Why did the pig pick up a hammer and what was it trying to get from our host? What should be done with those who violate the principle of non-aggression? Is revenge permissible if it is non-violent? What question should one ask when seeking compensation for damages?
I present to you a fresh video on individual tactics for defusing aggressive violence. The script was written with a hammer to the temple, but everything turned out fine. Enjoy the viewing.
Our team has released a new video. We continue to develop the theme of NAP, and while in the previous episode we limited ourselves to formulating the principle as it applies to today’s realities, now we are considering the question of why, exactly, violence is a poor tool. It would seem that so many people have used it for so many years, so why give it up?
Separately, I really enjoyed the atmospheric gaming inserts in the video — the team has returned to its signature touch, and that makes me very happy.
The next episode will feature a set of recommendations for the unobtrusive implementation of NAP (I already have this script ready), and further, there are planned recommendations regarding obtrusive implementation, a topic I am still exploring.
As I promised in the announcement for the previous video, the new cycle on the Libertarian Band channel will be entirely dedicated to the NAP. While we previously viewed the non-aggression principle as a kind of spontaneous order that characterizes sufficiently viable societies, the new cycle describes the exact opposite approach instead of spontaneous orders: the artificial imposition of the non-aggression principle.
The introductory video explains that leaving social morals to natural selection is too rash, and conscious measures are needed to instill a culture of non-aggression. The next video will be devoted to answering a strange question: what exactly is wrong with aggressive violence, since it is an excellent tool—why be squeamish about it?
The long series of videos about libertarianism on the Libertarian Band channel, for which I wrote the scripts, had a rather blurred ending. The series consisted of sections that—as it happened—contained exactly five videos each. The first section told about libertarianism in general, about different approaches to building a libertarian society, and about ancap as the goal of the movement. The second examined the basic concepts used by libertarianism and their interrelationship. The third discussed the mechanisms operating in a stateless society. Having analyzed law and morality, I wanted to finish by showing how they intertwine when applied to a topic as slippery as children. It was intended that this would conclude the ancap section and shift the focus to agorism.
However, the script was rejected by the rest of the team and completely rewritten, narrowing the topic to abortions alone. Further on, apparently, instead of agorism, an entire series on the NAP will be deployed, but also with a different scriptwriter. And you’re telling me about some split in the LPR. Who even cares about a split in some LPR?
The video turned out well—thorough and rich in factual detail—but it looks somewhat like a book being finished posthumously by the deceased’s heirs. But since I haven’t actually died, I now have the wonderful opportunity to present this video to you.
A video of atypical content has been released on Libertarian band. One of the team members, Alexei Nefedov, also works in a precinct election commission. He decided to join the strike of election commission members and briefly explains the motives why other members of election commissions should follow his example.
For my part, I will add that on one hand, it is useful for as many election commission members as possible to strike, and on the other — it is useful to create as much workload as possible for those remaining, so that they curse everything and regret not joining the strikers. Call the commission to your home; for once, this is allowed for everyone, so we should take advantage of it and let them run around. Are we agorists or what?
In the new video, the Libertarian Band team and I examined morality from the same perspective we previously used to examine law, namely as a spontaneous order, so it is better to watch both videos one after the other. I don’t recall anyone describing morality in this way before, but I hope we managed to provide a sufficiently coherent, consistent, and practically applicable vision of the topic.
And next will be a video on a topic that many libertarian theorists have clashed over — about children. So don’t forget to subscribe to the channel.
A new video has been released on the Libertarian Band channel — about how an old ailment called the state, which humanity simply cannot seem to cure, has led to serious complications in combination with a new viral infection. Not that we are particularly fresh or original; too many have already spoken on this topic. But it is always useful to record your position, otherwise, people might rub it in your face later: “remember, remember how you were calling to beg for money from the state last year? well, now enjoy your hyperinflation!”
This is a special episode that interrupted our series of educational videos on libertarianism, but we will return to the main sequence closer to May.
I recently published a selection of interesting quasi-libertarian channels, and among them was Artyom Seversky’s channel Life with Others. I specifically recommended checking out the series of posts on monetary policy, but digging through a Telegram channel’s history can be inconvenient. Fortunately, the author was kind enough to compile these posts into a single article and post it on the website. At the same time, you can browse the site; there are some interesting things there as well, for example, an article on classical liberalism and libertarianism by the same Eric Mack, whose book we are currently translating.
The Libertarian Band channel, where I write scripts for a series of educational videos, has started its own separate news section and today released a pilot episode with a new charismatic host. Please take a moment to leave a comment about what you think of the presentation to help improve it.
I have also posted the translation drafts of five new chapters of Practical Anarchy by Stephan Molneux. With this, my budget for incentivizing volunteers has completely run out, so I think the flow of drafts will now stall, and I can calmly focus on editing what has already been sent. However, you can contribute more money, and the volunteers will perk up. As a reminder, here is the wallet for financing the translation project: 1AFkD2bazCs5YZBBrSD7HsRMWLmRbg6QBo
This is not an April Fool’s joke: Libertarian Band has finally released the long-awaited video about courts under ancap. I consider it one of our most important works, and I hope the video goes viral at least as well as the old video about ancap itself.
The film crew are absolute legends for managing to produce content at a good pace despite the current situation. Throw some money their way; they’ve earned it.
While creating the script, I leaned heavily on Hayek as interpreted by Zolotorev and, to a lesser extent, Chetvernin, as well as David Friedman and some other sources. I hope I managed to combine these diverse concepts harmoniously and create a truly original product.
I look forward to your likes and comments under the video.
The second episode of the third season of our favorite series by Libertarian band has been released. The third season, dedicated to the mechanisms of a stateless society, began with the criteria for the stability of anarchy. We examined several of them, chose one, and settled firmly on it. Bitcoin is an excellent illustration of how this criterion works.
We briefly went through the history of money and described why Bitcoin emerged, why it was created in this specific way, and why it is an excellent tool for a stateless society, without which, of course, things would have been significantly more difficult for us in the wonderful Ancapistan of the future.
