Libertarian Takes Sam To Coconut Island
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 сен 2024
- Dan from California calls in to take Sam to a magical tropical island.
We stream our live show every day at 12 PM ET.
We need your help to keep providing free videos! Support the Majority Report's video content by going to / majorityreport
Watch the Majority Report live M-F at 12 p.m. EST at / samseder or listen via daily podcast at Majority.FM
Download our FREE app: majorityapp.com
SUPPORT the show by becoming a member: jointhemajority...
We Have Merch!!! shop.majorityre...
LIKE us on Facebook: / majorityreport
FOLLOW us on Twitter: / majorityfm
SUBSCRIBE to us on RUclips: / samseder
Image Credit, Julius Silver
commons.wikime...
creativecommon...
Image has been cropped and color has been altered.
Dan: Hey sam. This is Dan Norton from California.
Sam: Dan from California, what's on your mind?
Dan: Yeah, we talked a few weeks ago about objectivism. I don't know you, you know that call. Sam: okay.
Emma: Yes, we know that call.
Dan: just want to make sure…
Sam: Oh you're the guy who has fertility issues!
Dan: So let's see, there's a lot I wanted to talk about since the last show. Where to start?
Sam: Well, let's give you the most important thing you want to talk about.
Dan: Most important, okay. I guess the island example we were talking about. I'd like to go back to that.
Sam: Okay refreshed my memory now.
Dan: Okay so I asked about the issue of coercion so if you're alone on an island the first question is if you're alone on an island do you need to work to survive. and I got an answer to that from you and from matt.
Sam: all right yeah okay well we'll figure out Emma. like we don't need to I don't need to take a tour of like Bradley and Emma and then maybe we can ask we're going in the hallways working in the building and this and that. I mean okay so what's your point? you're gonna make a point it's not about taking a survey.
Dan: Well, I thought there might have been some disagreement. That's why I was raising this. because Emma was the one who was bringing up the issue of coercion the most.
Sam: What's the point you want to make though? What's the point you want to make?
Dan: Well, I want to know what you think isn't coercion ultimately? because I think that's the root of the disagreement.
Sam: All right, well give me an example and I'll tell you if I think it's coercive.
Dan: Okay well maybe we can know Vaush's coconut island example?
Sam: no.
Dan: Okay it's kind of vulgar so maybe I'll give him a version of it well.
Sam: or not how about coming up with another example? how's that?
Dan: okay maybe I can debate that with him sometime if he wants but. So let's just say that there are two people on an island. and at first, they don't know about each other like imagine one is on each side of the island split in half and they don't agree so each one is surviving by himself at first and at that stage you would say is it correct that you would say neither is being coerced?
Sam: Neither man is being coerced. I mean if they're not in any way aware of each other so they can't be coerced. in each other and there's I don't know what other dynamic exists but assuming there's no everybody else on the island right they're not being coerced. Dan: Okay so there's no coercion if they're just by themselves in nature acting. okay now suppose that they discover each other or one discovers the other and they start trading with each other. like one guy says all right I'll do the fishing and you work on building the shelter.
Why Sam hasn't started a Libertarians-only call-in show yet baffles me.
I assume Sam has children and had enough of teenagers with them.
He doesn't get too many nowadays since most have realized they can't win a debate against him
Do you want this man to die?
Why are libertarians so dumb, lol.
@@gimphandjeff I don’t think I would say that. There’s definitely some libertarians who I disagree with on political points but are also intelligent enough to say “I am wrong.” The problem is: those people don’t have the time or interest or even Cojones to call into Sam.
I have like five friends who are libertarians and they have a running joke when I send them a video:
“Oh? Matthew is trying to make me rethink my life choices today?”
Catching 10x more fish than you need to survive isn't "wealth inequality". It's depopulating your food source, like a moron, just so you can have a pile of rotten fish.
'Talent' is also not the same thing as 'wealth'. First one is unique and cannot be distributed, the other can. Im 100% sure this libertarian bases his knowledge about the world on games, reddit subs and YT videos.
@@MRTN13 Hehe, I love RPGs, but most are ancap madness, when it comes to economics. "Please save our village hero!", "Oh, you need a magic sword?", "That'll be 1000000 gp."
@@MRTN13 what games, like rts and like civ?
Even their examples are fucking moronic, unless you're salting and drying the fish, even catching an ungodly amount is ridiculous
@@epictube51 Their examples aren't based in reality, either. Notice how he has to create more and more hypotheticals/convoluted situations as some type of "gotcha!" to prove a definition wrong. This is why """praxeology""" loses to material analysis.
