Why utopias fail Videos

Canon Rebel T3i with two small lights off to the side.

Thank you sir!

You and me both, pal. Just wish I had something to add to the conversation.

+Ularg The Spine's chorus, the chord progression and that higher counter-melody. God it's fantastic.

+strummerdood You could easily do a commentary on how Transistor's music feeds back into the world and story. Not many people put much thought into it beyond how good it is.And let's not kid ourselves, Transistor's music deserves top 40 status.

The music is better than my commentary, let's be real. I'm just getting in its way.

+John3285 From their website, majorityfm:Contact Call in! or Contact the ShowCall in to the show M-F 11:30am EST: 646-257-3920Skype: majoritylive

+Zach L What username?Also, what time zone?

You can call in on skype.

+Zach LI live in Australia and don't think I would be able to afford it. I imagine it would involve spending a fair amount of time on hold.

+John3285 Get them to call in. Or if you yourself are one, call in 646-257-3920.

+bigge525 THAT is core idea. They are trying to "sell" anarchy, hate, or batshitcrazy as normal. Nope 

+John3285 and 99% of them are internet pseudo-academics trying to re-define anarchy as the "liberty" to do whatever they want, whenever they want, regardless of how their actions might effect other people. There are good reasons why Libertardians have NEVER ONCE been in charge in the highest institutions of America throughout it's entire history.

+NUTCASE71733 Well said. Totally agree. That was my "Fold under that questioning and willalways remain silent" from above. Bingo! They are just loud children trying to live in fantasyland

+John3285 They're such an extreme minority in the USA that they're almost nonexistant. Elsewhere in the world left-wing libertarians exist in larger numbers. Here in the USA, libertarianism has been subjected to the same thing the nazis delt with when Hitler and his brownshirts murdered the liberals and leftists among them before they themselves took it over turning the nazi party into the right wing cesspool we know today.

Right wing libertarian. There are left wing libertarians you know.

+Bolgernow Once I point out the illogicality of the NAP 9 times out of ten I never get a response, which ultimately makes for an automatic win for the rational people.Every other time someone responds to defend the NAP I get called a godless commie and get blocked. As such whatever the case, by picking apart the NAP you win the argument no matter what.

+NUTCASE71733 Yeah I totally hear you. I really do, & like your posts. Used to be exactly thatway. They aren't going to ever change & they attempt to create chaos to make the world a shittyplace. Any feedback/attention obliges them IMHO. Take that from them & it bothers them greatly

+BolgernowSomeone once said that sometimes one has to feed the trolls, and considering the damage trolls like Tyler end up causing society, it's worth the risk.

Please do not feed Tyler guys. He's far right wing crazy hate troll. The reason he admires the NAPis in that vacuum of power, he & evil sociopathic morons can take it's place. To all do as they wishDon't you see it's us(governmental rules in society) that stopping him from being en epic sociopath

+Tyler Hurson You're against rulers? What do you think a capitalist is?

+Tyler HursonYou just ruined your own argument by claiming that government is the same as a mafia, seeing as how the distinction was made in this video, plus the appeal to NAP only further destroys your argument.The reason NAP fails so hard is mainly because you automatically think all coercion is bad and can do no good, when degrees of force are required to make sure those who break the law are properly punished so that the victims of such crimes are paid back for it.Also its worth noting that by the rule of the NAP, we can't expect the people in the government to be held accountable for wrongdoings either, so there's another nail in your coffin, dumbass.

+Bolgernow Libertarians aren't against rules, we're against rulers. We recognize that society must operate on regulations as much as you do-- we just don't think the mafia should be writing and enforcing the regulations. The initiation of the use of force is immoral. Therefore any institution that initiates force against peaceful people is immoral. The NAP destroys the state in the same way that personhood destroys slavery. We're taking a principle that society already holds dear in their private lives (do you let the government tell you who to marry?), and applying it to the public sphere. It's that simple.

+Tyler Hurson"Characteristic of all black markets is the sale of illegal goods."No, black markets are about avoiding the threat of force.  Libertarian's object to the MONOPOLY of force, not the existence of it, and as long as there is the threat of force there will be black markets."Ancaps don't advocate feudalism since feudalism is a form of government."Ancap libertarianism is corporate feudalism.  Having merchant princes rather than royal princes doesn't change the facts, AnCap is feudalism.

