Latest / The Junto Podcast / E43: Non‑Aggression Principle - From Philosophy to Practice

Transcript

E43: Non‑Aggression Principle - From Philosophy to Practice · The Junto Podcast

0:10
Hello, America. Welcome to the Junto Podcast, where we promote the practical
0:15
applications of critical thinking and bold creativity.
0:18
I am your host, Edgar Mills. Thanks for joining.
0:28
Hello, good people. Welcome to episode 43. And today, we're going to be talking
0:34
about a subject that was suggested to me from one of my listeners or followers.
0:39
And it was a brilliant suggestion because it's a brilliant follow-up to the
0:43
last episode, episode 42, talking about harmonious dissent.
0:49
So in this episode, we're going to be talking about the non-aggression principle,
0:54
and all about it and what does it mean and and where did it come from and all
0:59
these things and how does it apply the non-aggression printer now i know it's
1:03
ironic a little bit coming from from me i know this,
1:08
I would say I was a lot of things in my life, aggressive being one of those things.
1:17
However, when we're talking about adult life and business and politics and interacting
1:23
with other humans out in the world, we have to grow up a little bit and everything's
1:30
not about going to knuckles, you know.
1:33
So the non-aggression principle.
1:36
And what is it what's what's the yeah don't
1:40
initiate force against other people
1:43
or property and the only instance where it's okay to use force is in self-defense
1:51
well generally speaking i just described every rule of engagement for cops and
1:59
soldiers and everything else,
2:01
It's not okay to initiate force except in self-defense.
2:06
Now, we'll talk about as it applies to law enforcement a little later.
2:12
And that's very broad and generic sounding. I get it. And we'll go into it. The roots, the...
2:21
Okay, well, you guys know John Locke, right?
2:24
He was a historic figure, philosopher from, I think, the 1600s, 1700s.
2:30
And he wrote Common Sense. Yeah, he wrote Common Sense.
2:34
But the non-aggressive principle comes from essentially, well,
2:41
you can trace it back further.
2:44
But I think for the modern day, we can start with John Locke.
2:49
And what he basically laid out
2:53
to us was that individuals have a right to life, liberty, and property.
2:58
And shouldn't violate other individuals' right to life, liberty, or property.
3:05
So, yeah, that's it.
3:07
And then in the more modern day, right, the 20th century, we're talking about
3:13
mostly libertarians who espouse this idea.
3:18
Now, Democrats will say they hold this idea to be true as well,
3:23
and some Republicans maybe, but not really.
3:27
I want to say somewhere around—well, the Libertarian Party was formed, I want to say, in 1970.
3:37
Two or 73.
3:40
And the non-aggression principle has always been a piece of that platform.
3:46
But it also comes heavily from Austrian economic sort of ideology as well.
3:55
That really, really hammers on government-initiated force and coercion.
4:02
Now, as far as the economics go,
4:06
They look at any government coercion of economic policy as just that coercion,
4:13
and that's in violation of this non-aggression principle.
4:18
And one of my favorites, Ayn Rand, she espoused the non-aggression principle
4:23
through objectivism and rational self-interests is what we all chase after so
4:31
far as we do not initiate force against other humans.
4:36
Our rational self-interest cannot infringe upon someone else's rational self-interest.
4:42
Otherwise, it's not rational, it's irrational.
4:45
So it's basically a foundation for the libertarianism.
4:49
And as politics goes, the party, the libertarian party, this is a platform point there.
4:58
And aggression is just violence. And this includes the government,
5:04
right? The government holds a sort of a monopoly on violence, does it not?
5:09
If you, let's say you don't pay your taxes, and then at some point,
5:16
the IRS chooses to initiate action against you as far as collecting money goes.
5:22
But you don't have the money. You didn't pay the taxes because you didn't have the money.
5:25
And now that you can't pay the taxes that are owed, at some point,
5:31
maybe a sheriff or someone or maybe an IRS agent, I don't know,
5:35
are going to come knocking on your door and they're going to look to start taking your stuff.
5:39
And if you ain't got no stuff to take, they're going to look and start taking
5:42
you. Well, that's force. And it all seems perfectly legal, I guess.
5:48
But it's still a violation of the non-aggression principle by the government. Yeah.
5:56
Fraud, theft, coercion, that's all violations of the non-aggression principle
6:02
because they undermine your autonomy. They do.
6:08
So, again, the Libertarian Party has been promoting this from the get-go.
6:13
And places like the Mises Institute and the Cato Institute, they advanced the
6:19
non-aggression principle through various articles and books and things like
6:24
seminars and all these things.
6:27
And it applies. You can apply the non-aggression principle to every piece of our life.
6:36
And there's, I'm at a loss for words right now.
6:45
I don't know if the principle, I mean, is it, I don't want to say it's a libertarian
6:50
principle. It should be a humanistic principle.
6:53
Now, I know there's aggressive people out there. And like I said, I was an aggressive guy.
6:59
But institutionally, and I mean for every institution, business, government,
7:04
if we practice this, then we'd probably have much smoother interactions with
7:13
other humans and other businesses and other organizations.
7:18
Well we'll get into ethics here in a little bit when we start talking about that.
7:25
But as far as politics goes, I don't want to sit and loiter around politics
7:30
this whole episode here, but we got to start with that because,
7:33
like I said, government seems to have a monopoly on violence.
7:38
So we want to talk about that. At local levels, the non-aggression principle applies to politics.
7:49
When you're doing things at the grassroots local level, like,
7:54
well, let's talk zoning laws, right?
7:56
Kind of opposing or fighting zoning laws or property taxes. That's a big one these days.
8:03
A lot of people are getting on the boat with like, hey, we need to abolish property tax.
8:09
Because these things, like I said, taxes especially, they kind of force compliance
8:15
without, you know, Really, without consent?
8:19
Yeah. And how do we get around that then? Well, if we didn't have zoning laws,
8:23
Edgar, there'd be a shooting range on every corner.
8:25
Nobody would get – well, you've got to have sort of voluntary community interaction and agreements, right?
8:33
Do you need the government to make that decision for you?
8:39
Well, if it comes out on your side, then, yeah, then the government was good.
8:43
If it comes out against you, then the government was bad.
8:46
But minus the government, yeah, we could come to some agreement.
8:51
What about the state level?
8:53
I've talked about this on different episodes, but I'll talk about it again.
8:58
The non-aggression principle sort of challenges things like occupational licensing, right?
9:03
We talked about that a hairstylist spends more time in school than a cop learning to do their job.
