WTF: Kokesh Calls on Voluntaryists to "...put down the ideology..."
...if we want to see that voluntary society achieved in our lifetimes, we have to put down the ideology in a sense. At least make sure that it is secondary, compared to taking this great step forward for humanity, together.
~ Adam Kokesh, 9:46 mark this video.
"Voluntaryist activist" and 2020 presidential hopeful has just called on Voluntaryists to drop the Voluntaryist ideology, or "make it secondary" to his political campaign.
First, politician @adamkokesh suggested we stop using the word "anarchist."
Now, in a bizarrely-delivered video, choc-full of flowery political rhetoric, we are called on to "put down the ideology."
Though I am not jumping to any conclusions other than the fact that dropping an ideology to make the ideology come true is...insane...this whole thing is starting to stink like a massive disinfo/anti-liberty campaign designed to "herd the cats" as it were, into participating in the benign, completely controlled and impotent, political process.
Think I am nuts for suggesting such a thing? Well, in his recent debate with Larken Rose, Kokesh passive-aggressively implies that anyone questioning his activism is similar to, OR MAY BE such an agent. Go to the 7:30 mark of the debate video.
- Calls for dropping of anarchist label.
- Calls for dropping of foundational ideology.
- Questionable/fraudulent donation milking.
- Constant pressure on voluntaryists to "get political."
- Flowery speech about dialogue/understanding in official videos, petty name-calling and abusive voting practices on Steemit and in "real life."
That, or as Rose said in the debate, he just views himself as extremely important. A white knight, central political savior. Either way you slice it, it's bizarre.
Awaiting the rabid Kokesh disciples who are certainly coming to put me in my place before reading any of this thoroughly.
Perhaps Kokesh's dumbing down of the message to make it "acceptable" to the masses, is to blame.
~KafkA
Graham Smith is a Voluntaryist activist, creator, and peaceful parent residing in Niigata City, Japan. Graham runs the "Voluntary Japan" online initiative with a presence here on Steem, as well as DTube and Twitter. (Hit me up so I can stop talking about myself in the third person!)
Gresham's law applied to libertarianism. Popular libertarians drive out genuine ideas in favor of appealing to the lowest common denominator of "freedom-minded" thinking in order to like you say, generate appeal to the masses. Makes me wonder the motivation of these type of people. Is it freedom or is it attention?
I'm inclined to guess the latter, after all I have witnessed from the "campaign" thus far, sadly.
I agree with Adam's message. I ultimately, think there is a good chance if there were a free market for ideas, then people would eventually converge upon voluntarism--I think there is a good chance it might even be achieved in Rawls' "original position" thought experiment where a population would agree upon the rules of a society before knowing their position in the resulting society.
Sure utilizing the political process does give it the pretense of legitimacy to people who don't care about whole underlined by coercion aspect any ways. But I think if voluntarists, collaborated with libertarians, greens, and all other radicals to at least realize an actual democracy, then I think the likelihood of someday realizing a free voluntary world would be more likely.
These political structures exist whether they should or shouldn't doesn't really matter ultimately? I think realizing a society where more people examine and consider Voluntarism and Agorism would be great. That is what I understand Adam to be pitching.
That’s not what he’s pitching at all, though. That’s why we had this debate.
It seems he is pitching localization by shutting down the federal government--sure that is not straight voluntarism/anarchy with NAP but I think it is fine to make a pragmatic argument--at least in a political party, especially one misbranded as Republican lite, by the joke candidacy of Bill Weld in 2016. Sure engaging in politics/elections is a questionable tactic toward anarchy--but I think it may be useful. For better or worse the sheep who give the state its power and recognize its flags and claims to authority are big into elections and the narratives those myths give meaning to in their lives. I think utilizing the political/election process to 1. advertise an alternative non coercive free market alternative is interesting and 2. possibly compromising further via localization is interesting.