I’m glad that Libertarians like Dan are starting to apply Alden’s Theory of Monetization to their arguments.
It’s hilarious 😂
Alden’s number is the most important number
Aspect 1: Save life by losing all money in trade.
even google has never heard of this theory
do you have a link to an article?
How do you keep a straight face? My grade 4 students would’ve thrown their pencil at me and stormed out of the room 🤣
This caller taught me if you want to explain coercion to a libertarian the idea of being compelled to lose their life or be required to do sex acts isn’t coercion but if they have to give up their money then the concept finally starts to click 😂
I bet he loves coconut Island aslong as he has all the coconuts lmfao
If anything that just reaffirms what we already knew about them: they literally care more about their money than people's lives or people being exploited for sex. They're such reprehensible lowlifes I swear.
That's because every libertarian ever got their start by looking at their paycheck and being mad that a percent was taxed.
@@bpdmf2798 lol right, "Taxation is theft and the government is stealing from me... But I also believe the minimum wage should be $0 and that's totally not theft sweat shops get a bad rep for no reason!!"
@@bpdmf2798 Or they read Ayn Rand books and thought that they were John Galt.
He's butchering Vaushes analogy and it still doesn't work for him lmao
lmao thats what i said
Hey, that exactly what I said too, even used the word butchered lol.
couldnt watch it cuz i was 2nd hand embrassed, its obvious he doesnt get the point of vaushs thought experiment because o fhow he tried to explain it (he didnt want it to be vulgar... then why didnt he just add a different offer instead of a bj?) in a way that would twist the logic into hisperspective instead of wrestling with the argument itself with seder
@@plusixty8992 He didn't get the point of his own thought experiment.
He'S nOt StArViNg BuT hE;s On ThE eDgE oF dYiNg.
@@davidm1926 I thought libertarians loved "The Edge".
The caller's argument: "That's not coercion; that's [synonym for coercion]" on repeat.
Coercion and exploitation are very different concepts.
@@SoundsSilver If we're being pedantic, your use of the word very was both unnecessary and misleading.
pretty much
@@SoundsSilver They are different concepts but fairly closely related. The textbook definition of coercion the caller is using is very narrow and only really includes physical force or the specter of physical force. So no this isn't coercion or the meaning of coercion that he wants to use. The caller was unwilling to commit to answers to the thought experiment. Person a can catch x number of fish person be can 10x number of fish. Person b wants to trade. Well, how many fish does person a need? If it's less than x he doesn't need to trade. The caller doesn't want to say person a needs >a fish because then he has to admit it's "something" that isn't fair trade between equals. Just like the limb example isn't trade between equals. I would like to hear the caller's thoughts if total fish was a finite number like 1,000 and every day they were taking 11x fish when they only need 4x fish between the two of them and the other 6 fish are going to waste but still coming out of the total. If person a stopped catching his fish every day they'd have 10 more days of fish before running out. Also assuming shelter is an immediate need and fish is a long-term need there is a lob-sided power dynamic there too. Libertarian thought experiments fall apart pretty quick under real-world conditions.
@@SoundsSilver you can't be exploited completely absent coercion
"You're the guy with fertility issues!"
I laughed so hard at that
That's how he remembered him lol
Impotent Dan!
@@fefelarue2948 What's the backstory behind that? I missed it, and it's still hilarious in isolation, but maybe that would make it even better.
Ngl I kinda felt bad for him after that. That had to be embarrassing for that guy
That's just being needlessly mean
The original analogy is elegant and beautiful in its simplicity.
This guy took it, chewed it up, and spewed it all over the carpet.
Sam's was simpler 😆 and I wouldn't call Vaush's elegant or beautiful, but the guy definitely sent it through a spaghetti strainer.
@@watamatafoyu Dennis from It’s Always Sunny also gave a perfect example of coercion when he was talking about the boat and bring women on to it for sex. “We’re not forcing them to do anything, but they won’t say no, because of the implication”
@@AlexeiIgnavich
Gross
@@lizzy-wx4rxrelax, it's from a tv show.
He totally butchered the coconut analogy lol.
Sam is like some carnival game for libertarians. No matter how many times you see someone try and fail to knock over those milk bottles with a baseball, there is always someone who will walk up to give their money away for the opportunity to fail again.
lmfao!
And then call it coercion lol
The caller should have used Alden's theorem to make a more convincing argument. Sadly he didn't check his argument's extended warranty beforehand
Very good. The goodest, most bestest comment. Ty. CIA Daddy.
You should call in
Please help, my extended warranty is outside my door
Alden's theorem involves horses, right?