9:10
And they have to be licensed to do it. Otherwise, you're kind of an outlaw there,
9:14
right? you get shut down.
9:16
So that's an argument that that's force right there, sort of.
9:22
Setting a high bar, financial bar, essentially, for your entry into the work
9:28
play, the profession, right?
9:30
Now, for me to be an instructor, I mean, I went to an instructor course in the
9:36
military, which, you know, qualifies me to be an instructor for, well, anything really.
9:44
But I have a couple of different instructor certifications from recognized organizations,
9:52
that qualify me to be an instructor, but do you really need that?
9:56
I guess for somebody to feel comfortable initially with you, you do.
10:01
But let's say, what if you wanted to open a barbershop, I guess, in Rome?
10:06
I got to imagine that you've got to show some, well, one business license.
10:13
If you're in the city here in Rome, you got to have a business license.
10:18
But I don't know, So do they check for your barber certificate?
10:21
I'm not sure. They probably do. Or is there some barber governing body out there
10:27
who, like a union, comes around and strong-arm you if you're not licensed through them?
10:35
I'm not sure. I got to ask my barber friends about that.
10:41
Is there a barber union? You got some thugs that come around every so often?
10:46
Make sure you're paying your dues.
10:51
Unions. Yeah, non-aggressions. That's aggression.
10:55
Paying union dues is a form of aggression. If you can't work unless you pay
10:59
union dues, that's a form of aggression. Yep.
11:04
What about federally? Well, one of the big things you hear on the Libertarian
11:09
Party a lot is, I'm already against the next war.
11:13
Yeah. That's physical. That's actual aggression, right?
11:17
And the non-aggression principle is against any war that's sort of a non-defensive type war, right?
11:26
Like a lot of guys bemoan the capture of Maduro.
11:33
Now, look, man, I'm a libertarian. I believe in a non-aggression principle.
11:37
But I also happen to believe that Maduro should have been snatched up.
11:42
I think that was a good and appropriate thing.
11:46
Did it require congressional approval you
11:50
know that's nuanced stuff that i don't
11:53
i don't know about really yes it probably should have
11:56
had congressional approval and maybe it did they who knows really what went
12:01
on behind closed doors there but any military intervention i don't know at what
12:06
level is it okay to intervene militarily and then governmentally speaking do
12:13
Are the people represented in that?
12:15
Now, a lot of people don't think the general public is educated enough to.
12:21
To have an opinion on that, really. And that's why we have representatives in
12:26
government, but that ain't really, yeah.
12:30
Are we a representative government? Yeah, we've got a bunch of,
12:33
we've got, I don't know, 500 and something people in Congress that are meant
12:40
to represent us, but who knows, really?
12:43
And do they get a chance to speak up on that? I don't know. So that's kind of
12:47
one of the big debates right now, right?
12:49
The tyranny of the executive branch versus the legislative branch versus the judicial branch.
12:56
I don't know, man. But anyway, non-aggression on a national level,
13:00
yeah, war, defense, right?
13:04
Acting against a sovereign nation. Who knows?
13:08
And then what about internationally? What's an application of the non-aggression principle?
13:16
Well, what about free trade? What about tariffs and sanctions and things like that?
13:24
Voluntary exchange between countries minus the sort of coercive policies.
13:34
Yeah, man, again, I like to stay, I have an opinion on everything,
13:40
but as far as offering solutions, do I have a real solid solution?
13:46
A lot of these tariffs and sanctions and these various things are used to affect
13:52
policy in different ways and to affect different parts of policy.
13:55
So do I think Cuba should have been embargoed for, you know, decades and decades?
14:03
I don't know. Yeah, the Cuban regime is a communist dictatorship who treats
14:10
their their citizens badly.
14:13
Is that a thing for us to pass judgment on? I don't know.
14:18
What about Saudi Arabia? They got the oil, so we trade with them.
14:24
They still cut people's hands off and shit. So I don't know.
14:27
I don't know the right answer on it.
14:30
But generally speaking, in a political perspective, any coercive policy is sort
14:39
of a violation of non-aggression principle, because we're not just talking about physical aggression.
14:43
We're talking about coercive aggression and various policies.
14:48
And then from a very libertarian perspective, we're talking about non-aggression, right?
14:53
Criminal justice reform, decriminalizing victimless crimes, drug policy, right?
15:02
Decriminalizing a lot of drugs that, I don't know. I mean, I've got mixed feelings on that as well.
15:09
But I want to say Portugal decriminalized most drugs and their crime rate obviously went down.
15:17
And then they spent a lot of effort and time in their mental health and their
15:21
rehabilitation facilities, and I think that's working for them.
15:26
Now, always be wary of comparing America to some other country.
15:30
I mean, there's a lot of different variables there.
15:34
Just the size of the population and things like that, never mind the value system
15:41
and the different—I don't know.
15:43
There's a lot of stuff going on. So you can't always do a one-for-one comparison.
15:47
But like I said, Portugal seems it works for them.
15:52
Non-aggression principle, coercive policies, never mind physical aggression and war.
15:57
We're talking about coercive policies at all levels of the government.
16:03
So now I said this was a good follow-up episode to the last one,
16:08
because now we're going to talk about non-aggression principle as it relates
16:13
to law enforcement. Oh, yeah.
16:18
And look, this is not to shit on cops at all.
16:22
I think if we're going to shit on anybody, it needs to be the lawmakers first and then the enforcers.
16:31
But limiting police action to literally defending against physical crimes against someone else is...
16:44
Actual aggression, physical aggression, violence or theft. Yeah, that's pretty much it.
16:52
All these weird policies, like you remember the stop and frisk thing up in New
16:56
York and just randomly cops could just stop.
17:01
Some people will say, well, there was some success there, but it also led to immediate escalation.
17:07
And so now we're given cops via the law, we're given cops some perceived authority
17:17
that they may or may not actually have.
17:21
And there's, I'd say, widespread.
17:25
Now, I don't have numbers to back this up right in front of me,
17:28
but there is abuse of power. And the power does go to some of the guys,
17:33
to their brains there, especially the younger guys, I think.
17:38
When you have all this perceived power and authority over individuals.
17:43
And I've talked about this, this us or them mentality that some of the cops have.
17:48
And they're saying us or them, and the them is the citizens.
17:53
Folks, it shouldn't be cops against citizens.
17:57
It just shouldn't. All right.
18:01
So you might be thinking, well, Edgar, you're talking about Mayberry.
18:04
You're talking about Andy, who's, you know, yeah, well, maybe I am.
18:11
And maybe that's a little bit unrealistic. And maybe there are criminals that would exploit, right?
