FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Market anarchist media center names advisory panel.
AUBURN, ALABAMA – August 19, 2009 – Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) – Center for a Stateless Society Director Brad Spangler today announced formation of an advisory panel for the market anarchist media center.
Gary Chartier, Stephan Kinsella, Wendy McElroy, Sheldon Richman, Shawn Wilbur
Named to the C4SS Advisory Panel were Stephan Kinsella, Wendy McElroy, Shawn Wilbur, Sheldon Richman and Gary Chartier.
###
ORGANIZATIONAL SUMMARY
The Center for a Stateless Society is the Molinari Institute’s media center. The mission of the Molinari Institute is to promote understanding of the philosophy of Market Anarchism as a sane, consensual alternative to the hypertrophic violence of the State. The Institute takes its name from Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912), originator of the theory of Market Anarchism.
CONTACT
Brad Spangler
Center for a Stateless Society
media@c4ss.org
http://www.c4ss.org
When attending meetings Stephan Kinsella and Wendy McElroy will have to don fake beards, lest they be excluded from discussion.
So being on the C4SS Advisory Panel is sort of like being a Pharaoh, then?
They had tiny narrow beards. Anarchists tend to sport Lenin or Santa Claus-style bears. :0
I’m afraid Stephan will be like the fifth dentist in that “four out of five dentists” cartoon:
“I strongly recommend it.”
“I heartily concur.”
“Highly advisable.”
“A wise course of action, indeed.”
“That shit’ll rot the teeth outta yer goddamn head! It’ll fuckin’ KILL ya!”
That lineup image is like some sort of alternate-universe left-libertarian Sesame Street segment. One of these things is not like the other…
This made me literally lol.
Wendy McElroy is a troublesome addition since her lack of a beard violates the “leftism ~ beard” proportionality I discovered before.
As Roderick’s pix highlight so clearly, Wendy is also distinguished from the other participants by another obvious disadvantage: the possession of a full head of hair.
At least this time Stephan Kinsella can’t go crying to Lew Rockwell if someone on the panel criticizes the not-so-thinly-veiled bigotry of, say, Hans-Hermann Hoppe in a random blog comment thread.
And hopefully we’ll hear less whining about Hoppe’s “bigotry” by Mary Sues as well. Wouldn’t that be grand.
Cool, now we won’t have to read anything else about Kinsella and the left-libs fighting about some stupid definitions… At least I hope…
Oh, haven’t we announced the C4SS Advisory Board Arena Brawl?
Not on my calendar. Re-send memo, please.
One more reason for me to ignore the C4SS. Except for Wilbur, none of these people inspire me to confidence, especially not “all left-libs are crazy commies” Kinsella.
Why?
There’s a nice cross section of market anarchism there, I think its a positive move.
Especially, why do Wendy and Sheldon not inspire confidence? I can see your point on Kinsella, but hey, at least he’s willing to engage with us.
Thanks. Of course we anti-statist libertarians are all allies (and despite myths to the contrary I’m not a “paleo”). The anti-state, pro-property rights left-libertarians have done some great work of late exposing the insidiousness and distortions of state corporatism.
This, from an advocate of shoplifting. Good grief!
Hi, drunken bigot! I see you managed to lift yourself off your bed long enough to make (what you mistakenly think is) another slur against me. Good work!
When you see the other guys at C4SS, try not to piss yourself, kay? The smell would turn them off.
That’s not helpful. Any more like that and I’ll take steps.
Um, Mr. Kinsella has more talent in his toenail than you’ll ever have in your entire life (assuming that you keep acting like this).
To hell with shoplifting. Get a job and buy what you want. Or just download it. At least we can ALL agree on that!
And yet another item on a long list of “Why I ignore Francois Tremblay” items…
Advocate of shoplifting? Hell, he calls himself an “extinctionist” and says that parenting is “immoral”:
http://francoistremblay.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/mankind-must-perpetuate/
“Even if humans do not go extinct, a major decrease in population could only have greatly beneficial effects on freedom and happiness as a whole, on economic terms (less people to feed with the same amount of land, less economic inequality possible…”
Wow. Just…WOW.
I think C.S. Lewis made a comment once to the effect that, as an individual actor the survival of the human race in the abstract may or may not hold utility for you. Thus, if you had to pay a million dollars (or something like 50% of your income the rest of your life) to make sure humanity survives in a million years would you do it? Why or why not?
I’d ignore anything with you on it tbh. Kinsella I’d listen to. You? Not in a million years.
In the land of the blind…
Apparently Kinsella and Tremblay have crossed verbal swords elsewhere:
http://polycentricorder.blogspot.com/2009/05/why-i-reject-self-ownership-redux.html
If we imagine self-ownership is just a right to expect others to not violate or infringe on your body I see no epistemological or other difficulty.
But it seems to me that the interesting debate here has to do, not with violating people’s bodies—which are fairly clearly defined—but rather with violating their extra-bodily property. There are difficulties, epistemic and otherwise, about that.
This is a bit off-topic, but my opinion is that extra-bodily property is ok as an “extension” of bodily property (since, after all, most of your body are extensions of your cells anyway); however, it gets a lot weaker as the extension becomes more remote in time or space. I wouldn’t go as far as the commies and say that it’s ok to just waltz in and take what you like off the shelves of a grocery, but land that hasn’t been used for a few years or a “corporate branch” that the shareholders/managers have never personally occupied themselves should be fair game.
I think we should add Bush and Obama to the advisory board. Because Bush favours an “Ownership Society,” and so do we; and Obama favours “Change,” and so do we. Oh, and let’s kick all those darn anarchists off the board, they make us look like some kind of anarchist outfit.
I’d suggest adding Dick Cheney, who recently made clear that he believes that “freedom means freedom for everyone” and, if he’s available, Nikita Kurushchev, who, according to the Encyclopedia Brittanica, “allowed a considerable amount of freedom to the European communist parties.”
I’d suggest adding Dick Cheney, who recently made clear that he believes that “freedom means freedom for everyone”
He totally stole that from Russell Means.