Category Archives: Libertarianism

Following the cancellation of Fox Business Networks The Independents, its libertarian host Kennedy re-emerged Monday with an eponymous nightly show on the same network. The show promises a quirky blend of politics, sports, music (Kennedys a former MTV VJ), and allusions to hilarious nights of binge-drinking with other political pundits.

Kennedy sat down with Mediaite for a quick Q&A on what she learned from her first political show experience, what she hopes Kennedy will accomplish, and why libertarianism is growing considerably, especially on cable news.

Enjoy below:

Since Mediaites readership is full of people who religiously watch cable news, explain to them why your new show is awesome and they should watch it.

Its awesome because its got a lot of lively interesting conversation, and its liberty-minded. Its whatever your favorite things were about the 90s we concentrate them all in one place.

So basically its a big melting pot of Gen-X sentiment and libertarianism is awesome? So its not just a bunch of people who are gold hoarders [a popular libertarian stereotype]?

Uh, I love gold hoarders. I love survivalists. But you dont have to hoard gold to love the show. Thats the nice thing about it. If you hoard gold, youll be delighted. And if youre a fan of other precious metals or paper currency, youll be equally happy. If your moms best friends love shiny things, theyll be right at home.

The new show has a similar vibe to E!s The Soup, mostly because you riff on all these things happening in the news, with a deadpan sort of mockery. Is that intentional?

Well, there was no Soup discussion when we were putting the show together, but I do love Joel McHale. Ive been a fan of his for a long time. I love his delivery, I adore his acting. I think hes really good. But what weve been trying to do is be true to ourselves and let the rest follow.

Go here to see the original:
Yelling at People Is Kinda Boring: Kennedy on Her New Show and the State of Cable News

Libertarianism is one of the main philosophical positions related to the problems of free will and determinism, which are part of the larger domain of metaphysics.[1] In particular, libertarianism, which is an incompatibilist position,[2][3] argues that free will is logically incompatible with a deterministic universe and that agents have free will, and that, therefore, determinism is false.[4] Although compatibilism, the view that determinism and free will are, in fact compatible, is the most popular position on free will amongst professional philosophers,[5] metaphysical libertarianism is discussed, though not necessarily endorsed, by several philosophers, such as Peter van Inwagen, Robert Kane, Robert Nozick,[6]Carl Ginet, Hugh McCann, Harry Frankfurt, E.J. Lowe, Alfred Mele, Roderick Chisholm, Daniel Dennett,[7]Timothy O'Connor, Derk Pereboom, and Galen Strawson.[8]

The term "libertarianism" in a metaphysical or philosophical sense was first used by late Enlightenment free-thinkers to refer to those who believed in free will, as opposed to determinism.[9] The first recorded use was in 1789 by William Belsham in a discussion of free will and in opposition to "necessitarian" (or determinist) views.[10][11] Metaphysical and philosophical contrasts between philosophies of necessity and libertarianism continued in the early 19th century.[12]

Metaphysical libertarianism is one philosophical view point under that of incompatibilism. Libertarianism holds onto a concept of free will that requires the agent to be able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances.

Accounts of libertarianism subdivide into non-physical theories and physical or naturalistic theories. Non-physical theories hold that the events in the brain that lead to the performance of actions do not have an entirely physical explanation, and consequently the world is not closed under physics. Such interactionist dualists believe that some non-physical mind, will, or soul overrides physical causality.

Explanations of libertarianism that do not involve dispensing with physicalism require physical indeterminism, such as probabilistic subatomic particle behavior a theory unknown to many of the early writers on free will. Physical determinism, under the assumption of physicalism, implies there is only one possible future and is therefore not compatible with libertarian free will. Some libertarian explanations involve invoking panpsychism, the theory that a quality of mind is associated with all particles, and pervades the entire universe, in both animate and inanimate entities. Other approaches do not require free will to be a fundamental constituent of the universe; ordinary randomness is appealed to as supplying the "elbow room" believed to be necessary by libertarians.

Free volition is regarded as a particular kind of complex, high-level process with an element of indeterminism. An example of this kind of approach has been developed by Robert Kane,[13] where he hypothesises that,

In each case, the indeterminism is functioning as a hindrance or obstacle to her realizing one of her purposesa hindrance or obstacle in the form of resistance within her will which has to be overcome by effort.

At the time C. S. Lewis wrote Miracles,[14]quantum mechanics (and physical indeterminism) was only in the initial stages of acceptance, but still Lewis stated the logical possibility that, if the physical world was proved to be indeterministic, this would provide an entry (interaction) point into the traditionally viewed closed system, where a scientifically described physically probable/improbable event could be philosophically described as an action of a non-physical entity on physical reality. He states, however, that none of the arguments in his book will rely on this.

