The Mindcrime Liberty Show with Dobson and Patton

Ep 90: Why aren’t there more women in prison? W/Todd Lewis.

The Mindcrime Liberty Show is joined by Todd Lewis of the Praise of Folly podcast to discuss, why aren’t there more women in prison? If opening up male dominated spaces and closing the gender gap is so important for politicians, government bureaucracies, megacorporations, universities, many churches and activists, then why do they not try to go after the disparity in this male dominated institution: prisons. In England and Wales 95% of the prison population is male. In the US Federal prison system 93% of the population is male as well. A large gender gap also exists in school detentions and punishments as well. Why is this so high? Why do all the egalitarians and male dominated space critics not care? Is society much harsher on men and boys? Do men commit more crime? Do men get longer sentences? Will this disparity continue to get worse? Is this disparity all "capitalism's" (not Murray Rothbard's definition) or better known as neoliberalism/crony capitalism fault? Should the Marxist Left take seriously the claims of Men's rights activists? At their height, were historical Marxism and the historic labor movement at their height mainly a male thing? What could change this disparity?

Ep 89: How much would an ideal society spend on healthcare?

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses what is the marginal value of healthcare compared to other goods (say a nice dinner or a house)? If an ideal society existed where there was no IP, parasitic middleman, regulations and etc what would people spend on healthcare? How much is a life worth and how much is life extension worth given that scarcity exists? How much is perfect safety worth? Is Hans Hoppe right about the absurdity of modern “insurance”? Can healthcare be provided by the free market? What is to be made of alternative, or off label use of medicine? Why do progressives and at times so called classical liberals/conservatives think that medicine only consists of what state licensed doctors do? 

EP 88: What is GDP growth and why should anyone care?

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses GDP and the problems surrounding its calculations and use. Is GDP useful? Is much of GDP growth illusory especially that which is created by finance and central banks? Is the wealth of nations impossible to calculate and compare? Is calculating the wealth of nations harmful and only done for malevolent reasons? Would private product remaining be a more useful statistic to calculate? What are the problems associated with this? What would be a better way to calculate the "wealth of nations"?

Ep 87: Is Vladimir Putin right? #justwartheory #reparations

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses whether Vladimir Putin is right? Is this a legitimate case of re-acquiring land as a kind of military invasion version of reparations? Is this a just war? What exactly is a modern “just” war and does anyone care to apply the standards consistently? Who exactly owns a piece of land and how do individuals, groups and/or state acquire it “justly”? What exactly is the process of just land acquisition other than naked state military force and has it ever occurred justly? Does anyone or any state have a pure clean title to land, especially the land within Ukraine? What are some similar versions of disputed lands throughout the world both currently and historically?

 

Ep. 86: Should public intellectuals be more like Ric Flair?

The Mindcrime Liberty Show is joined by Terminal Philosophy to discuss whether Public intellectuals should be more like Ric Flair. Flair in a way invented professional wrestling, in particular the part that makes it fun: the flamboyant gregarious trash talking promos. Should public intellectuals adopt this posture at times especially when they are right or think they will be right? Would this make learning and politics more “ fun” and make it easier to pay attention? In our previous discussion with Terminal Philosophy we discussed how both Alex Jones and Graham Hancock are public figures who are extremely entertaining compared to the aging dinosaur establishments they are up against. The big danger is that sophists will of course use this tactic to their full advantage but it is not clear that established institutions can be capable of engaging in this behavior over the long term with any authenticity. Are intellectuals headed this way anyway? Ought intellectuals act this way?

Ep 85: Does grammar exist? w/Rik Storey.

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses whether grammar exists with Rik Storey. What are the rules of grammar and where do they come from? Is grammar merely a useful social construction? Is there such a thing as universal grammar and is Chomksy right? Does grammar’s existence imply a kind of divine order? Is there such thing as “correct” grammar or does it evolve over time and in different places? How does one improve on grammar if it is indeed so subjective? Is grammar authoritarian or libertarian?

