10 October, 2014

Hong Kong Protests: Clash of Titans and a Sidetrack Struggle for True Democracy

It is an admirable cause to want to protest in fight for being allowed to choose your own representative dictator without outside interference.  It is exactly what Hong Kong protesters have been gathering in streets for.  They want freedom to elect their Chief Executive, without Beijing's prior approval of the candidates.

Regardless of how things will play out in the end, who will do what face saving move in order to bring an end to the current protests in Hong Kong, it is important to take a candid look at who all the major involved parties are and what is really at stake for each of them, for they and their interests can reveal what the future may bring to the world’s freest economy.

Hong Kong people as the main stakeholders are divided on whether to protest the issue of the universal suffrage.  While most Hong Kong people desire universal suffrage, not everyone is willing to go to conflict with the motherland over it.  Majority of those who have been protesting are students.  Born in the years well after the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre, they have never experienced turmoil in their life.  In comparison with the past, they were born and have lived in a prosperity that was once unimaginable, especially the young people that were born and raised Hong Kong.  Most people of older generations, having experienced many great economic hardships and political upheavals in the past, desire stability and don't want any confrontation with the central government in Beijing.  Still, regardless of their differences on this issue, most Hong Kong people resent the Communist Party, and don't want any interference in the territory's affairs by Beijing.  Therefore it is not a surprise that so many people of older generations came out in support of the young protesters, when fears developed that the Hong Kong government under Beijing's instructions might use force to crush the protests.  Shaped by the 155 year long history of British rule, Hong Kong people's patriotism of today does not include communism, something which is undeniably well manifested in these latest 2014 September – October protests.

However, the desire to be free from Beijing's influence is not all that many Hong Kong people want.   For some, it is merely a step towards much greater ends. The “Umbrella Revolution” also includes groups that openly call for a full democracy in Hong Kong.  Rise of welfare populism in recent years has put pressure on Hong Kong government to enact laws and collect taxes to pay for expanding social services.  Frustrated by difficulties in passing redistributive legislation due to government's relative illegitimacy under Beijing's command, the aim of these collectivist groups is to completely democratize the Hong Kong's government and therefore give it a full democratic legitimacy to exercise great many powers on behalf of the people of Hong Kong.  Others are frustrated by huge inequalities blamed on the elite's capture and control of the Hong Kong government in key industries such as property development.  Some have thus reasoned that democracy would bring down property prices, using it as another good reason for them to protest.

Hong Kong government, much of which is readily controlled by Beijing, is clearly split between serving the Hong Kong people and appealing to the greater powers in Beijing.  Those serving the interests of the Communist party are the Chief Executive along with all the judges and other public officials that he is entitled to appoint, and about two-thirds of the Legislative Council (LEGCO).  Opposing them are the minority civil servants from the Pan-Democracy camp, which favor checks and balances in government and universal and equal suffrage.

Hong Kong's powerful corporate special interests are another stakeholders in the game, who had seamlessly changed their loyalties from British to Beijing upon returning of Hong Kong to China in 1997.  Here we mean big corporations, which, as a result of their being deeply in bed with Hong Kong government throughout many decades, have established effective monopolies and cartels over some of the essential industries, and that is the actual cause of so many grievances of the people of Hong Kong.  According to the Crony Capitalism Index of the World, despite its small and efficient government, Hong Kong is ranked as the #1 on the list.

The next stakeholder in line is the Central Government of the People's Republic of China.  First of all, it is important to notice that China needs Hong Kong as it is now, because it depends on it as an important international financial center.  Therefore, it would not be in China's interest to fully integrate Hong Kong into the motherland even today, as it was not in its interest back in Mao's days when it relied on Hong Kong, not just for financial assistance but more importantly, to trade with the rest of the world.  A good example of this trade aspect are the China's Renminbi (RMB) denominated Dim Sum bonds issued by Hong Kong banks, which saved the day for the RMB currency after Shanghai's Panda bonds didn't find many foreign buyers.   The West does not trust Shanghai, but it trusts Hong Kong's financial system, which with its Dim Sum Bonds helped turn RMB into a respectable international currency, slowly intent on rivaling the US dollar's world reserve status.

Even though Hong Kong is today of much lesser economic importance to the Central Government than it was during Mao's reign or even at the time of its handover in 1997, the significance of its political obedience as an inseparable part of China remains great.  Endless and sometimes laughable mantra of a harmonious and prosperous society is espoused by Beijing officials whenever they talk about Hong Kong.  Said Premier Wen Jiabao in one of his visits to Hong Kong: “Motherland is good, Hong Kong is good.  Hong Kong is good, motherland is good.”  It is paramount for the Communist Party that all its provinces and territories are in line and loyal to the one party regime.  All calls for democracy are swiftly crushed and perpetrators severely punished. Hong Kong's disobedience is particularly troubling, because the central government cannot interfere in the territory without receiving a global condemnation, or even worse, economic sanctions and even resulting in war.  Yet, allowing even just one of its territories to go the way of democracy will encourage others to follow suit.  So the Communist party is using its various tools on disposal in Hong Kong to influence the protests.  Besides the already mentioned Hong Kong government and big business loyalists, the communist regime from Beijing is also employing NGOs and Triads gangs to disrupt and quell the protests.  Similar tactics with NGOs have been used in China's efforts at disrupting and suppressing Falun Gong practitioners in Hong Kong.