Nozick puts forward an indeterministic theory of free will in Philosophical Explanations.[6]

When human beings become agents through reflexive self-awareness, they express their agency by having reasons for acting, to which they assign weights. Choosing the dimensions of one's identity is a special case, in which the assigning of weight to a dimension is partly self-constitutive. But all acting for reasons is constitutive of the self in a broader sense, namely, by its shaping one's character and personality in a manner analogous to the shaping that law undergoes through the precedent set by earlier court decisions. Just as a judge does not merely apply the law but to some degree makes it through judicial discretion, so too a person does not merely discover weights but assigns them; one not only weighs reasons but also weights them. Set in train is a process of building a framework for future decisions that we are tentatively committed to.

Continue reading here:
Libertarianism (metaphysics) - Wikipedia, the free ...

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) The transcript of a recent speech Salon.com founder David Talbot made at Stanford University has spurred some lengthy and heated comment threads.

In it, Talbots paints a grim picture of the future of the City of Love. He chronicles the rise of Silicon Valley, from its birth as the incubator for the technology that helped fight the Cold War, to its present day form a breeding ground for the selfish libertarianism of todays baby tech moguls.

Talbot decries the triumph of techno-capitalism, the machine mentality that all social problems can be engineered away.

He describes his own neighborhood Bernal Heights once home to filmmakers, cartoonists, counterculture artists and community organizers who lived side-by-side with blue-collar workers and Latina grandmothers. Now, he says it is overrun by Teslas and Beamers transformed into what one real estate website crowned the hottest zip code in town.

Talbots rant is not new. Complaints about the changing face of San Francisco and the gentrification of working-class neighborhoods are almost mundane, so common is the practice of urban reclamation and redevelopment. The difference, perhaps, is to hear it from the mouth of someone who admits to having benefited enormously from the wonders of the digital revolution. Sadly, Talbot feels that revolution has grown old and corrupt.

In the end, Talbot challenges his Stanford audience, Are you interested in going public, or in serving the public youre either part of the problem or part of the solution which one are you, a Stanford dick? Or are you different.

Judging from the comments, articles, and reactions to Talbots speech, no one is indifferent. They run the gamut. One commenter wrote, Grow a pair and move on already. The person who wrote that, said it right after another who claims he was reading Talbot as, my wife and I are being evicted from our home of twenty years by a young tech couple. Theres finger pointing at the finger pointers, and they all point back.

Perhaps the ensuing conversations about Talbots speech are the best part of his rant. Check it out:

READ: Talbots Speech Don't Be a Stanford Asshole.

See original here:
Salon.com Founders Speech Blasts His New Bernal Heights Techie Neighbors For Ruining The Vibe

[This article is adapted from a talk presented at the Houston Mises Circle, January 24, 2015.]

Presumably everyone in this room, or virtually everyone, is here today because you have some interest in the topic of secession. You may be interested in it as an abstract concept or as a viable possibility for escaping a federal government that Americans now fear and distrust in unprecedented numbers.

As Mises wrote in 1927:

The situation of having to belong to a state to which one does not wish to belong is no less onerous if it is the result of an election than if one must endure it as the consequence of a military conquest.

Im sure this sentiment is shared by many of you. Mises understood that mass democracy was no substitute for liberal society, but rather the enemy of it. Of course he was right: nearly 100 years later, we have been conquered and occupied by the state and its phony veneer of democratic elections. The federal government is now the putative ruler of nearly every aspect of life in America.

Thats why were here today entertaining the audacious idea of secession an idea Mises elevated to a defining principle of classical liberalism.

Its tempting, and entirely human, to close our eyes tight and resist radical change to live in Americas past.

But to borrow a line from the novelist L.P. Hartley, The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there. The America we thought we knew is a mirage; a memory, a foreign country.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is precisely why we should take secession seriously, both conceptually as consistent with libertarianism and as a real alternative for the future.

Does anyone really believe that a physically vast, multicultural, social democratic welfare state of 330 million people, with hugely diverse economic, social, and cultural interests, can be commanded from DC indefinitely without intense conflict and economic strife?

Read the original:
Secession Begins at Home

This morning, Politico's Ken Vogel and Tarini Parti reported that KentuckySenator Rand Paul had underperformed at the past week's Koch brothers showcase. (More officially, it was a gathering of the donors who supported the Koch network of pressure groups, and who finally saw returns in 2014.) Many, including Bloomberg Politics' Michael Bender and Julie Bykowicz, had reported that Florida Senator Marco Rubio did himself the most good. Vogel and Parti reported on a "straw poll" that determined the extent of Paul's problem, conducted by Frank Luntz in a breakout session.

"Kentucky Sen. Rand Paulwho received the least enthusiastic response from donors during a Sunday nightforum of prospective candidatesthat also featured Rubio and Texas Senator Ted Cruzfinished last in Luntzs poll," they reported.

