Woot! Awesome win, Marc! And I'm even more glad to see it's on RBN and not GCN
but also a much bigger audience than TruthRadio (which is good too, of course, it opened many doors I am sure).
You announce this on the same day I was inspired to write up a little 2 minute series of questions for Alex Jones I'm gonna phone in sometime soon... Maybe I'll call your show and ask basically the same questions. As a preview, Marc, are you against world government? If so, then are you also against national government, so-called constitutional government, or even state or local government? ...and so on...
I'm about to email the following to Alex Jones right now... Any thoughts? ;D
(email)
TO: alex@infowars.com
SUBJ: re. Marc Stevens interview today
Hi Alex, this is Darren Dirt from Canada, long time listener, always appreciate what you are doing for the cause of freedom.
Alex, you just had Marc Stevens on your show today (Thursday April 20th) and you said you wanted to debate him because you think *some* kind of system is necessary.
From simple observation, government may claim to be providing a service, at the very least protecting our rights.
But what if a business were to offer that same service, and that business used violence to force its so-called customers to pay for the service... we'd call that a protection racket, organized crime, the Mafia. Wouldn't we?
If a non-voluntary government does any activitiy of any kind, how is it funded? Taxation is "legalized" armed robbery, with the proceeds funding future robberies. Do you think that armed robbery is okay if done by a group that claims to represent the very people who are being robbed?
I mean, you often say that you are not anti-anybody, that you're pro-freedom! If you were to just look in any dictionary, you would see that freedom at its core simply means "absence of restraint".
But government means, literally, control-ment. To govern means to control, to restrain. Government is *restraining*, by its very nature! It is *by definition* anti-freedom.
You say you are against world government, correct? And you seem to be okay with *national* government, or at least state or local government... as long as it operates within "constitutional limits", right?
Well Alex, are you familiar with what George Washington said about government? He said, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force". And Abraham Lincoln said, "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master".
Even Ronald Reagan said, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ...if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?"
The reason I bring up those words expressed by these famous icons of freedom is simply this: I wonder why you are okay with *any* man forcing another to receive a service at gunpoint? Or even worse, forcing another to fund a service he doesn't even want?
Do you believe that every man is so evil, at his core, that he needs a master to tell him what to do and what not to do? To stop him from hurting himself and others? If so, this is not justification for government, it's actually an argument against government -- because those same evil men would be in "power", controlling others. Against their will. At gunpoint.
I really hope you re-read Marc's book, with an open mind as to how the "few bad apples" theory just doesn't hold water. I also suggest reading and/or listening to some recent materials from Stefan Molyneux (
freedomain.blogspot.com/ ,
www.freedomainradio.com/ ) , especially this...
** Disproving the State: Four Arguments Against Government **
freedomain.blogspot.com/2005/10/disproving-state-four-arguments.html(quote)
Logically, there are four possibilities as to the mixture of good and evil people in the world:
1. that all men are moral
2. that all men are immoral
3. that the majority of men are moral, and a minority immoral
4. that the majority of men are immoral, and a minority moral
...
The logical error always made in the defense of the State is to imagine that any collective moral judgments being applied to any group of people is not also being applied to the group which rules over them. If 50% of people are evil, then at least 50% of people ruling over them are evil (and probably more, since evil people are always drawn to power). Thus the existence of evil can never justify the existence of the State. If there is no evil, the State is unnecessary. If evil exists, the State is far too dangerous to be allowed existence.
(/quote)
Thanks for your time, Alex! And thanks for having Marc on your program, and for offering his book in your store!
-Darren Dirt, advocate for liberty, proponent for query
Is it right for individuals to interact, or to conduct business by providing products or services with customers, under the threat or use of violence? Our answer is an unconditional and emphatic "No!"
Bring life to the GAFFE community. We invite you. We dare you. We request the honour of your esteemed presence.
www.GAFFE.org/radio(sent 20Apr2006)
(/email)
) but the bits I did hear seemed to be positive, i.e. Marc got to pose a lot of questions and share his own experiences how he "woke up".
but also a much bigger audience than TruthRadio (which is good too, of course, it opened many doors I am sure).
