a free market in itself.

That said, I have just finished making a site and am in the process of coming up with first articles, videos and possibly even music for it. The inspiration for this project came at the moment I finished reading "1984" by George Orwell. In that novel, people who were essentially slaves without a slaveowner (slaves to each other) LOVED it that way. They loved it because through a long and ongoing process they completely lost their humanity. All independent thought, romantic relationships, self interested desires.. all gone, or at least severely self-repressed. I realized that tyranny completely relies on dehumanization, the more complete the dehumanization, the more complete the tyranny. The conclusion was obvious. If we want freedom in the world we must promote humanism, specifically the power and potential of a human individual. And that was the idea behind this project. I immediately registered a domain name: DoublePlusHuman.com.

It is a hack on Orwellian NewSpeak. The very word "DoublePlusHuman" would in an Orwellian society be heresy of the highest degree. It is a cry that say NO, I am a human being and I am powerful, and I am gonna change the world, and nothing will stop what I have to say!

That was one and a half year ago. In the first half of this year I spent weeks trying to rediscover myself. I've read a book about finding what I really love to do that I could make a living of. I concluded that it is making web sites with emphasis on philosophy, technology, aesthetics and business. My talents include writing, abstract thinking, debating, diplomacy, honesty, imagination. I can combine all of them into making unique web sites. I don't hire web designers, ad makers nor writers. I envision something and do it all myself, a complete web experience.

And that is my main project now, what I dedicate most of my time to. DoublePlusHuman.com is pursuing self improvement, personal freedom and consequential social change, starting from the bottom and building to the top. First defining yourself, then shatter the shackles (liberate yourself) and then live as a change you want to see in the world. I will write articles, make videos and probably even try making music (I have past experience with electronic music production), all in the name of DoublePlusHuman and freedom that it promotes. I also allow outside contributions of unique content and links to appropriate content from elsewhere. The ultimate desire is to create a powerful medium for spreading the good ideas (individualism, critical thinking, voluntaryism) out there.

I proudly derive inspiration from people like Napoleon Hill, Raymond Kurzweil and to top and complete it all, our very own Stefan Molyneux. I think this is an incredibly explosive combination. It's combining optimistic success philosophy with optimistic technological singularity philosophy and complete theory of personal freedom and voluntaryism. For some reason I get terribly excited about that combo. :D

Anyway.. that's what I'm doing. Further ideas also include creating an online TV station, as an auto-aggregation of DoublePlusHuman related pro-individual, pro-liberty videos (videocasts, propaganda etc.). :)

Cheers

Very well said.  I've always found it interesting that the closer two ideologies are, the more likely their followers are to hate each other and claim that they are polar opposites (example: Communism & Fascism).  So how do we break through to be able to work together on the really important stuff?

What Phil said!!!

lowkey:

Very well said.  I've always found it interesting that the closer two ideologies are, the more likely their followers are to hate each other and claim that they are polar opposites (example: Communism & Fascism).  So how do we break through to be able to work together on the really important stuff?

That might be true and in case of anarchists we really may be fundamentally the same. I think what anarchists mostly differ in is what they theorize may evolve from a society in which all coercion is considered illegitimate. Anarcho capitalists will say a free market. Anarcho syndicalists and anarcho socialists will say some there will be some sort of cooperative communes. It may very well be a combination of all these which is fine so long as nobody is coerced to participate in whichever kind of organization or form of order you come up with.

But minarchists vs. anarchists I think really ARE polar opposite, and conveniently I've just read a good article that sheds some light on that: Anarchists & Minarchists & Socialists, oh, my!. Minarchists support a little bit of violence. Anarchists don't. That's it in a nutshell.

memeverse:

lowkey:

Very well said.  I've always found it interesting that the closer two ideologies are, the more likely their followers are to hate each other and claim that they are polar opposites (example: Communism & Fascism).  So how do we break through to be able to work together on the really important stuff?

That might be true and in case of anarchists we really may be fundamentally the same. I think what anarchists mostly differ in is what they theorize may evolve from a society in which all coercion is considered illegitimate. Anarcho capitalists will say a free market. Anarcho syndicalists and anarcho socialists will say some there will be some sort of cooperative communes. It may very well be a combination of all these which is fine so long as nobody is coerced to participate in whichever kind of organization or form of order you come up with.

I agree completely.  Every time I've tried to picture what an anarchist society would look like, I end up seeing a series of small communities developing within the larger community based on these types of differences  (actually I believe that the same thing would happen under a minarchist solution but with more emphasis on the statist side of the individual community solutions).

But minarchists vs. anarchists I think really ARE polar opposite, and conveniently I've just read a good article that sheds some light on that: Anarchists & Minarchists & Socialists, oh, my!. Minarchists support a little bit of violence. Anarchists don't. That's it in a nutshell.

Once again I agree (even though I still have minarchist tendencies myself ).  Minarchists are statists.  It's a very small state and hopefully a very restricted state but it is a state.  So really not compatible with Anarchist ideals even if we mostly agree on certain core principles like NAP.

Right... but it's impossible to agree with NAP and still support a little bit of coercion. If you really agree with NAP, you're inevitably an anarchist.

Btw, there is a type of anarchists who really are also incompatible with us, which are the anarchist under the mainstream TV definition of "anarchy", people who really just want violent chaos where in the process of protesting the state they also burn private property of other people and incite general rioting. Those certainly aren't the "anarchists" we ought to associate with.

Even if we strictly define "anarchy" as a belief against coercive rulers, it is very easy to just flip it into a belief "against government" and then by portraying government as the only way to have order finally into "against order, for chaos and violence". That's an unfortunate flaw of terms which express an "anti" rather than "pro" attitude.

So what I would suggest is this. Let all true anarchists who believe NO coercion is acceptable whatsoever unite in cooperation, but before picking our allies let's probe each of them and each of us mutually for whether they/we truly believe all coercion is unacceptable, ever. Then let's adopt the term "voluntaryist", one that expresses a "pro" attitude and makes it clear that we are for voluntary interaction (which by definition excludes all coercion).

Thus the new "anarchist club" or "anarchist alliance" becomes a pure Voluntaryist Alliance, a club of people who share one fundamental thing; all are against all forms of coercion, both now and in the desired future (both as means and ends) and all support solely voluntary forms of human interaction.