18:16
But we can deal with criminals who exploit this perceived, I don't know,
18:26
it would be perceived as leniency, I'm sure.
18:29
But I'm calling it just enforcing like real like critical laws, right?
18:37
Cops should be there to protect people's rights and to stop violence, really.
18:45
And I'm going to throw a thing out there, no-knock raids on somebody who has
18:50
a warrant for who knows what.
18:55
And it's only suspected that, oh, they may be violent or they may or may not be violent.
18:59
I don't know. I don't, I've always disagreed with no-knock raids on American soil.
19:04
Now, look, I've done a million no-knock raids on foreign soil, folks.
19:10
Okay, not a million. A few hundred.
19:14
Probably a few hundred over the course of my career.
19:19
And that's not a thing that you want to see in American neighborhoods.
19:24
And yeah, there might be violent criminals, but also, yeah, there may be innocent.
19:28
And we saw that with the Breonna Taylor thing, and I've talked about that before.
19:33
It just, it's a recipe for disaster, and it's a recipe for violence,
19:39
for escalation without, you know, with no clear need for that.
19:44
So in the law enforcement space, non-aggression principle should be sort of a leading ethic there.
19:54
And it's not right now, I know. And look, there's some people out there that
19:58
would just as soon cut your throat as to have a conversation with you.
20:02
And those people need to be dealt with aggressively.
20:05
But we can't have the thought police, you know, out cruising around because
20:10
you wear a hoodie or because you look a certain way or because,
20:14
hey, now just because I own a firearm and it's on my hip doesn't mean that I deserve.
20:24
Any kind of preemptive violence.
20:28
And then other people talk about,
20:32
and I mean, advocates of the non-aggression principle argue that tax-funded
20:38
enforcement is coercive and that it's forcing you to pay for somebody to come
20:48
and violate your rights. Right.
20:51
I mean, that's, hey, it's a perspective. Whatever you think of it,
20:56
it's a perspective that has to be given a little bit of credence.
21:02
Yeah, it has to be given a little bit of credence. Now, that leads us into privatized policing.
21:13
Now, that's a hot button issue.
21:17
Privatized policing. Then the incentive, I guess, would be what?
21:21
That more crime creates more incentive for the cops. Is that?
21:27
No, it's the opposite of that.
21:29
Less crime would be more incentive for the cops because they're getting paid
21:34
based on the absence of crime.
21:39
Now, how do you preemptive, how do you, I don't know, we get into,
21:44
this is a big can of worms about preemptive policing and things like that.
21:48
So we're not going to go down the rabbit hole.
21:51
But, yeah, there are people out there to argue that tax-funded law enforcement
21:58
is coercive and that law enforcement should be a voluntary effort,
22:03
a community effort, or private effort.
22:07
That sort of creates competition and eliminates the monopoly on force.
22:13
Because right now, folks, as it is, like it or not, the state and the municipality
22:19
has a monopoly on violence.
22:23
And a lot of this qualified immunity stuff, they can get away with it.
22:28
And they can sort of haphazardly go into a situation, screw it all up,
22:35
accidentally shoot someone, kill someone,
22:37
violate someone's rights, and then they can find some law that you were in violation
22:44
of to make it, well, look, he had a gun, but he was also obstructing justice,
22:50
so that's a commission of a felony.
22:52
Well, having a gun and a commission of a felony warrants deadly force.
22:57
You see, it's all very, So the law is very manipulative. The law is very manipulative.
23:07
And, yeah, cops and agencies and the lawyers in these agencies sit around to
23:13
figure out how to, well, I could say get around law or be in absolute compliance with law.
23:20
Whereas you don't have that law. You're going, hey, man, well,
23:23
if you do this, you can get away with this.
23:24
But if you do that, you can't, et cetera, et cetera. So you guys can see already
23:29
how the non-aggression principle, as far as law enforcement goes, is very jinky.
23:35
It's very jinky. What about in the system itself?
23:39
Courts exist to enforce contracts, resolve disputes.
23:46
When aggression occurs, they resolve that, right?
23:52
And there should be, as far as punishment goes, right? How about restitution
23:57
versus punishment? If a guy's in jail, he can't pay restitution or work off the restitution.
24:05
These state imposed penalties and these minimum sentencing things and laws and whatnot.
24:11
Yeah, I guess when it comes to actual murder and things like that, sure.
24:15
But as far as disputes among contracts and, and I guess even theft to a degree, I mean,
24:25
should, we should be able to, to actually implement restitution a little,
24:31
a little more thoroughly and a little more thoughtfully versus just straight-up punishment.
24:38
Because, look, even if a criminal goes to jail and then he's forced to pay X
24:42
amount of money over the course of however many years, most of that money goes
24:46
to the state because they're the middlemen. They're the one managing the money.
24:51
And you, as the victim, you're going to see only chump change on that.
24:56
Saw that firsthand when we had a tenant who cost us a lot of money in Colorado.
25:04
We sued and we won that case, but ended up seeing a chump change on that over
25:12
the course of a few years.
25:15
So it almost wasn't worth the effort.
25:19
So people, you know, people who criticize the non-aggression principle,
25:26
they criticize it based on kind of vagueness and like, it's not really highly defined.
25:32
And then aggression is kind of, how do you define aggression,
25:36
right? Is it physical or is it coercion or things like that?
25:40
And, and that's where all this legalese, that's where the legalese squeezes
25:44
in and then that's when it becomes more coercive, in my opinion.
25:50
And then, you know, as far as law enforcement and the use of force and how much
25:55
force can an officer use versus, you know, and we got proportionality, right?
26:01
Like, and when, at what level does de-escalation, has it played its course?
26:08
And what if you have to, there's a lot of what ifs, right? All these situations are very different.
26:14
Now, I believe that cops should be highly trained in de-escalation and they
26:20
should be highly trained in lethal force. Yeah, that's right.
26:24
The more trained you are in lethal force, the more confident you are in the use of that force.
26:31
And then therefore, the less apt you are to jump straight to it because of uncertainty,
26:39
I think. That's what I believe.
26:44
We can still have the non-aggression principle in
26:47
law enforcement in law enforcement yeah we
26:50
can now out there in the libertarian world we have anarcho-capitalists which
26:57
if you want to get absolutely absolutely technical i would classify myself i
27:03
agree with the anarcho-capitalist principles more than most other variants of that.
27:11
But yeah, ANCAPs want to replace state police with free market,
27:19
you know, private entities that go into a contract.
27:25
You have to live up to a contract and you're accountable to that contract.