@@Fragenzeichenplatte well just a particular part of horse anatomy.
you can tell he's a libertarian because he compulsively removed the part where one person woke up first, because everyone starts out equal in their tiny little brains
Technically speaking, we all do start out equal. We are all born into this world with nothing.
No, some of us have less than others. Like a kid born without a leg. Our bodies are something.
But I get what you mean colloquially speaking
@@Patrick-sg7cmCongrats, you missed the point,
@@Patrick-sg7cm Some of us are born with a trust fund waiting for us, or rich parents willing and able to pay to nurture our talents. That's also not counting the contacts that make the track to success much more easily gliding.
@@wvu05 the point is, we all come into this world naked and helpless. In that sense, we are all equal. True, some have better parenting and life circumstances.
libertarians on the majority report are an early christmas present. love it
what if the guy catching way more fish catches all of the fish and then takes the other guys food supply, sure that's not exactly coercion but it does affect the other person
@@p.chuckmoralesesquire3965 generally speaking, The Infertile One time and again tries to separate "coercion" of the environment from "coercion" of a human because for some reason "coercive" environment breaks his logical framework. It's like people must be these purely abstract entities that don't depend on their environment, like their dependence of their environment can't be as much of a physical property of a person like having a body or nerves or brain. Like once a person is born they become a completely detached independent self sufficient entity instead of a constantly needy and dependent organism that is inseparable from the environment.
Basically, he has logiced himself into not allowing himself to not be a complete moron who can't possibly accept basic properties of humans
@@lindaleelaw5277awesome
It’s a late present for 2023, but your premise is still true 😂
Here’s another example of coercion: “We’re not forcing them to do anything, but they won’t say no, because of the implication”
"We're not forcing you to stay here. But if you leave, we're probably going to fire you". Dan from California would say that this is NOT coercion.
"When asked, they said that they didn't prevent any of their workers from going home early. However, the workers said that their managers said that if they went home early they were fired." - Reporters regarding the candle maker's factory being sued by workers
so they are in danger?
@@Bisquick I knick @Matt Gibbs knows the reference. His comment is a quote from that same conversation between Dennis and Mac.
"We're not asking you to not unionize because we're dirty, evil sexist, racist and r*pist pigs. We're asking you to not unionize or we may have to terminate you".
-Activision.
Not helping someone out when they're starving is fine, but taking someone's MONEY!? Now that is rotten..
"Starving? Not my problem, just eat lol" -Right-Libertarians
just get good at catching fish buddy...you cant be lazy when you're hungry
/s
Because you just can't violate their right to their property.
@@dezzymombod Libertarian version of the fish adage (tm): sell a man a fish, you have fed him for a day, teach him how to fish, you just blew a golden business opportunity!
@@rajashashankgutta4334 Ok cool, what makes it _their_ property? On the face of it, technically _all_ money is the state's property.
As Rousseau facetiously noted, _"the first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said 'This is mine,' and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of 'civil' society."_
"Is one of them trying to get the other to do something?"
Sam immediately picked up on what Coconut Island is without even knowing.
The idea isn't exactly rocket science, though it eludes most Libertarians. Even this guy intuitively understood what was wrong in the "Coconut Mountain" scenario, to not do so is to be spiritually subhuman
I don't think this guy knows what coercion means tbh
The libertarian version of the give a man a fish analogy goes like this. If you help a cold man start a fire he's warm for the night. If you light him on fire he's warm for the rest of his life.
@@Bisquick Teach a man to fish and you're entitled to 15% of all his future catches. While the man you taught doesn't really own the knowledge he exchanges for 15% of his earnings because if he gives it away without your consent he is criminally liable for theft.
This guy should’ve just used Vaush’s example, he went the most convoluted way possible, and Sam’s cliff example is the exact same. The only difference is Sam lets you fall off the cliff, vs Vaush’s example where the coconut hoarder lets you die of starvation.
Sam wasn't ready to hear the coco cost
If he had used Vaush's analogy he wouldn't have been able to explain how it's not coercive, as he showed when he failed to answer to Sam's essentially identical analogy
@@blitzthebird I guess, but it definitely would’ve been faster at least lmao
Sam described the same kind of situation in 1% of the words, and the guy still died.
Should have said it the proper way and just used slightly less vulgar versions
I love how he’s shocked to hear a situation where it’s your money or your life. That’s the whole health care system in America Dan the dumb
Reminds me of the old Jack Benny bit: Robber to Jack, "Your money or your life!" Jack doesn't say anything. Robber, getting mad, "Your money or your life!!" Jack, still silent. Finally the robber demands loudly one more time, "Your money or your life!!!" Jack, "I'm thinking about it!!"