Ep 84: What does a community devoted to Free Speech look like? Feat. Right Ruminations

The Mindcrime Liberty Show is joined by Right Ruminations to discuss what a community devoted to free speech would look like. Is free speech in decline and if so when did it reach its zenith? Why is free speech valuable? What is the relationship between free speech and excellence? How would a free speech society deal with heretics? What place would the university have in a free society? Would they encourage public debates with the heretical views? How should employers view speech of employees outside of work? Does freedom of speech conflict with freedom of association?

Ep 83: Are rent and interest slavery?

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses whether interest and rent are a form of soft slavery? Robert Nozick in Anarchy, State and Utopia assumes no one defends slavery and the Marxists view capitalism as just an updated form of serfdom defined by exploitation. Two of the key aspects of capitalism are interest on capital and rents collected on property. Are landlords and rent collectors the beneficiaries of a form of exploitative soft slavery? Are those persons who collect gains on capital indirectly benefiting from a form of exploitative toil? For the economic left, what would be the attributes of a system which isn’t defined by exploitation? Is this the contents of an empty box? What are the benefits of interest and rent? Why would anyone save and grow the amount of capital goods in a society if there wasn’t a benefit to deferred gratification?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ep 82: Why do Feminists want to work for Capitalists if Marxism is true?

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses why Feminist woman want to work for or become capitalists themselves if Marxism is true? The classical Marxist doctrine is roughly that working for capitalists is a form of exploitative slavery and enriches the owner. Feminism for the most part comes out of, or has serious overlaps, with the Marxist left viewing the patriarchy as a form of slavery. Most self-described Marxists today are feminist or at least not against it and vice versa. Exceptions of course exist but the affinity and overlap remains. If all the above is the case, then why is career woman feminism so rampant? Why is much of mainstream modern western culture all about woman empowering themselves in the workplace as leaders, owners and of course employees (i.e. wage slaves under the Marxists left’s own description)? Now it could be that Marxism is false and no exploitation exists. It also could be the case that feminism is false and the sexual division of labor is either natural or voluntarily desired by most people including by woman themselves. The right-wing traditionalist anti-capitalist position makes sense if a form of progressive Marxism is true (i.e. capitalism is exploitative, greedy and too individualistic) but right-wing traditionalists by in large don’t advocate careerist girl power feminism. The right wing anti-capitalists say woman should be at home raising children or doing charity. This is of course anathema to the left position. The left-wing position seemingly makes no sense. Being an employee is merely a form of slavery so all one is doing is trading one pair of chains (the patriarchy at home) for another (the boss) based on their own analysis. As far as the issue of leadership is concerned the absurdity gets even worse. CEOs, heads of state, soldiers seeking glory and so on are forms of “toxic masculinity,” “bossism” and “male chauvinism” so woman should go ahead and become bosses, state leaders and generals. The left's bizarre relationship with Ayn Rand and Margaret Thatcher bear this absurdity out. Apparently toxic masculinity isn’t toxic if woman do it (or is it)? One could argue that current existing non-pure corporate “capitalism,” ironically or un-ironically, is the driver of women's empowerment. Is Deidre McCloskey right to argue that it is the driver in her Oxford debate? If left wing anarchists such as David Graeber want to abolish currency and transition to a gift economy, then why are they so averse to the family which is a kind of an actually functioning gift economy?

Ep 81: Are politicians stupid, mistaken or evil?

The Mindcrime Liberty Show discusses whether politicians are stupid, mistaken or evil? Are politicians good intentioned at heart and merely making honest mistakes? Are they evil and purposely pursuing bad policy and engaging in malice? Is the situation a bit of both? This issue is an issue which divides the anti-conspiracy theory minded beltway libertarians with the more radical ones who suggest the politicians are evil criminals. This issue also divides minarchists (and almost everyone else) and anarchist libertarians. What exactly is a criminal other than what the state says so? If the state has legal privilege and immunity, then can politicians ever be considered guilty under the minarchists’ standards?