+Tyler Hurson I'm still not interested in the semantic games, especially not when you're arguing from the dictionary. Unless you're describing a world in which there are no such thing as communities - however you would construe that term - then there will be social norms and acceptable behavior that will be outlined. People will violate those norms in ways that will benefit them financially. They will need a place to sell their stolen guns, stolen cars, stolen credit cards, jewelery, furniture, electronics, etc. It's absolutely amazing to me that you think that what's important here is not that there would still be places that function exactly like current black markets - which you agree is the case - but rather what we call them.Actually, the illicit markets (happy?) that would exist in your dream world would be even worse than current black markets - nothing is illegal, so come buy yourself a slave. Buy yourself a 12 year old girl. Buy yourself a tank. Want to build a nuke? Here are the plans; that'll be 50 Rand. Want all the info that was in the NSA's databases when we dismantled the state? Got it right here. Anything you can think of, any bad thing that you're currently glad people are prevented from getting their hands on, would be freely and legally available. You're pure theory. Zero utilitarianism, all dogma. Trying to draw a distinction between two identical things because in your theory, they would be called by different names. As our friendly host often says: stunning. This is a level of appeal to theory that even a communist would be envious of.

+diqtits The defining characteristic of all black markets is that illegal goods are exchanged. This is how black markets have always been defined://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market//www.investopedia.com/terms/b/blackmarket.asp//www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/black%20market//dictionary.reference.com/browse/black+market//dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/black-marketIt isn't so much to fence goods to call yourself a black market. You have to sell illegal goods (which may or may not be stolen).

+Tyler Hurson You can mess around with semantics all you want, but you've just described a black market. It doesn't matter what you call it, it matters that it's a place where people sell stolen goods. Go tell some people that they should adopt your favored ideology because, while places where stolen goods will still exist just as they do now, we'll have to find something else to call them because technically blah blah blah etc. See how far that gets you.

+modelmajorpita Read my original reply. I said black markets are a product of the state. I did not say that thieves are a product of the state (though the state does create a lot of thieves!). Characteristic of all black markets is the sale of illegal goods. Without the government, there is not even a concept of legality. Therefore, there can be no black markets in a government-less society-- though I'm sure there would be markets in which stolen goods are sold.Ancaps don't advocate feudalism since feudalism is a form of government.

+Tyler HursonSo you are saying there would be no theft without the government?  This guy was selling stolen credit cards and other items as well as dealing drugs.AnCap Libertarianism (A corporate feudalism which only has no government due to semantics) always rambles on and on about private property.  You think that there wouldn't be secret markets for selling stolen goods, particularly when it would be "ok" for the person you stole from to kill you?

+Zach L+modelmajorpita There would be no such thing as black markets without the government.

+Tyler Hurson Dude, it was specifically set up by libertarians to be a libertarian utopia. Did you even listen to the interview?

+Tyler HursonThis particular black market was founded by libertarians, is popular with libertarians, and is justified using libertarian lingo.

+Tyler Hurson I know, its like laughing at someone who escapes North Korea and starves to death in the Chinese wilderness. "See how you turned out without your great dear leader." 

+kathy kelly The Silk Road and all other black markets are entirely a product of the state. It boggles my mind that people refer to it as a 'Libertarian utopia.'

And perhaps with the replicator it could improve education because the reason why education isn't all the great in America is because of poverty and funding.  But with the replicator it could replace that.  No longer would you need to "buy" school supplies, you could just ask for them and it's made. 

+JohanStarDragon that's a really interesting question! What would you do if money weren't an option? if you didn't have to worry about money and you first went to school--which wasn't a form of cramming facts into you so you could get a job, but to teach you about the world make you have fun and be curious. People who live life creatively make music art, learn, express themselves, solve problems because it's what challenges them instead of flipping burgers. education will need to be changed because "we are all geniuses until education takes away our ability to want to learn." A new education system in that kind of world would have to train kids to grow up with a different skill set to find themselves and realize their purpose. I think I'd learn a shit ton about everything i love in the world. then go out and start making things with all my life skills and help other people too.