@@Bisquick speaking of Saw, you going to Sawcon next year?
Lets go democrstic socialism! We dont have it here in canada ! Ahahahahaha suckers!
@@Bisquick It's Saw 6 and yeah the Saw movies aren't masterpieces but it's actually one of my favorite ones. Worth a watch if you're ever in the mood for something silly/gory/kinda political lol
🤣🤣🤣🤣
"It's exploitation, not coercion"
These Libertarians are hilarious
Facts!! These libertarians are literal children who think life should work in some fantasy
Leftists think life ought to work like utopia
@@TheElementFive In what way?
@@TheElementFive Heaven forbid we try to build a world were everyone can live in dignity. That would just be horrible. Sorry we don't get off on needless human suffering.
@@TheElementFive You're right I do think life should work like in Utopia.
💁♂ "Oh. You're the guy who had fertility issues."
Warms the heart to hear it.
I enjoy the way the people in libertarian thought experiments always seem to start off equal. It truly is a world of pure imagination.
yeah as if someone is just going to take all the billionaires money away first,wait that sounds like socialism (the way rightwingers think it is) lol
that's why vaush's coconut island metaphor is better. two people crash land on an island, one of them wakes up first and gathers up all the coconuts. when the second guy wakes up, he tells him these are mine, and if you want some, you have to ... do sexual favors for me.
now, is this coercive?
if they answer no, they're clinically brain dead.
@@f_i_z Well not coercive because the caller wants to use a very narrow definition of coercion that only includes physical force.
Because they exist in this faux reality where everything can and does exist in a vacuum. Like Cop violence on the right; “It’s just a bad apple….it’s just a bad apple”. Libertarians are the same except it’s to do with property rights and taxes.
So true. It also seems like human kindness never factors into the equation, and if it does its perceived as weakness or the off ramp to some sort of degeneracy (you'll instantly lose all desire for productivity if I share my fish with you because you're starving, its better for me to throw my 10X fish in the trash.) Cooperation can't exist for its own sake in their world, it has to be linked to monetization/trade.
my personal fave part of these type of call is the smug confidence at the beginning - they always start off thinking "wow, gottem!", and end up arguing that being left to die unless you hand over cash isn't coercive. Love it.
Lol "Its not coercion its exploitation." Lmfao these people are insane bro
Everyone thinks they can ride the bull at the rodeo when nobody before them could
This is Matt’s favorite caller!! 😂
This guy wants to have a boss when he’s stranded on an island
Facts! Lol he said employers make your life easier... And im just thinking "How!?"
You can almost hear the callers brain breaking...the cognitive dissonance is just delish!
He's a libertarian. The libertarian ideology DEPENDS on cognitive dissonance, and non-acceptance of reality.
I think he dug himself into a hole by trying to use vaush's coconut island argument, he was too focused on getting BJ's for coconuts, and lost his train of thought.
Sam absolutely owned this caller who is clearly a far-Right shill for the rich just like the vast majority of his vile brethren.
@@tommiest3769 coercion is threat or force
neither wer used in the analoogy
I love how at first he was like, "Um, can I argue with the woman on the show this time, please?"
We see you, dude.
he wanted to argue with Emma. Not a woman but a specific person named Emma.
Don't throw out accusations like sexism willy nilly. Takes away trust in the definition.
he wanted to argue with Emma. Not a woman but a specific person named Emma.
Don't throw out accusations like sexism willy nilly. Takes away trust in the definition.
I really don't think it's that deep...
He said he heard everyone else's opinion on the topic and wanted to hear hers since she was the one who initially brought it up.
Let's not scream sexism for anything that mentions a woman. It's honestly silly.
@@masterchief9291 And its rather concerning that shes getting a lot of likes. Seems dishonest actors arnt just a right wing thing.
@@samlamb1343
dishonest actors shouldn't be trusted in the first place, so whatever side they claim,...... it's safer to assume they aren't. also why does her likes concern you? your comment makes it sound like you think emma get's likes just because she is female. which may be true for some, but i can assure you she is actually decent at her job. I don't like her(she is growing on me), but i can't deny she has valid points, a certain comedic timing that fits with the show, and her cultural references have impressed me on more than one occasion.
i'm not gonna call you sexist(wouldn't wanna tarnish definitions of a bastardized language), but you do sound like a hater, and as the saying goes "haters are gonna hate".
Finally! Been excited for this to get clipped so I can send it to all my silly libertarian acquaintances.
I think even your libertarian acquaintances would find the caller unbearably stupid.
He’s dying, but he’s fine, but he’s dying and he needs it, but he doesn’t actually need it. This video succinctly explored the hypocrisy of the conservative libertarian and it’s perfect.