27:29
And then competing agencies can come along and try to outperform and outbid
27:36
you, et cetera, et cetera.
27:37
And that's how a lot of things are already.
27:40
But for some reason, policing seems a bridge too far on that.
27:45
Well, here's the thing, man.
27:47
It's what's in the contract. How much authority did you give them?
27:53
At what point, if they violate that authority, can you terminate contract and
27:58
go with your next vendor?
27:59
And then at what point, if they are in violation of their contract,
28:04
well, then they're at fault and possibly criminally negligent.
28:10
Well, the company ain't going to roll up their own guy.
28:13
Well, then you have a dispassionate third party who can enforce that.
28:22
There can still be a municipality, folks. Folks, there can still be a city government
28:28
who has the ultimate authority.
28:32
Elected officials, people, elected officials.
28:36
And they have the ultimate authority. Yeah, but the company's got all the guns.
28:41
Well, guess what? Every American citizen has a right to own a gun.
28:44
So if you structured that up just right, you know, you wouldn't have that issue.
28:49
All right. I'm going down a rabbit hole, kind of. I advocate,
28:52
I think there is a world where privatized policing can exist and in better harmony
29:03
than institutional government policing.
29:09
Yeah, I think that. I think that. All right, folks, we're going to shift gears.
29:17
What about the non-aggression principle in your daily life or in your daily
29:23
business interactions or whatever?
29:26
That's easy, isn't it?
29:28
I would say probably most people walk the earth adhering to that,
29:34
to the non-aggression principle.
29:35
You respect other people's boundaries.
29:38
For the most part, you respect other people's personal space.
29:42
Most people avoid physical confrontations. most
29:46
and most of the time you resolve
29:49
disputes through you know
29:51
some dialogue yeah hey f you hey f you you know that's an escalation right there
29:58
right i got into a little road rage incident a guy i was probably i was driving
30:05
aggressively and a guy uh.
30:11
To play the game where he shoots over in front of you to slow you down or to do whatever.
30:19
And then once, and then he would get up and he was driving in front of me and
30:24
then he would get up and then ride neck and neck with the car that was going
30:30
slow and then block the entire lane.
30:32
And then, you know, traffic was piling up behind us.
30:37
And then he would, he would step on it and speed up to where if I passed him,
30:43
it would be something ridiculous to where I'd have to.
30:45
So, and then I would just get over into the right lane and then he would get over and slow down.
30:50
And at some point it became where he got tired of playing the game.
30:55
And as I pulled up to go around him, he was flipping me off and flipping me
30:58
off and FU, FU, I could see we, you know, we were, we were going pretty bad.
31:03
So I flipped him off, but then he gave me the finger guns. Oh man.
31:09
So I lost it. That was an escalation.
31:13
And, and, oh man, I got, I got irate.
31:18
And then in retrospect, I was like, man, that, I didn't, that was,
31:22
that was madness. Because what would happen?
31:24
He was a, you know, average white guy, 20 something, 30, maybe 30 something.
31:29
And his wife was in the car with him. And I was like, man, what,
31:32
what if we would have pulled over,
31:35
What if I would have let the Hulk come out and then I would have cut him off,
31:41
pulled him over to the side of the road where he was forced to pull over and
31:46
then got out and said, you got finger guns.
31:49
Show me what you got.
31:51
And then we would have had to go into a shootout because of road rage.
31:55
You know what I mean? Because of aggression, raw aggression.
31:59
And so I almost immediately felt bad about that.
32:02
And then the wife writes a thing on my business. Hey, this guy's crazy.
32:09
And then I wrote back and I was like, hey, I don't think me or him are very
32:15
proud of that interaction. And I apologize for my part in it.
32:19
And I offered them some free training. They didn't take me up on it,
32:22
but the point is if you take a moment to think about the logical progression
32:27
of that aggression, it's not going to end well.
32:30
Do I want to shoot a dude, a regular guy who is just being an asshole?
32:38
Now, back in the day, I would have been happily thrown hands with the guy, right? Back in the day.
32:45
And I might've taken an ass whooping or I might've given one.
32:48
I've taken many and given many right there on the side of the road.
32:52
Then we both would have been charged with assault. You see the logical progression, right?
32:56
Somebody would have called the cops. And then in this instance,
32:59
probably the cops would have been there instantly, right?
33:02
Like if somebody's breaking into your home, it takes 20 minutes for the cops show up.
33:07
If you're doing something wrong, it takes seconds for the cops to show up in
33:12
my experience. My point is this.
33:16
Aggression will get you. It'll get you in trouble. And if you play out the progression,
33:21
are you willing to do to go all the way?
33:25
Are you willing to go all the way with it? Are you committed to that aggression?
33:29
Some people are, man, and they don't care and they'll go to jail and they don't, you know, whatever.
33:34
I care. I don't want to go to jail. I got grandkids trying to be a good example for people.
33:40
Not only my family, definitely my family, but there's people listening these days.
33:46
I just posted on the Facebooks, 10,000 downloads. Thank you so much for 10,000 downloads.
33:52
I don't know if that's good or bad, but hey man, it's pretty awesome to me. So that means there's.
34:00
My voice. And, you know, I can't, you know, so I got, I'm trying to be an example,
34:06
right? I'm trying to lead by example.
34:08
I'm trying to be a good human, trying to love Jesus, all these things.
34:12
So yeah, aggression, if it plays out and you're, you know, to the logical end,
34:17
are you willing to go that far?
34:20
And then what about property rights? Yeah.
34:24
Trespassing on other people's property, stealing other people's property,
34:27
destroying other people's property.
34:29
Or if you're a hunter, you know what? I had some dudes come up and knock on
34:32
my door in the beginning of hunting season.
34:36
And they were on some other property and had shot a deer with a bow.
34:40
And the deer came over, they tracked it onto my property.
34:44
And instead of coming onto my property, they came to my front door,
34:48
knocked on the door respectfully, stepped back off the door respectfully and
34:52
said, Hey, here's what happened.
34:54
Is it okay if we go look for the, yeah, right on man, that, that was,
35:01
that was an execution of the non-aggression principle, whether he knew it or not.
35:05
That was just good manners. A lot of people just call that good manners,
35:08
but yeah, man, I thought that was very good of them because I'm very skeptical
35:12
when people knock on my door, good people.
35:15
I'm very, I'm not, you know, I'm not, I'm not crazy.
35:21
You know what I mean? I'm not some kind of crazy paranoid
35:25
dude but if somebody knocks on my door
35:28
unexpected right because we don't live in like a neighborhood we live kind of
35:32
on a somewhat in a somewhat rural space so when people knock on my door it takes
35:40
a lot of effort to knock on my door it's 178 yards from my mailbox to my front door.