That is something I like about the idea of a replicator.  It'd be the ultimate recycling machine.  But this goes into a small aspect that was only touched upon briefly by Dr. Kaku in that if there is infinite plenty, then what would we do as a people?  We do have that need to do things with ourselves.  So what would happen if there's no need to work for certain amenities like food and shelter?

+JohanStarDragon Not attacking you specifically it's a bias in all of us. I was just pointing that we all have ways of looking at things. I used to look at the world exactly like you and now I don't. I've seen it from both perspectives. it's not about predicting the future it's happening now. kodak is gone replaced overnight. similarly innovation replaces with democratized information. for example people don't pay for cds or even individual songs now they can pay monthly and have access to all the songs they want. 3d printing has made it so that divergent industries, a new car manufacturer can set up new companies complete with design for a couple million--previously(4 years ago it costed close to a billion to start a competitive car company). Things are getting cheaper, and even free in some cases, more widespread, and democratized. in the early 2000s college researchers put the entire dna of smallpox one of the deadliest diseases online. and the way information and the future is heading companies and the government can't catch up, it's a fucking powerhouse and things are super hard to regulate. With one replicator, which by the way would probably be cheap because of the raw materials needed, it could replicate the materials for another one. Or one of the hundreds of crowdfunded research facilities, or even independent or private groups would create another in a matter of years if that. from then if it's illegally given to someone they can scan it and democratize the information so anyone can create it. essentially making everyone rich and not dependent which wouldn't be a bad thing for companies. all companies want is money. they need money to buy materials and feed themselves. Essentially replicators make having a company a moot point as creating materials is free and food is free and abundant. . .

Let's not attack the arguer, alright? As far as telling people 100 years ago about our time would we just explain the good parts and leave out the bad parts?  As far as companies losing power, I'll believe it when it happens completely and I'll gladly admit to being wrong.  After all, we've been wrong about predicting the future before.  So perhaps something in the middle might happen.

I think you are more or less biased because of an evolutionary trait for information to filter first through the amygdala then the rest of the brain and positive information actually gets thrown to the wayside. Everything eventually becomes democratized. If you described the world today to a person 50-100 years ago they would say that it's too optimistic. free education, internet allowing everyone to have access to more books and knowledge than the library of congress and instant communication. The world will not stay the same and neither do companies. First off all many companies are trying to keep up. On average 15 years is the time a company will be disrupted, i.e. an industry will be deemed moot. We'll have the ability to have internet free because google and facebook are both rushing to establish worldwide free internet using satellites, balloons, and drones. Companies are loosing power, government will probably not be the same 100 years from now either, so who's to say anything.

+Jake MitchellI think that's a little too optimistic.  A real world example as far as the power and the kind of companies assuming power is this:  Turing Pharmaceuticals bought up a drug called "Deraprim" which was once 7.50 a tablet.  After Turing bought it, they jacked up the price to 700 dollars per tablet.  Given this example, somehow I can't imagine a company that has a Replicator product and wouldn't jack up the price of it because that's the way of business: profit.  Even when it's matters of life and death. 

+JohanStarDragon unrealistic view of companies, their power and the kind of companies assuming power. Those companies will no longer exist. read Bold by peter diamandis it's an amazing book that shows the future of products and entrepreneurs smalll companies replacing and disrupting industries by relying on the power of society for interdependence as well as individual self empowerment.

+Drithe Bors It's also about overthrowing it too, and that's more simple than what most people think since we are 99 times more than them, and without us they die... We just need to act massively.By the way, I don't know why Nanotech would be the end of humanity since even right now, we have nuclear power, biologic weapons, combat planes... And we are still alive.You're right about the fact that it can be used for a good or a bad thing, but it has always been like that, and it will probably never change. But what we can change is what we do as human beings to prevent the technologies to end between bad hands.

+Gengis Den (gengis2005) Because Nanotechnology is touted as being life saving. They can heal you or improve your body and mind. Nanotech can be used for all sorts of GOOD. But what they fail to tell you is they it can be used for all sorts of BAD as well. Perhaps someone makes a Nanotech disease that kills off certain parts of humanity that they deem .... unworthy. Perhaps they use Nanotech to control peoples minds and used for control. Assassination will be a breeze with Nanotechnology. It is all about control, power, and greed.