That was how a source recalled it, but Luntz disagreed.

Anybody who thinks they're loyal, faithful Republicans have not talked to them for more than three minutes.

Joe Scarborough

"It wasn't a poll," wrote Luntz over e-mail. "It was a random question. It doesn't deserve any attention. It was only to a few people."

Luntz just asked some donors who showed up to his session who'd impressed them most. Yet the "few" apparently amounted to more than 100 people; in the wake of the event, not many people are following Luntz's distinction between an actual focus group and a quick read of the room. It doesn't change the basic truth that Paul did not blow away the donors, despite a steady campaign to portray himself as the natural choice of libertarians.

Should he be? Like Paul, the Kochs are forever surprising political observers who don't know how to classify libertarians."Anybody who thinks they're loyal, faithful Republicans have not talked to them for more than three minutes," said Joe Scarborough of the Kochs after speaking at the conference. "They have no use for these people who want to go out and have these bloody battles on social issues...they don't want the federal government in your pocketbook. They also don't want them in your bedroom. I think they're like most Americans."

http://youtu.be/A4rQuB4FZlc

That's exactly the way Paul presents himself. If he failed to impress the Koch summit, there are two reasons. One is that he didn't chew into the questions the way that Rubio or Cruz did. On foreign policy, Paul made a defense of free trade, saying that"opening up China made us less likely to go to war," and that opening up Cuba worked because "we tried isolationism for 50 years." He got into a long dialogue about taxes that was unlikely to excite anybody. He made a pitch for his idea of blocking big government contractors from lobbying, which, according to people like Scarborough, sounded like a hit against the "crony capitalism" the Kochs opposed.

Go here to read the rest:
Bloomberg the Company

Is Capitalism Compatible With Libertarianism?
This is a non-profit channel. Please like, subscribe, and share as your way of showing support. Featuring Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Mikhail Bakunin, Pyotr Kropotkin, Noam Chomsky.

By: Reich-Wing Watch

Go here to read the rest:
Is Capitalism Compatible With Libertarianism? - Video

Jan 28, 2015 8:28am

By MICHAEL FALCONE (@michaelpfalcone)

NOTABLES

THE ROUNDTABLE

ABCs RICK KLEIN: Indiana Gov. Mike Pence drew headlines this week for his odd if not just plain ill-conceived state news service, sparking enough Pravda and Kim Jong Un Tweets to power a Seth Rogen movie. But the most consequential thing Pence may have done this week, at least when it comes to 2016, is the deal he cut to expand Medicaid using funds available under Obamacare. If Pence winds up running, his move will become a major point of contention; if he doesnt, hes given some other key candidates a strong talking point, maybe even precious cover. This is shaping up as one of the biggest fault lines inside the Republican presidential race. Possible candidates will run the range of outright rejection of Obamacare funds (Jindal, Perry), through special state-specific deals for some expansion (Walker, and now Pence), right up to accepting the money and the coverage expansion that was designed as a key piece of President Obamas healthcare overhaul (Christie, Kasich). And, of course, well have the senators in the field, who can and almost surely will take the clean stance that any acceptance of Obamacare funds is abetting a fatally flawed program.

ABCs SHUSHANNAH WALSHE: Scott Walkers launch of his Our American Revival political committee Tuesday could not have happened at a better time, fresh off his well-received speech last weekend at the Iowa Freedom Summit. Whether the roll-out was long planned or not, using the momentum from his star turn is a perfect way to keep the 2016 story on him over his potential opponents. Its a 527 not a leadership PAC, like possible rivals Jeb Bush and Chris Christie have recently set up, but he will still be able to use the funds to travel to early states or donor meetings. And speaking of donors, like a PAC, it gives a spot for early supporters to place funds ahead of a full-fledged campaign.

ON THE ROAD WITH POTUS

FIRST LADYS VISIT TO SAUDI ARABIA SENDS STRONG MESSAGE ABOUT WOMEN. In a country where women have few rights, First Lady Michelle Obama yesterday seemed to lead by example. There she was, standing side-by-side with her husband as he stepped off Air Force One in Riyadh Tuesday, where, during a brief visit, the president offered condolences for the recent death of King Abdullah and met with his successor, King Salman. According to ABCs MARY BRUCE, the first lady accompanied the president throughout the stay, embodying some of the reforms that her husband is pushing the country to adopt. Wearing pants and her head uncovered, Mrs. Obama stood dutifully beside her husband as he shook hands with the Saudi delegation on the airport tarmac Tuesday morning and again at Erga Palace on the outskirts of Riyadh. Due to the cultural constraints, the first lady purposely stood slightly behind her husband and waited for a gesture to be made to her by the men in the receiving line. If one of the men initiated a handshake she returned, if not then she simply smiled or nodded politely. http://abcn.ws/1JC1iqO

The rest is here:
Scott Walker Steps Out

Left Libertarianism VS Right Libertarianism
Left Libertarianism is a fraud. It is oxymoronic and contradictory and has no place in a true libertarian society. Right Libertarianism on the other hand is ...