35:47
So it takes effort. You've got to come up to very steep driveways on either
35:51
side of, I got two, right?
35:53
They split off at the bottom of the hill and one comes to one side of the house, one goes to the other.
35:58
Yeah. Yeah. It takes effort to do that. You're deliberate.
36:02
Once you get to the split in my driveway, whatever you're doing beyond that is deliberate.
36:11
So, you know, unless you're invited, I'm a little skeptical.
36:16
But anyway that that's an example right that's
36:19
a real-time example those guys came and
36:21
asked permission to go on my property and good
36:25
man that's awesome and that's what you're supposed to do all right let's we're
36:30
talking about business a little bit but let's let's talk about small scale entrepreneurs
36:34
like myself because that's what that's what i know right every transaction every interaction,
36:42
it's voluntary, folks.
36:43
I don't coerce people. I don't sell a bill of goods that I can't deliver on.
36:51
I don't defraud people. I don't overcharge people.
36:54
I don't present one thing on the socials and then deliver another thing in person.
37:00
And as a small business guy, That's rational self-interest.
37:06
You treat people fairly and with respect and honestly so that your business
37:11
will grow and you build a good reputation for people.
37:18
Long-term trust and stuff like that, and a loyal customer base,
37:25
and that kind of stuff, right?
37:29
And as far as competition with other people, that competition in the market
37:36
is very good, but check it out.
37:38
That don't mean you can't still collaborate, right? I collaborate with several
37:42
other instructor types who do the same things that I do and probably have had
37:48
a crossover of customers.
37:50
I'm not getting rich. They're not getting rich. And if I stomped on those dudes, would I get rich?
37:56
And even so, would it be worth it? Would it be worth stomping someone else out? No, man.
38:02
That's the non-aggression principle in action in business, being a square dealer,
38:08
right and i'm
38:11
transparent i believe i think people know my intentions
38:14
i think people know the direction my business i
38:17
think they know what i'm trying to achieve etc etc and then
38:20
down to the very most personal level right individual self-defense
38:24
yeah i mean yeah i believe you should be lethal but you should always look for
38:31
peaceful resolutions first yeah always and And attempt to have some mutual respect
38:39
for other people, even if you believe differently.
38:42
I say again, even if you believe differently, have a mutual human respect for
38:46
other people so that you trust that you can interact with these people without
38:53
any coercion and that they're interacting with you without any coercion.
38:57
You know, trust is a thing there. All right. All right.
39:02
So moving on to the next sort of topic, and again, this ties in very well with the last episode.
39:16
And misuse of the non-aggression principle.
39:20
And we're going to talk about protesters. We're going to talk about these community organizer,
39:27
what is told to us to be grassroots efforts to protest a thing.
39:40
Usually it's just to protest Donald Trump And anything Donald Trump has got his hands on.
39:47
And it's very dangerous. It's very dangerous to frame your actions up on the
39:55
surface as non-aggressive,
39:57
but then try to suddenly escalate tensions, such as standing in front of a...
40:06
Now, look, folks, you know I'm not a... I believe we should abolish most government agencies. most.
40:14
But if you're standing in front of a, and I mean impeding their forward progress
40:19
while they are executing, what is legal duties, folks? Whether you like the legality of it or not.
40:29
Or if you're surrounding, if there's two or three agents standing around doing
40:35
their thing, and you don't like the thing they're doing, and you got 30,
40:40
40 people surrounding two or three guys,
40:44
you're setting the conditions for bad things to happen.
40:48
And I guess if you're willing to be a martyr in that situation, I guess drive on.
40:53
But if you're not willing to be a martyr in that situation, then you're going
40:57
in because it's designed to create an overreaction so that then someone can
41:04
catch it on video and then say, see, look how evil these guys are.
41:08
But here's what I can say sort of about the government.
41:13
Sees in the dudes and the cops even, and cops even.
41:18
At the ground level, generally speaking, ground level dudes are just,
41:24
are good dudes just doing what their job is.
41:28
And maybe they have, and maybe they haven't put a lot of deep philosophical
41:33
thought into what their job is.
41:36
They're just out executing what, hey, you know, we do this, we do immigration
41:42
enforcement, So that's what we're doing.
41:44
And then you start getting and then they're getting accosted by all these folks
41:48
under the guise of peaceful protests.
41:51
OK, the agency and the organization is one thing.
41:57
The greater the the larger agency and the doctrine of the larger agency and
42:03
the decision makers at that level and then even the, you know, executive level.
42:10
That that's one thing but then the
42:13
guys out executing that's another thing
42:16
now i will always critique
42:19
the level of training that many many many of these men
42:22
have from and women based on the things
42:25
you see on the video various videos i'm
42:28
not talking about one in particular i'm just saying there's a
42:32
lot of like you can see a lack of training in the way they go hands-on or the
42:38
way they attempt or not to de-escalate or their gun handling skills or any of
42:46
those are their defensive tactics or...
42:51
Like that. I think training is lacking in general, and it's hard to train for
42:56
these very spontaneous and weird baited interactions.
43:04
But you see that if you bastardize the non-aggression principle for some kind
43:12
of appearance of having the moral high ground,
43:15
that's eventually going to bite you in the ass. It's going to bite you in the ass.
43:21
And look, the question is about some of these grassroots organizations,
43:28
the question is, are they grassroots or are they being funded by,
43:33
nefarious parties and just being manipulated and being, what's the word?
43:41
Radicalized. Yeah, that's it radicalized with propaganda
43:45
that you get from all the socials and their social media bubbles
43:48
and all the things man we talk about all this stuff all
43:51
the time but as it relates to non-aggression principle if you're using non-aggression
43:57
to incite violence then is that non-aggression at all if you're trying to incite
44:03
an overreaction from a guy who has a firearm and then somebody gets murdered,
44:10
well, you've achieved a strategic objective, haven't you?
44:15
And if you're willing to sacrifice someone else's life to achieve a strategic
44:21
objective in your hyper-partisan world, that's not the non-aggression principle
44:28
at all. No, that's not at all.
44:31
And then there's property, right? What did we see during the riots several years
44:37
ago where they were destroying literal city blocks and businesses and everything?
44:45
Because once a Molotov cocktail is thrown, the whole movement is discredited, in my opinion.
44:52
This manufactured indignant behavior.
44:58
Like, yeah, nobody's more against government overreach than me.
45:04
But by doing equal and opposite of the thing that you're claiming you don't
45:09
like, you're a hypocrite.