Do libertarians not realise how making these examples so convoluted means they themselves are FISHING?
Sam getting this dude to admit that it's coercive is a beautiful thing.
I didn't get why he wouldn't admit it's coercion... what was the point he was trying to make?
@@SulaimanamialuS because libertarianism is based on the fundamental idea that coercive deals aren't coercive. They can't admit to it as if they do, they are basically acknowledging publicly that everything they believe about how the world works is wrong.
Edit: spelling.
@@xuxuang8574 coercion basically has one definition
that's the use of a threat or force
neither are used in the analogy
the caller didn't admit was coercion
@@robinsss you think not saving someone's life isn't a threat? The guy is literally saying "give me money or I won't save you". It's deliberately portrayed as a choice to show how stupid of a thing it is to say that it's a choice when there's only really one answer cause the other is death
This is a massacre of Vaushs' coconut island analogy.. sam handled it very well tho.
He was working so hard to twist the circumstances in his favour, and still failed...
@@JL-rj5vh yep, it was like schrodinger's island... simultaneously enough fish for it to not be coercive, and also be starving so has to build shelter
the caller was right
the island situation is not coercion
@@robinsss which island situation?
@@NinjaThatLongboards the one with the money
Would be great to see Sam have Doctor Alden on the program to discuss coconut theory
Do people still not get one of Sam's longest running bits is responding with "no" when asked if he is aware of something that he is very clearly aware of?
Honestly watching Sam, loving him in these vids... and I never caught on that it's a good trick. I love it
It’s perfect because it forces the caller to expose their poor understandings well and truly before a debate even happens. It also exposes bad actors who manipulate certain hypotheses or theories early on too.
Part of any quality debate is agreeing to terms and definitions. I’m not saying you don’t know this, I’m just remarking how incredibly clever Sam is when he does this seemingly small thing.
@@crawdad I love it, he makes it even more obvious with his pointed questions that reveal he knows whats up but these dudes never pick up on it
@@douglaslangley9251 lol when Sam manipulates, coerces and exploits these fools right in front of them as they argue how government is evil with zero sense of irony how easy it is to exploit and manipulate them in the process. 👌
@@crawdad He was also clever enough not to let the caller put the spotlight on Emma. That's another trick these 'debaters' use so that they can spend the time criticizing their opponents positions and morals instead of having to defend their own.
Nothing better than when a libertarian doesn’t understand their own argument 🤣
Sam seriously, you should have Vaush on. You’re literally his favorite political commentator and you guys agree on 90% of the issues.
Vowsh when?
Sam, please do not have Vaush on. It's a good way to degrade the quality of the show.
@@andresabourin2423 ... what exactly is the issue with vaush? I’m not a huge fan, but I always see people complain about him and when I dive deeper into whatever they’re complaining about it’s almost always a weird misinterpretation or like idk... never feels like it’s a totally valid critique when I actually dive in
@@andresabourin2423 subbed to Hakim and BadEmpanada, I wonder why you have an issue with Vlorsh.
@@Destabilise15 Most people who have problems with Vaush on a non-political level usually have only ever seen out of context clips on Twitter
I love it when "Libertarians" add all kinds of riders and qualifiers on these simple thought experiments to just end up in the same basic situation
Every. Single. Time.
Because if they add their shit to it, it makes it *their* "original intellectual property do not steal".
99% of all Libertarians suffer from the Dunning-Krueger effect.
I see you went low, not to overestimate
@@zombi3lif3 Yeah, I didn't want it to come across as hyperbolic.
Leftists take the title with 100%
It's 100%
Good one! I almost spit out my wine!
Leave it to a Libertarian to make this analogy complicated. Vaush better react to this lol
Oh do I have good news for w
I love how incredibly insecure this type of caller is and how hurt they are when Sam doesn't remember them calling three weeks ago. They all blend into one another, nobody stands out.
Agreed, although I honestly think Sam was playing dumb here, based on the way he responds to him and the way Emma knew exactly who he was
I want Sam to go "wait are you the guy who thinks children shouldn't be able to have free school lunch, the guy who thinks disabled people shouldn't be born, or the guy who..."
This caller is a gift from Alden.
Teenage boys love libertarian ideology. Its the psychological reaction to being told to clean you room, do your homework, be nice to your aunt and uncle. "I dont wanna'
He fundamentally changed the point of Coconut Island by erasing that one person woke up before the other.
I wouldn't consider that part necessary, as the point still works if one's good at gathering food and the other isn't.
@@watamatafoyu well its supposed to show that the fact that one person has more than the other is mainly due to luck and not to an intrinsic quality that makes the first person more deserving.
