For those that still don’t get it...
“Now obviously, I can’t tell you as a US Senator I’m going to get rid of the entire Federal government. That’s not a realistic possibility.”
“That has nothing to do with the authority that I’m asking for. And that’s what it is, you’re asking for a certain authority with the blessing of the voters to say I wanna take on this political position. I wanna take on this power.”
Here’s the source:
These are not the words of a propertarian individualist. The “authority” granted by mob rule elections is illegitimate. It doesn’t matter if he says we will “vote no” to everything. Assuming that this power, to determine which policies will or will not be enacted and enforced upon other non-violent individuals, is legitimate, is not a voluntaryist position.
And sorry to all the well-meaning, if naive voluntaryist supporters, who wanted to see the Federal government “dissolved” in 2020. That’s suspended now. In limbo. Hundreds of thousands of dollars, countless man hours of activism, outreach, and support, now to potentially never take shape. You can’t be a senator and a president at the same time. Whoops. Oh well, there are lots of other ways to grab some power, keep the hype train moving, and continue making a living.
#inb4KokeshDisciplesStartMakingLameExcuses
~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 DLive and Twitter. (Hit me up so I can stop talking about myself in the third person!)
But... he's going to say no. That no is powerful, because its a no.
Joke aside. I love the ideas of voluntarism, to me they are the utopian future that we will either achieve and along with that triumph our species survival (long term of course) or we will fail to achieve and watch the new roman empire now represented by the world's collective be reduced to nothing.
Of course this won't happen today, it might not even happen in my lifetime. But, what's important to me, and possibly the most important thing. Is that leaders that hold the ideals have to have cognitive consistency.
In other words, the message because it's important, must be clear and unbending. I equate this to how scientific discoveries are made, specially when it comes to astro physics.
Many don't know but many of the equations that are absolutely necessary today for things like cellphones to exist, were written about, were developed at a time when the scientist did not know if they would ever be useful, if they would ever be used.
So to me there is a parallel line to be drawn here. Of course these are not equations, but they are attempts to change the minds of populations, they are proposition to shift consensus. If all of the sudden my positions are softened, or more accurately modified, compromised to "play the game" to me that means either:
Both of them not being something I would want in a leader per say. So I'm with you. Adam could be the nicest of guys, he very well could be, I have not way of knowing otherwise. But, I suspect his recent monetary support, might have made him acquire a life with too much comfort, enough for him to forget the real reasons why he started his journey.
These are some great observations. Thanks for giving me a new vantage point from which to view the philosophy.
Yes, and I’ve been trying to tell people for quite sometime now. There is much, much more to the story, but presenting his ideas in his own words this way in short, but clear quotes strikes me as perhaps the most effective way to get the message across: He’s not a Voluntaryist.
All of voluntaryism rests on one immutable, objective, metaphysical natural law reality. Namely, individual self-ownership.
From the beginning I have criticized Kokesh’s ideas and platform, demonstrating that they would violate ISO if enacted.
The only thing I would change about what you said is the word “utopian.” To the contrary, living according to natural law and reality is the most practical thing there is, where the dystopia we live within today is based on utopian pipe dreams and myths.
I think I catch your meaning, though, and I agree 100%. This battle is worth fighting, even if I’m not around to see the full “win.”
Oh shit, I haven't been following the Shokesh political crusade that closely but had no idea it got this bad. Senator now? What a waste.
Yep.
When are you ever wrong? You exposed the snake before it could bite.
Hah. All the fuckin' time! Lol. Kokesh is indeed a snake, though. Funny you wrote this, because I just came across an @papa-pepper post this morning talking about recently avoiding a bad situation at a swimming hole with his kids. Water moccasins hiding under a log. Four of 'em! Yipes.
Something about snakes today.
It's the season of the snake! That's messed up, papa pepper know his shit though, I'm glad he spotted and identified the threat. I'll go read his post.
I really struggle with this whole voting/not-voting thing. I get the angle that voting is force, but I don't see government simply dissolving because only 25, 10 or 5 people voted.
For me, it's more about local elections and local change. Some person in DC isn't going to change anything one way or the other, but I can change my local environment through actions - and maybe even voting if it restores freedom and walks us back in the right direction.
I do think a good LP presidential candidate who can garner attention and help disseminate educational information would be ideal, but that said, I don't think kokesh is or ever was that guy.
Yes, yes, lots of reading to do on the subject, and I see it's merits, just not fully convinced either way.
Hey brother. I don't think that voting itself is force or violence, but to vote to have one's favored policy enforced on others is indeed a despicable act.
As for local voting, I do not judge people, really. What I would say is that it is always immoral (in its consequences, as all policy is paid for with stolen money, and is forced on non-consenting individuals) and is a "hacking at the leaves," which can never bring about lasting freedom.
Yes. Kokesh's ideas and platform are a cancer to the true message of peace and liberty as he routinely advocates for positions which are contrary to the recognition and respect of the self-ownership of each individual.
Wow! This just boggles the mind. Has he taken a page from Ortega's book?
This is misleading comment; Rand paul, Bernie Sanders, John Mcain were all senators and ran for president.
You also pointed out that he suspended his presidential campaign. This doesn't mean anything objectively or legally since there aren't any federal rules regarding on suspending a campaign. For example John Mcain suspended his campaign but still ran for president.
Don't get me wrong, I have criticisms of Kokesh too. But you seem to be reading to much into one video.
Not at all. A suspension of the campaign is a suspension of the campaign. You can be a senator and then run for president, but one cannot be both at the same time. I don’t see anything incorrect about the sentence you’ve quoted.
As far as principle is concerned, the quote from the video speaks for itself. This is simply not a propertarian/voluntaryist position.
I didn't say it was incorrect, I said it was misleading. In the video; Kokesh never said he would be senator and president at the same time.
Suspending a campaign can refer to anything the candidate wants it to mean, there's no legal term.
What I'm trying to say is there would be nothing to stop Kokesh running for seantor in 2018 and run for president in 2020. I'm not debating what's principled and what's not.
That’s true, and I didn’t say anything to the contrary.