45:11
That's it. You simply can't claim to be adhering to non-aggression and being
45:18
peaceful protesters while inciting,
45:21
intentionally creating a situation that logically will lead to an overreaction or violence.
45:29
Now, that's where I sort of lean on
45:32
the training of these agents and these ground-level, tactical-level dudes.
45:36
You you should be
45:38
held to a higher standard but the reality is
45:41
you have qualified immunity for most things and then
45:45
there's enough there's enough law out
45:47
there that if somebody does something and you accidentally kill someone you
45:54
can still skirt by by the law will still help you kind of get away with it and
46:00
the government that makes no
46:01
pretense of the non-aggression principle they are there to be aggressive.
46:05
And I'll tell you a thing right now, as far as all this ICE stuff goes right
46:09
now and border patrol and all, I think that the administration wants to project
46:15
strength and wants to project force.
46:18
I disagree with that tactic, but I don't disagree that illegal immigrants need
46:25
to be deported. I don't disagree with that.
46:28
I think the way it's happening is the wrong tactic That's what I think.
46:36
I cut people who disagree with me.
46:39
One guy says, well, what about Lakin Riley? And what about, and you start naming
46:44
off all these young ladies that were murdered by some illegal criminal.
46:53
And I'm not discounting that at all. I'm not saying that those dudes don't need to face justice.
47:01
I'm saying, what does that have to do with murdering protesters?
47:07
All right, damn. And whether or not a protester has it coming.
47:12
Look, if you incite violence, you got it coming.
47:16
But nobody deserves a death penalty unless you aim to cause death.
47:25
Nobody deserves a death penalty for being an asshole.
47:29
So if you're on board with all the protesters inciting and provoking all these
47:36
agents, you may as well, I mean, yeah, go out there and do it yourself.
47:43
Put yourself in the way so that you might be the one that catches a bullet or two or ten.
47:50
Otherwise, think critically and understand that using the non-aggression principle
47:55
as a moral shield Is incorrect and wrong Just like,
48:01
Unnecessary use of lethal Violence is wrong Alright, damn,
48:08
Should I continue on?
48:11
Let's see I don't want to continue on that,
48:15
a little bit. These groups, look, if they're out there coordinating all these
48:18
blockades, right. And you're trying to physically block.
48:23
Whether or not you think a warrant is valid or not, that's not for you, right?
48:27
That that's not for you. You go challenge that in court or you go challenge
48:31
it. Well, that don't stop them from getting picked up today. Yeah, you're right.
48:36
Well, the question of why you think illegals now look.
48:43
Propaganda aside, uh, If an illegal alien, never mind criminal history, should be deported.
48:52
An illegal criminal for sure should be deported. Well, yeah,
48:57
deported and then face charges.
48:58
But will that happen? Who knows?
49:01
But if you're causing property, if you're throwing bricks and rocks and shit
49:06
like that at government vehicles, there's no pretense of nonviolence there.
49:12
That's not peaceful assembly at all.
49:15
And just because you're calling something, you know, aggression by the state,
49:20
which it is aggression by the state, but unfortunately, it's legal aggression by the state.
49:27
And you're fighting the fight in the wrong arena out there on the street.
49:33
You're fighting. Yeah, that looks good for social media.
49:35
It looks good for the for the six o'clock news, but it's the wrong arena.
49:41
Social media, any media that all the media amplifies this shit.
49:44
They edit footage to make it look one-sided or the other side,
49:50
whichever side they happen to be on.
49:52
And then it just reinforces the hyperbolic propagandistic shit, right?
50:02
Pretty posters out there of, of what now I'm pretty sure it was a border agent
50:08
or possibly DHS guy that, that shot that dude pretty, but there's,
50:14
there's an image out there now.
50:15
And it's a very compelling image that shows a guy who looks just like pretty
50:20
kind of down and on the ground. And then it shows an agent standing over him,
50:27
standing up straight and tall, pointing his gun at his head.
50:30
And it's a very compelling image.
50:33
And it may or may not win over a few hearts but it's propaganda it's it's excess
50:39
it's not doing anything to solve a problem it's just adding fuel to the fire
50:46
of the the problem and what is the.
50:54
Congress's failure to pass any kind of practical immigration reform.
51:01
That's the real problem.
51:03
But when your representative is on TV spewing a bunch of nonsense and they offer
51:11
no practical solution, and then
51:14
you go vote for them because they spew nonsense that you like to hear,
51:18
you're setting up the conditions for
51:21
this kind of shit to continue on so it's
51:24
not addressing a root cause so all these
51:27
protesters and all these anti-trump type groups who come out under the guise
51:33
of of a non-aggression peaceful protest now some guy on on x put out a very
51:44
he was a former Green Beret, or maybe current,
51:46
he put out a very compelling post drawing all the comparisons with what's going
51:51
on in Minnesota with an actual insurgency structure that he dealt with in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria,
52:02
et cetera, et cetera, and that I've dealt with too.
52:05
Most Green Berets will see a lot of these things, and they will look very familiar. That is true.
52:10
And that's what these organizers They're going off a playbook They're going off a playbook.
52:16
True. And if you deny that, you're either ignorant or willingly blind if you deny that.
52:23
But my point to that is this. Is that illegal?
52:28
Now, if you're a conservative, right-winger, MAGA type, do you believe that
52:35
it's okay for you and your homies, your hunting buddies to get together and form a little militia?
52:42
And you go out and walk around open carrying with your 2A Molon Lab shirt on, is that okay?
52:53
Well, yeah, it is okay. And it's okay for these leftist groups to organize. That is okay.
53:02
Do I think they're wrong? Yep, I do.
53:05
But that don't mean that's not their natural right to do it.
53:09
They have a freedom to assemble, right?
53:13
Oh, well, they're a part of this signal chat.
53:15
Well, who ain't a part of a freaking signal chat?
53:19
Well, they organize and they have their little whistles and they use apps to
53:23
highlight where ice raids are going on. Well, I got news for you, good folks.
53:27
If the tactics were different, they wouldn't know where these ice raids were going on at.
53:32
So either somebody is leaking information to these people, which is highly possible.
53:38
You know, these politicians are up there They're nefarious, right?
53:44
They ain't beyond leaking information.
53:49
Because this resembles an insurgency, it is not yet, on a broader level,
53:56
I don't think has breached any legal boundary now.
54:03
Obstructing justice or whatever it is, some other people posted.
54:08
So this guy, Preddy, for instance, yes, I do not question one iota.