@@movieblocks9164 it’s luck that Sam wasn’t the one that fell either. That argument is still there, you might have to make it separately tho.
@@watamatafoyu think of the two on the island as one being Wyatt Koch. Now it's not about gathering coconuts but he just tripped and fell into a pile at 3am after he accidentally peed in his mouth and spooked himself.
@@watamatafoyu well, as the discussion tends to go with this debate, one is good at gather food because he "worked harder" at it. The time/order component puts more focus on what isn't in either control: the order they came into existence within that situation.
It's hilarious that this guy is so committed to the pedantry of the term "coercion" rather than the obvious horror he actually feels at the dynamics of the situation.
Libertarian: "I think that the branch will hold for..."
Branch: **breaks**
Libertarian: "ITSNOTHOLDING!!!"
Coconut Island, I wonder which bearded Chad streamer that originated from…Pepe chat ;)
Moral of the thought experiment: never share an island with a libertarian
Other moral of the thought experiment: if you do share an island with a libertarian then negotiate from a position of power because libertarians respect power and the you can control them easily
Just say you own the island and everything on it and he will be compelled to work for you.
The most important thing is to bring plenty of strong seasoning because that shit ain't gonna taste good on it's own...
Another moral of the story: if you see socialist hanging off a cliff, do nothing and pass by
@@sshope19 propably couldn't afford your help any way.
I heard Emma did a paper on alden's number in college
She even studied under him
I had to do a study on her paper last semester.
I wrote a paper in college arguing that Alden is made up, and my teacher gave me an F and got the registrar and a bunch of students to cancel me.
this might be one of the most brutal calls i've heard... dude sounds like a whimpering puppy by the end of it...
damn sam, go easy on them... they just don't know words... lol
Every libertarian assumes that every situation is a win/win and they will always come out ahead. When confronted with anything else their brain completely melts down.
Exactly. They all suffer from superiority complexes. In reality, they are bitter losers, so they blame everyone else for holding them back. If the minimum wage didn't exist, then they'd be able to negotiate a contract at Wal-Mart to make $100/hour to stock shelves, because they do it so "intelligently".
I had one tell me that record corporate profits are due not to price gouging and exploiting the workers, but because of Government Regulations.
I love how the libertarian admitted to Sam's example displaying corruption and exploitation, but for the sake of not conceding the argument he refused to say it was coercion.
So, his issue is solely with coercion, meaning he's completely fine with corruption and exploitation in capitalism.
I love how in his own analogy it changes from one guy is fishing and one guy is building the shelter to they're both fishing to one guy needs fish to be able to build a shelter to shelter isn't even important because the weather is always perfect.
I love how the guy completely butchered the coconut analogy and Sam just cut right to the heart of the issue anyways
His refusal to admit to the branch scenario being coercive is amazing
Thanks for the call Dan!
I love Dan. I hope he never stops calling.
I love how this dude tried to go off the libertarian dialogue tree rails, but fucking nose dived IMMEDIATELY
Dude that branch example is absolutely perfect. Fell right into the trap and then starts to squeal
the defeated "okay" from Dan at the end is everything i love about these
It’s the way Sam always speaks to lolbertarians like they’re confused children that does it for me.
"Bye Dan the branch just broke"🤣🤣🤣🤣 gotta love Sam bro
The one libertarian caller gave his house away to Sam. This one fell to their death. So sad.
"When I'm exploiting others, it's fine, when it happens to me, it's coe...err...rrupt!" - Libertarianism in a nutshell
I noticed that. I love how they say taxation is theft and the government resorts to force to make you pay it but they think the minimum wage should be $0...
So exploiting workers for their productivity and time isnt theft for some reason lol
I think this guy is a left wing libertarian though
I feel like he screwed up Vaushes example of coercion existing through implication of being in a disadvantaged situation and exploitation of that.
LOL
Exploitation and coercion are two separate things
@@fuckyoutube9713 yes. What workers are being subjected to is exploitation which is different from theft.
@@rajashashankgutta4334 Idk in which way you mean that, if a worker is being paid sweatshop prices for their labor... I would consider that theft and the theft is only okay due to the exploitation of people's situations.
Tell me what is the difference between coercion and exploitation? I do believe theyre different but when we're talking about them in this context I have to say they go hand to hand
Vaush RAD
Amazing: the guy calls back weeks later to follow up on his desert island scenario, but then can't even put together a coherent libertarian story. To summarize: the one guy, who's builds shelter that isn't necessarily needed, via the strength that he doesn't necessarily have, is surviving, but is on the edge of dying, but then again, not really, because he's only taking the fish from the master fisherman in order to make his life BETTER. Hey Dan from California: how the hell can one say if it's coercion or not if the story is so jam-packed with self-contradictions?