Ultimately, I would compromise with the electorate even further just to realize significant change and help defeat the mass armies of government bureaucracies. I think of those who vote, there is a serious consensus on a welfare state. I think replacing the entire US federal government--if cryptos haven't already solved everything by then with a $10k per year annual basic income for $3.3 trillion would be preferable, to business as usual (sure not as good as eliminating all institutionalized state coercion--but absent some digital social transformations seems unlikely to be realized by 2020). I'd rather have $10k more in my pocket and no war on drugs, and no war on terror by 2020.
But sure, it is possible we could convince everyone way before 2020 to stop with this arbitrary institutionalized state violence. Obviously if one embraces deontology/ is opposed to teleology it would not matter, if one course ultimately realizes a less insane state, even if that path eventually realizes a free society--or does so more quickly, if such path requires one to compromise their values.
Adam helped bring me to steem and his videos helped convince me that voluntarism is much more viable. Robert Nozick, who turned me against arbitrary state power has some interesting discussions of consequentialism in "Consquentialism and its Critics," and "Anarchy, State an Utopia." I wonder what Nozick would think of this digital world we inhabit? I think it is good to ask important questions and never just assume the best of people. I have found Adam to be genuine and well motivated in my interactions.
Hopefully we are free someday.
Yep.
Dear Mr Kokesh.......... GO FUCK YOURSELF!
I'm tempted to buy your Book & wipe my ass with it!
-Mike BlueHair
It might seem counterintuitive, but I think he makes sense. I wrote two blog entries this week about making the simplest arguments for voluntaryism. The short post is easiest to read and the other one gives some more background (Adam upvoted the second link the other day).
Why does it make sense to "drop the ideology?" Because much of the Libertarian ideology is framed in terms of a particular interpretation of Christianity (natural law theory is a religious theory), and converting one's religion is not easy. In conflict resolution and marriage counseling, the big challenge is getting the each party to listen and to really understand what the other person is FEELING (not thinking), because emotional responses happen in the real world and much of our thought is floating in storyland. People are not inclined to change their behavior because of someone else's story from storyland.
I recommend connecting with people on an emotional level (this is a technique used for clinical interviewing and conflict resolution):
Does that make sense? The stick figure who connects on an emotional level can make a connection to the other stick figure and make some progress.
It makes sense in a way, and the picture makes complete sense, but I believe that this is not really analogous to sharing voluntaryist principle. It doesn’t have to be related to the Christian tradition (or any other tradition) at all to be successfully conveyed. Voluntaryism and its tenets are simple and easy to understand.
Before pushing politics so hard, Kokesh used to speak to these simple realities which anyone can understand quite often.
I love this picture, though. Dead on, and excellent point regarding being human and connecting on an emotional level. Kokesh sucks at this, to be honest. When I questioned his platform he called me an “annoying and ignorant troll.” When Larken Rose raised contentions Kokesh called him a coward. He’s all persona, and it is creeping me out.
This post is just about yet another red flag from the Kokesh camp. Now he is encouraging a blurring of lines in the interest of “we the people” and “humanity.” Typical politicking, void of substance or principle.
he seems to be mostly trying to work out his own issues
Resteem 😃
i had gandhi in one hand and gadafi in the other
I choose think Larken put Adam to the test of his resolve. Mr. Kokesh must be ready for attacks from all angels and this one touched a nerve. #ONLYLOVE
Larken (or logic/principle/sound argument, rather) destroyed the religion being peddled by Kokesh in that debate. NO PEACE WITHOUT PROPERTY AND PRINCIPLE. Otherwise, "only love" is impossible.
Congratulations @kafkanarchy84, this post is the ninth most rewarded post (based on pending payouts) in the last 12 hours written by a Hero account holder (accounts that hold between 10 and 100 Mega Vests). The total number of posts by Hero account holders during this period was 370 and the total pending payments to posts in this category was $6010.38. To see the full list of highest paid posts across all accounts categories, click here.
If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, please reply stop to this comment.