+Drithe Bors Why ? You say that like this is the ultimate truth and you don't even need to explain yourself...

+Ganesh Kendre Atheist.

+Kenzo Leong ru religious?

+Covert Nerd Yes they are human concepts, but they are vital for the current and future sustainability of our species. My moral values come not from avoiding sin but from the nature of my heart and empathy of other living organisms that feel and experience pain and suffering just like you and I can. Greed and misconduct of power is not only currently causing the suffering and death of millions of lives but hugely increases the chances of violence and destructive harm. Think of where we could be if we all supported each other instead of only ourselves. Very primitive behaviour indeed to see war, poverty and economic abuse ongoing in developed countries across the world. Imagine the funds that could go towards scientific research or medical research but is wasted on war. Greed is such a futile motive. It is an addiction and corruption of the mind.

+Covert Nerd You speak of desires, idiotic idealisms and control and has admitted that the outcome for the human race hinges on our own sensibilities. War comes from greed. Nothing else. Just profits. If every move in our human history (including those in-charge of governments/ countries) has touched on one of the 7 sins, what makes you think we can do better after being a type 1 civilisation? That is if we do not destroy each other first before reaching that stage. Humans are inherently chaotic, like the rest of our Universe. But, our actions can be shaped by our morality, unlike the Universe (mother nature for eg). Shouldn't we exercise that intelligence and live responsibly and productively?If you would look at our climate and the outcome that what those changes entails, we could already be too late to change anything. Our greed may have already given us a death sentence.

+Kenzo Leong Honestly, it's incredibly disheartening to read a narrow-minded response to such a video; you speak of these concepts as though they are truths. Morality, virtue and sin are human concepts developed through a desire for moral compass aka a sense of importance, the reality is such things are no more a truth than dragons, fairies or pixies. Pain and pleasure exist as do life and death in the sense of the physical and ultimately selfish desires are born from the will to survive long enough for your genetics to persist, avoid predators etc. Civilised society invented "sin" to control us but such ridiculous concepts are no longer needed, we exist as the top species on the planet and once there is no excess or deficit there will be literally no reason for us to fight each other and once we are at that stage of our own, non nature-dependent evolution we certainly will not need idiotic idealisms such as sin and virtue to control our behaviour it will merely require a logical and rational mind which you certainly will not find in those who are religious believers. Of course this is all dependent on our ability not to kill each other with atomic bombs over some argument about who is morally virtuous or sinful which, considering the stupidity being displayed in the world at the time of writing I admit is a possibility.

+Kenzo Leong Indeed. Have a good day.

+Sir Gent I think we will agree to disagree for now. I leave it to the interpretation of anyone who reads

+Kenzo Leong "Things that one doesn't have," ... Those are materialistic things... Additionally... Enlightenment? I hate to burst your bubble, but many people have already reached enlightenment, depending on what you define as enlightenment. The Buddhist definition or the scientific definition?Additionally, a "utopia", per say, is impossible. Nothing is perfect, and nothing will ever be perfect. You neglected that fact. Cleansing humans of these so-called "deadly sins" will not solve every problem known to humans. There will always be a new problem to solve.Instead, we use connotations for the word "utopia", in which many people think of a utopia as a highly advanced society in terms of technological and scientific advancements and achievements.Cheers.

+Sir Gent greed, envy and pride doesn't just comes from materialistic longings. It could be someone's wife, or their girlfriend or simply, things that one doesn't have. Therefore it cannot be eradicated unless we reach enlightenment.

+Kenzo Leong Greed, envy, pride, and wrath would be eradicated. Greed and envy stems for a love of money and materialistic objects, which would be erased if a replicator existed.Wrath and war is a result of a need for resources in most cases.Pride is often commonplace among people who have more than others, which would not be the case if a replicator existed.The only "deadly sin" that would still be around would be "sloth", which may be increased if a replicator existed. However, how is sloth a sin? What need would there actually be to work if nanobots could do it? There is nothing wrong with no work if there is nothing to work on. A replicator opens the doors for so many opportunities and innovative ideas.

+Pussn Boots Todd produced Skylarking.

+Ivaylo Ivanov must say too hahaha why max sloow options see that move? Bullsxxt