54:17
This dude's right to be carrying a firearm loaded with another magazine with
54:23
an optic on it. I don't care if it's got a ported barrel or a compensator.
54:28
I don't care if he had extended mags.
54:31
That's his right to do it. And that guy, because he's making bad decisions,
54:36
whatever, that's bad. And when he broke the law, which he did,
54:41
well, he made a bad decision to break the law.
54:45
And then under-trained agents do, they did what under-trained agents do. They overreact.
54:53
It was a bad situation. But that dude had every right to look at his little
54:58
app and go to wherever the protest, the little flash mob protest was.
55:04
He had every right to stand on the sidelines and video.
55:09
But when he stepped out into the middle of the road to obstruct or to step in between an agent.
55:20
Overreaction or not, to step in between an agent and the conduct of his duties, he broke the law.
55:26
And by virtue of having a gun on you while you're breaking the law,
55:30
that just doubles down. That just adds to your charges after that.
55:37
Folks, be very careful about the language around, you know, this firearm situation.
55:42
Because if you're a righty and you say he had no right to be out there protesting
55:46
with a gun, you're slipping, you're slipping hard.
55:49
And if you call yourself a 2A person, you're being inconsistent right now.
55:56
Yep, that's the way it is. All right, nevermind. All right, Damn,
56:00
damn, damn, damn. Sorry.
56:03
Now, that dude out there under the guise of the non-aggression principle,
56:08
the minute he interjected himself into the situation, he violated non-aggression
56:13
principle and thus was no longer at the moral high ground.
56:20
I don't care how, how much of a caring nurse he was.
56:24
If the only thing was he willing to risk his life to stop, you know,
56:31
this lady from getting snatched up and arrested. Yeah, he was, I guess.
56:37
Did he think it was going to go that far? I don't know. Don't know what he was thinking exactly.
56:43
So there's a line that legally, and that's what you got to worry about.
56:48
Look, morally or not, I said this, I said this on the last episode,
56:52
I say it every now and again, the moral line and the legal line are in two different places.
56:58
And just because it was morally correct, don't mean it was legally correct.
57:02
And guess what? That's what you're going to be judged on standing in a court
57:06
of law, or you're just going to be murdered on the spot, which is not okay. It's not okay.
57:13
But it happened anyway, didn't it? That poor guy is equally as dead,
57:17
no matter, no matter what.
57:20
No matter what his moral high ground was.
57:23
And those agents probably won't get charged.
57:28
I think legally speaking, they won't. Unless they really pick apart that video
57:32
that exposes that he got shot after he was disarmed.
57:38
And that just again highlights the lack of training amongst that crew there.
57:44
At any rate. Oh my gosh.
57:49
All right. If the general public in America, the general public in America,
57:55
generally speaking, adheres to the non-aggression principle,
58:00
whether they really think they are or not by name, right?
58:03
But they just, generally speaking, you leave other people alone.
58:06
You don't violate other people's property or person.
58:10
But then you see groups out there who are using what's called,
58:14
they're saying we're nonviolent.
58:17
Right. But then the situation inevitably becomes violent.
58:25
That's casting a shadow on the non-aggression principle.
58:28
They're not casting a shadow on the people doing the violence.
58:33
They're casting it on the principle itself.
58:35
Look, these people were out doing non-aggression.
58:39
Critical thinkers are going to look at that, and they're going to see it as a deceptive tactic.
58:45
And then sheep out there are going to look and say, oh, look,
58:48
they were being non-aggressive and still.
58:49
But it makes, you know, advocating for non-aggression principle a bit more difficult
58:56
from a libertarian's perspective when you got people out there using it as a
59:00
goddamn political tactic, a physical political tactic.
59:05
Because using it as a shield, yeah, you risk violence.
59:10
You provoke overreaction. Innocent people can be killed.
59:15
Protests look like a scene in some dystopian movie. And then guess what that
59:21
does, good people? Guess what it does?
59:26
Overreaction from the state so what are they trying to do by by talking about
59:32
this guy had a gun a military was some some article said it was a military style
59:37
gun it was a pistol it was a 320,
59:41
now whether that gun might have went off by itself or not it's a whole nother episode,
59:48
but what that does now the state's going to have an overreaction and i say the
59:51
state i mean like The United States.
59:57
And what is that? What does that look like? They conflate.
1:00:01
So I commented on this to someone.
1:00:06
If you guys know about the Cloward-Piven theory or the Cloward-Piven doctrine,
1:00:12
as it relates to government and like welfare, right?
1:00:16
The doctrine kind of broadly and loosely states that if we,
1:00:22
and I believe this is relevant to immigrants as well, if we bring in immigrants
1:00:27
and put them all on welfare, and we have enough people in America,
1:00:32
and not just immigrants, I mean like people out of work,
1:00:34
unemployed, and stuff like that,
1:00:38
If they overwhelm that system to the degree that the system breaks under the
1:00:43
pressure of all that weight, then they can institute absolute governmental control over.
1:00:51
That is a government system. Anyway, they believe that they can implement,
1:00:55
you know, kind of total stricter, total governmental control.
1:01:01
Well, in comparison, if now, because what you're seeing a lot now is you got
1:01:07
liberals who are out carrying guns.
1:01:10
There are liberal and I mean, left wing, you know, colorful liberal types who
1:01:17
are banding together in their own little gun clubs. And I'm here for it, folks. I'm here for it.
1:01:23
But what that's doing is it's proliferating gun ownership, right,
1:01:27
to the degree that, okay, gun ownership is not the domain of the right-wing Republicans at all.
1:01:37
It's not the domain of libertarians.
1:01:39
Libertarians, half of them are out there with all the guns, and then half of
1:01:43
them are out there who are completely peacenik, you know, hippie types.
1:01:48
So libertarians are a very diverse group as well.
1:01:52
But the peacenik libertarians don't begrudge the gun-owning libertarians and vice versa.
1:01:59
Okay, but now you got the extreme hard left who is out there advocating for
1:02:04
guns too. And they're using incidents like this, in fact, and they're not wrong for it.
1:02:10
So now that you can almost say, well, everybody's kind of on board with gun ownership now.
1:02:18
And then we press these issues here. Well, let's go instigate.
1:02:23
Let's go do a protest, instigate violence against the state,
1:02:27
because that's what DHS and ICE and all those guys represent.
1:02:33
They're representatives of the state.
1:02:36
So, OK, hey, let's go incite violence against these guys while armed.
1:02:41
OK. And now you go and do this. And now guess what? Well, this guy was armed.
1:02:47
And so next thing you know, somebody passes a law where you can't be at a at a protest.