Sam should have just conceded everything, just to see where the caller was trying to go with it. Because even then his scenario would have collapsed in on itself. So what if we say the guy starving getting fish is not coercion. What then? What does the saving guy offer up to not starve? Suck the other guys dick? And then what? It proves what libertarian point correct?
@@Prometheus4096 Good point. Since he's only good at building shelters, which is useless because they don't need shelter on that island (huh?), the oly thing he's got to offer/sell is himself. Those libertarians.
@@Seattle-2017 He got his analogies mixed up, somehow. I don't know what he was thinking, because original Vaush analogy was designed to the libertarian correctly identify and obvious example of coercion as coercion. Or just even fail to identify coercion in even this extreme example. And somehow this guy flipped it on it's head and wanted to get Sam Seder to admit that his obvious example of borderline not coercion was,... borderline not coercion.
"Goodbye Dan! Your branch just broke!" The mental image of a libertarian thinking if they're being coerced then falling is hilarious to me
@@mr.negativenancy5751 haha, it’s too good
LMFAO!! I so enjoy these discussions. I was going to say that you'd think they'd learn to bring their brain with them when they call, but then, I remembered that they're libertarians. A zombie would shuffle right past them because they know they'd starve.
I love it when they start out talking about how the last libertarian was a fake, and didn't have his talking points together. they then proceed to present basically the same talking points, get stumped by the same rebuttals, and end up looking more stupid than the person they called a fake.
@@tonyolo4591 Have a problem with comprehension? Sad.
@@mickiec5298
where exactly do you see a problem with comprehension? I was only pointing out one of the more popular ways libertarians "don't bring their A game" when calling sam.
your response implies you didn't get that fact......... who in this situation has the comprehension problem?
11:43 Matt: "Once again, a libertarian retreats to pedantry."
[insert Sam's "I don't wanna be a pendant" joke here]
The guy who can fish just became Governor of Coconut Island and the guy who cant fish is still justifying libertarianism.
🤣 🥥🏝 Pedantic Libertarian Dan has to get the guy on the island to the very brink of starvation, unable to shelter himself from bad weather, just barely surviving on the minimum possible number of calories, and doesn't think it's a "coercive" deal, it's just "corrupt", "exploitative", etc...
The cognitive dissonance is kicking in hard
I was trying to figure out how the guy was corrupt; he didn't mention a corrupting force. Regardless, coercion is the method the "corrupt" guy used.
The coercion comes if one person on the island claims the island is entirely his despite having no hand in creating the island, and demands the other pays a rent or risks swimming with the sharks, despite more than enough space for both.
That is precisely what Proudhon meant when he said 'Property is theft'.
That's a claim, not coercion - if the other person was... I dunno - John Wick, they could push back on that claim, effectively nullifying it.
The coercion comes from the power imbalance between the two parties - if someone will seriously suffer or die if they don't engage in the exchange, they're effectively forced (coerced) into that exchange.
What's forcing the guy to swim with the sharks? That's just a threat unless the guy is going to fall into the sharks without the other guy's help.
@@JL-rj5vh Well yes the claim must be enforceable to coerce the other into accepting the subordinate position of tenant. Then they must exchange money or labour for the right to occupy 'my' land.
The right to exclude others from land can only come from government's monopoly on violence, or without rule of law your own direct threat of violence.
But a claim to legitimacy because land was bought on the market does not make it morally legitimate only legally, because the person you bought the land from didn't make the land either, trace it back far enough indeed most of land we enjoy rights too now was acquired via war and plunder, so these land rights have their basis in theft and have simply been legitimised via the fog of history.
And to return to the island analogy, if I owned the entire island and had the force to back up my claim, I could charge as much rent as I wanted, leaving just enough for subsistence living for my tenant.
And if they raised their productivity to improve their lot, I could just raise the rent to keep them at subsistence level. A landlord can claim as much of the economic surplus as the concentration of their monopoly allows, because land is fixed in supply. Unequal access to land is the main source of exploitation.
@@watamatafoyu either direct threat to remove them from "their" land, or the indirect threat of starvation or similar due to restriction of access to resources.
“I won't unfollow your channel because you're just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever.” - Libertarian Joker
Ohh man. This was a good one. I love how Sam basically turned the tables on him and had the libertarian explain why he is in the wrong by slowly walking him through it. Libertarians are fun.
he never agreed that it's coercion
@@robinsss lul
@@robinsss that's because his brain started to rot.
