Unsurprisingly, not all economists agree on how to approach what used to be called “political economy”. Adam Smith in 1776 defined it as “an inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations”. It was understood that the default state of mankind was poverty, so the question was how people become wealthy.
Episode 445 welcomes Anderson Silver to the podcast to chat with Skyler on the following topics: the French language in Canada; the cultural diversity of Montreal; his journey to self-reeducation; publishing 3 books on Stoicism; how Stoicism saved his life; our physical needs versus our mental and spiritual needs; how we each have a spirit, or soul; Stoicism and parenting; the prevalence of unidentified philosophy, or people learning and choosing the wiser course of action; human capacity for good and evil; striving toward clarity in dire situations; emotions make for bad advisors; Vulcanism versus Stoicism and Virtue Ethics; Stoic insight on New Year’s resolutions; and more.
It is both fun and informative to consider lists. To debate the list is a sign that you have engaged with someone who knows what she is talking about. This morning, I asked Google to find Web pages that opined as to whom might be included on a list of the greatest American fictionalists.
A “police officer” is a person who commits the act of policing; of enforcing legislation for political bullies in exchange for stolen money. “Police” is not the person, it is the set of behaviors the person commits. This is why it isn’t “collectivist” to admit there are no good cops.
“History” is a product of human beings. History of the same events and people may be done (will be done) differently from generation to generation. Sometimes, due to advances in archaeology or new discoveries of old texts, history done 500 years after the fact will be better than history done 100 years later. Similarly, changes in dominant ideology might make later history less reliable than earlier historical works. Best to read histories from multiple perspectives and times.
Politics forces everyone along the same path. Legislation dictates things only our ethics and morals should determine. To understand the anger, notice how politics makes a difference of opinion into a life and death struggle. An unnecessary one.
Forcing a needle or a pill into someone’s body without that person’s consent is no different in principle than forcing a penis into someone’s body without that person’s consent.
Coronavirus originated in China, migration brought it here, and suddenly life is terrible. Dogmatic libertarians can keep droning on about “liberty,” but everyone else now plainly sees that strict immigration controls could have stopped this plague – and only strict immigration controls can stop the plagues of the future. This argument sounds so right. What could possibly be wrong with it?
Our society has a sickness. No, not COVID-19, but a lack of real authority. I’m not talking about the chattering heads in State and national capitals, the authoritarians.
Argument against freedom of association constitutes a rejection of ethics. Politics is what you are left with after you reject ethics. It is the systematic violation of consent. It is an endless fight over oppressive control and stolen resources in which association must be either forced or prohibited.