1:02:55
Can be legally armed and have a permit, but then you, but you're not allowed
1:02:59
to go to a protest with it.
1:03:01
Well, Edgar, rules like that already exist for schools and, and federal buildings
1:03:05
and court houses and blah, blah, blah.
1:03:08
Well, to me, that's an overreach. There you go.
1:03:12
So now you're just setting the stage for more overreach. So I believe it's,
1:03:16
it's, I believe a part of this, a piece of this puzzle for a broader implication here is that if we,
1:03:26
okay, let's advocate for guns and then let's go out and put,
1:03:30
that way we ensure guns are in these very dubious situations.
1:03:35
And now we have justification to put stricter control on these guns.
1:03:43
That's what I think. That's what I think. That's part of, it's a piece of the
1:03:48
puzzle. Is it the grand scheme?
1:03:50
You know, I don't know, but I believe it's a piece of the puzzle.
1:03:54
And then politicians and media. You know what? I got sick of looking at social media today.
1:04:00
Politicians and social media and the mainstream media, they exploit these incidents,
1:04:07
folks. They exploit them.
1:04:08
And some of them may take the moral high ground or may claim the moral high
1:04:11
ground. They still exploit.
1:04:13
You can be on the side of whichever side you want and still exploit that for
1:04:17
your benefit, blaming your opponent for inciting the violence.
1:04:22
And all that does is keep us polarized, keep us distracted, playing the blame
1:04:29
game instead of looking at the underlying issues, which is what, folks?
1:04:34
Particular past event, this Minnesota business, what's the underlying issue?
1:04:39
It's immigration policy.
1:04:41
It's got nothing to do with firearm ownership, where you can carry a gun at. Yeah.
1:04:47
Manipulation of non-aggression principle has bigger implications.
1:04:52
That's all there is to it. And it might seem right at the moment for you.
1:04:56
If you're a ground level, allegedly grassroots dude, and you're out there protesting
1:05:01
ICE and protesting whoever,
1:05:04
and then you're getting in their face and you're trying to, just because you
1:05:09
throw your body, but you hold your hands up like, oh, I'm innocent,
1:05:12
I'm innocent, but you throw your body in front of someone.
1:05:15
That's not a freebie. That's not a freebie.
1:05:20
And all you're doing is putting more scrutiny on that tactic.
1:05:24
And the broader implications are that ultimately we're going to lose more freedoms because of you.
1:05:29
And the people funding all these, they don't care because they're among the elites anyway.
1:05:36
Oh, man. Yeah. All right.
1:05:39
Here we go, good people. We're going to wrap this business. Non-aggression principle.
1:05:45
It's good. It's solid. It's rock solid. It should be adhered to in all aspects
1:05:51
of life to include big-level politics, to include the enforcement of law, and,
1:05:58
people, you know, be a critical thinker.
1:06:03
Question everything you see and ask. Yeah, use the non-aggression principle as a metric.
1:06:11
Okay, well, did this dude in this incidence, did this, at what point,
1:06:18
who, where was the non-aggression principle violated?
1:06:21
And be critical about that and look and see where the breakdown was.
1:06:27
And this one I say all the time, and I'm going to say it again.
1:06:33
Apply standards of behavior equally to all sides of an issue.
1:06:41
Don't allow your side, because you believe you have moral ground,
1:06:45
to behave any worse than what you think the bad guys are.
1:06:51
Hold protesters and hold authorities equally accountable for escalation And
1:06:59
don't give one or the other a free pass based on ideology At some point,
1:07:06
some place, you can find a breakdown of who was wrong And a lot of situations
1:07:12
are very ambiguous, good people I know this.
1:07:16
Can find it. You can find it. You have to hold everyone, and I mean everyone,
1:07:25
accountable for their individual actions, because a government agent don't get
1:07:31
a free pass just because he was just doing his job either.
1:07:35
Hold everyone accountable. And then for these agencies,
1:07:39
not only the agencies, good people, but these community organizers,
1:07:43
hold everybody equally transparent
1:07:47
hold everybody equally transparent
1:07:51
you have to be able the community organizers just like the government if you're
1:07:57
organizing in the name of a cause but you're employing thugs or outside paid agitators that.
1:08:09
All that. Oh, just making everybody out to be, oh no, these people are just organic.
1:08:15
No, man, that's not good either. That's bad.
1:08:19
That's not only bad, that's bad for your own, because once it comes out, it comes out.
1:08:25
And then you look like an asshole, then your organization just changes names
1:08:28
or changes uniforms. You know, you wear a different t-shirt to your next protest.
1:08:35
Yeah, we know the government agencies need to be held accountable and they're often not.
1:08:39
But so do the organization, the community organizers.
1:08:45
Don't allow your side to behave any worse than you expect of the other side.
1:08:52
Don't allow your side to cross ethical boundaries that you ain't willing to
1:09:00
allow the other side to cross.
1:09:03
Don't allow your side To use something as universal As a non-aggression principle
1:09:08
To use it as a weapon When we're in these Hyper-polarized Friggin' disputes about things,
1:09:17
And here it is folks It comes all the way back to this Take personal responsibility,
1:09:24
Whether you're an activist Or whether you're a Law enforcement agent Mm-hmm.
1:09:30
Responsibility for your actions. Choose actions that uphold not only the non-aggression
1:09:36
principle, but uphold individual rights.
1:09:40
And while you're holding yourself responsible, yes, call out manipulations and
1:09:46
coercions that twist the situation for the worst.
1:09:52
Or for the worst, yeah.
1:09:54
Be individually responsible, even if you're a stormtrooper.
1:10:00
Have some individual responsibility. Don't be the guy that pulls the trigger on an innocent person.
1:10:05
If your partner does it, that don't make it okay, that means you call him out.
1:10:10
And then be honest about it.
1:10:13
And the same goes for your activist.
1:10:16
That's it, folks. Individual responsibility. Take individual responsibility
1:10:21
and practice the non-aggression principle in your daily life,
1:10:25
whatever level of life that is whether it's
1:10:28
in your house in the morning with your wife all the
1:10:31
way up to your political activism or your government
1:10:35
stormtrooper job yeah practice the non-aggression principle and uphold individual
1:10:39
rights that's what i got good people all right please follow us on all the socials
1:10:46
ospreyshootingsolutions.com twoteamguys.com.
1:10:53
Thejuntoepodcast.com give send go backslash helpahomiefund.com.
1:11:01
Siloftc.com go check all those out we got good stuff going on all over the place
1:11:06
good people thank you for listening I love you guys.