The day Sam Seder annihilated your objectivist delusion was the most important day of your life. For him, it was Tuesday.
This dude is so puzzling. The mental fucking backflips here. "Not coercive, just corrupt"
Yes, hes is like corruption is fine that's volentairy but coercion that's against the NAP 😂😂😂😂😂
Twisting Vaush's thought experiment to be as favourable as possible before raising it with Seder, and still getting blown out... Is this the best and brightest right-wing libertarians have to offer?
I'm sure this has been explained NUMEROUS times in the comments now, but this guy very deliberately changed the parameters of the analogy in order to soften it and make it sound more favorable. The best part though is that despite having never heard Vaush's explanation of it before, Sam saw right through this dude's charade anyway and called him out on it.
Sam is really a national treasure.
Even if this guy could have gotten away with it being not not coercion and coercion at the same time, it wouldn't help him achieve anything. Where was he even going with this in the first place?
"It's not coercion... it's just all these other words that are synonyms for coercion."
If someone's much better at fishing than another, and they offer to do the fishing if the other does the building... that's not coercion... that's co-operation. That's making the best use of each of your skills. If the second person can't get food at all, and you have them build for you in order for you to give them food, that IS coercion because you're using their starvation as leverage against them.
Just like how companies use the loss of a job as coercion to force workers to slave away and be abused.
I'm truly thankful for these discussions, and for your patience with these idiots. The philosophy is great, and you take the time to make critical distinctions.
Vaush better cover this segment, he is going to have a good laugh. The whole point of the coconut island is to try and make libertarians understand coercion. Sam came up with another great thought experiment. Libertarian brains are broken if they can’t understand this concept.
I absolutely love this exchange.
I can't stop laughing. You are the man Sam.
I love when Libertarians call in.
Lmao. "It's not coercive it's corrupt" lmao he just goes on to describe the issue with coercion but call it "something else"
Corruption is still bad, lol.
This was a brilliant turn by Sam and the team. Loved all the laughs, made my day much better!!
Sam’s tactics: Let the caller explain - give them enough rope…
Get Vaush on the Majority Report!
Dan immediately debated the value of his “life savings” and how awful it is to force him to lose it WHILE completely ignoring his life hanging in the balance! 😂😂
Time to get vaush on the show
Oh no, what a nightmare!
Not even close to the original version of Coconut Island. It's like he's trying his best to make a libertarian version of the analogy, but he _still_ can't make it work.
I really like that Sam used a metaphor of saving someone with an out stretched hand as an out stretched hand for the caller... and the caller still didn't get it.
Meanwhile on Coconut island. Our two protagonists died from exposure. The fruitless argument over whether the situation was coercion or corruption when the conversation should have been about co-operation.
Can't because one has all the coconuts
"How desperately does this other person need fish?" I am in literal tears, Sam is the goat! 😂
Known Vaushite Sam Seder
Looooooooooooooove these debates.
10:30 I’m leaning in going “come on Dan, we’re almost there.” 🤣
Dan sure is a special kind of guy.
I'm a fan of many libertarian principles. Unfortunately, there comes a point in every discussion with a libertarian where they are forced to defend the indefensible in order to stay "consistent" with the philosophy. From then on it is a train wreck. I'm a human being. I love in the REAL WORLD. I don't worship any philosophy or ideology to the point where I'm willing to let a kid starve, go uneducated or be abused because the adult in his or her life is a fuhk up.
the problem with right wing libertarians is all they think exists are negative freedoms. "you can't murder people" is an example of this. but they don't ever consider positive freedoms. a man starving alone in a desert with no one to save him is not the most free man on the planet because "he can do whatever he wants" - he can't actually DO anything but die. he has no negative freedoms, no restrictions, no taxes, no rules but he also has no positive freedoms, no actual actions he can take.
left wing libertarians focus on giving as many people access to as many positive freedoms as possible. freedom to get an education, own a house, get healthcare, have food are all currently are gated behind money. when people don't have access to these things you see right wing libertarians completely not care.
I thought these Jetpack-Americans were immune to falling damage.
The fact that the guy didn't immediately think the hypothetical guy who would make a deal with a guy about a die wasn't coercive is a huge self report. Like, it should just be an immediate response
“What's the dynamic between us?”
_In this call?_ *Contortion.*
I would love to go to coconut island with Sam 🤩
My man's original example definitely was abt a woman in an island selling her body for food to please a man, no shot I'M DYING
I also find it hilarious how libertarians stack the deck against the other person by creating a scenario devoid of context where their arguments could theoretically make more sense than they otherwise would, and even then still lose debates consistently