By: LibertarianUniverse

Originally posted here:
Left Libertarianism VS Right Libertarianism - Video

HOUSTON Rand Paul wants to lead the United States. On Saturday in Texas, his father was speaking at a conference about how to leave it.

"A lot of times people think secession, they paint it as an absolute negative," said former representative Ron Paul (R-Tex.). After all, Paul said, the American Revolution was a kind of secession. "You mean we should have been obedient to the king forever? So it's all in the way you look at it."

This weekend was a crucial one for Rand Paul, the Republican senator from Kentucky and undeclared candidate for the presidency. He was in California, trying to line up donors at an opulent retreat organized by the billionaire Koch brothers.

At the same time, his father retired after 12 terms in Congress and three presidential runs was in the ballroom of an airport hotel here, the final speaker at "a one-day seminar in breaking away from the central state." He followed a series of speakers who said that the U.S. economy and political establishment were tottering and that the best response might be for states, counties and even individuals to break away.

"The America we thought we knew, ladies and gentlemen, is a mirage. It's a memory. It's a foreign country," Jeff Deist, Ron Paul's former press secretary and chief of staff, told the group. "And that's precisely why we should take secession seriously."

The contrasting scenes this weekend illuminate the odd situation of the Pauls as the 2016 campaign season begins. They are a father and son tied together but running in opposite directions.

Rand, 52, is contemplating a presidential run at its heart, an act of optimism. He is moderating some hard-line positions and introducing himself to donors and voters. At the same time, Ron, 79, has embraced a role as libertarianism's prophet of doom, telling his supporters that the United States is headed for catastrophes and might actually need catastrophes to get on the right track

Which puts Rand Paul in the unusual position of trying to win over the country while his father says it is going down the tubes.

Asked by a reporter whether he was worried about making trouble for his son's presidential campaign by talking about secession here, Ron Paul deflected the blame to the press: "If we had decent reporters, there would never be any problems. You think you could ever meet one? Have a heart, buddy."

A spokesman for Rand Paul said he was not available to comment for this story. Both Pauls have said that if Rand Paul runs for president, his father will not campaign with him.

Original post:
Are Ron Paul's hard-core stands a problem for son's presidential bid?

OBAMA AGENDA: Drone lands inside White House grounds

This morning's alert: "A drone landed inside the White House grounds early Monday, a federal law enforcement official told NBC News. The official gave no further details about the unmanned aerial vehicle, other than to say it landed in a tree at 3 a.m. ET. The Secret Service responded and determined the drone did not pose a threat, the official said."

From the AP in New Delhi: "President Barack Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday declared an era of 'new trust' in the often fraught relationship between their nations as the U.S. leader opened a three-day visit to New Delhi. Standing side by side at the stately Hyderabad House, Obama and Modi cited progress toward putting in place a landmark civil nuclear agreement, as well as advances on climate change and defense ties. But from the start, the day was more about putting their personal bond on display. Modi broke with protocol and wrapped Obama in an enthusiastic hug after Obama got off Air Force One."

Analysis from the Wall Street Journal: "U.S. President Barack Obama joined Indian leaders on the reviewing stand at a military parade here Monday in a display of strengthened ties between the world's largest democracies as an increasingly assertive China shifts Asia's power balance."

Eye on the environment -- in Alaska. "The Obama administration is moving this week to designate areas of Alaska off limits to oil and natural gas drilling in its latest effort to bolster its environmental legacy," writes the Wall Street Journal. "The Interior Department announced on Sunday that it was proposing to preserve as wilderness nearly 13 million acres of land in the 19.8 million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, including 1.5 million acres of coastal plains that is believed to have rich oil and natural gas resources."

Eurozone Watch, from the AP: "A radical left-wing party vowing to end Greece's painful austerity program won a historic victory in Sunday's parliamentary elections, setting up a showdown with the country's international creditors that could shake the eurozone. Alexis Tsipras, leader of the communist-rooted Syriza party, immediately promised to end the "five years of humiliation and pain" that Greece has endured since an international bailout saved it from bankruptcy in 2010."

CONGRESS: Surgery day for Reid

Roll Call reminds us: Harry Reid's eye surgery is today.

OFF TO THE RACES: Wrapping up the cattle calls in Iowa, California

A couple of takes from NBC's Perry Bacon Jr. in Iowa here and here

Here is the original post:
First Read's Morning Clips