But the Communist Party has much more to lose than just a respectable global financial hub, if it lets one of its provinces to implement democracy unchallenged.  To them, democracy is a disease that would eventually spell the end of the one party rule, and the dream of "Zhōnghuá Rénmín Gònghéguó wànsuì" (中华人民共和国万岁; literally: "[may the] People's Republic of China [last for] ten thousand years") would surely soon come to an end.  On the side note, we all know what happened to a similar empire long live prediction, that of a thousand year Reich made by the Nazis.

So all China seems to be doing in regards to the latest Hong Kong protests is trying to bring an end to the unrest in hopes of preserving the status quo, so it can resume its subtle and covert strategy of gaining even more loyal support and control over the territory.  Other than through its long and twisted tentacles in Hong Kong government and big business, part of its strategy in ending the current Hong Kong protests also includes financing anti-protest groups that have been tearing down booths and clashing with the protesters.

Finally, there are also some major international third parties involved, without whom the current protests would not even have started at the present time, let alone be so well run and funded.  The chief among them is the United States government, which recently admitted to funding the Occupy Central movement through many of its government financed NGOs.  For example, the Washington-based non-government organization by the name of “National Endowment for Democracy” (NED), together with its many branches, is infamous in stirring up trouble around the world by financing groups that start color revolutions and overthrow elected governments.  “Arab Spring” uprising in the Middle East and “Euromaidan” civil unrest and government coup in Ukraine, all of which led to wars and unnamed thousands of people killed and displaced, the action that continues into the present day, are just a few more recent examples of their accomplishments. NED's work in Hong Kong with various local NGOs has been years in the making, and it bore fruit as their minions were amongst the most organized and loudest groups in the protests.

But the question of course is why?  Why would the US government create chaos upon chaos around the world?  And of all places, why also in Hong Kong?  It most certainly was not for the purpose of making the world safe for democracy, as they would like everyone to believe.  It is rather about Washington's imperial hubris, set on dominating the world. It is about global economic, financial, and military hegemony, necessary to keep the US house of cards standing upright.  It is a rigged system whose purpose is propping up the profits of Wall Street and military-industrial complex.

The US financial system is a Ponzi scheme, sustained only by the ability of the US government to use force and propaganda to extract taxes from its citizens, borrow from foreigners, and most importantly to inflate through printing of money out of thin air.  The last one is especially made possible by the dollar's world reserve currency status which allows for endless money printing and dumping it on the rest of the world as its chief export.  In order for this rotten system to keep on going, it must remain unchallenged by any would-be economic, financial, or military rivals in its quest for maintaining a complete hegemony over the world.  Maintaining this dominance calls for enormous spending on corporate media presstitutes to keep the masses at home and abroad brainwashed into compliance, running countless covert operations in many countries abroad, and maintaining the world's largest military budget which is greater than the budgets of the next top eight countries combined.

Simply put, Washington does not want a China, now the world's largest economy, capable of launching its own  reserve currency nor doing it jointly as part of the five-nation “BRICS” group, either of which could rival the US dollar and compete with the World Bank and the IMF.  It does not want a China competing in the US national interests around the globe.  It does not want a China capable of exerting military power to protect its own national interests in its sphere of influence which the US has its eyes on. It therefore prefers a China that is broken up into smaller and weaker countries, unable to put up any serious challenge to the US hegemony in any respect.  For that purpose, the US uses Hong Kong to weaken and destabilize China any way it can.

So yes, from the perspective of the Washington's chessboard, Hong Kong protesters are nothing else but useful idiots, tools for advancing the interests of US government and its corporate cronies.  On the other hand, US government's acts of exploiting genuine grievances and protests of Hong Kong people in order to advance its own agenda of destabilizing and weakening China, by supporting and providing financial resources to various populist groups in Hong Kong, is in effect sidetracking the Hong Kong people from real problems by ignoring and forgetting the facts that make this place so prosperous and by appealing to populist push for true democracy, which will slowly but surely take this shining beacon of economic freedom on the path of socialist Europe, Cuba, and North Korea.

Please stay tuned for my next post on why democracy does not equal freedom and why it will destroy Hong Kong.

05 August, 2014

Ukrainians Burning Military Drafts - Cowardice Will Save the World!

Ukrainians are burning their military drafts, refusing to hand over their sons to the Ukraine's Ministry of Defense.  I salute this brave act of these brave and independent thinking people.  Only if the rest of the world was like this, the wars would become the thing of the past.
Another more recent video:


And if anyone needs further explanation of why this is a good thing, please watch a 1964 American comedy-drama war film “The Americanization of Emily
Here's one key excerpt to get you thinking: “That night, I sat in the jungles of Guadalcanal, waiting to be killed, sopping wet. Then I had my blinding revelation: I discovered I was a coward. That’s my new religion. I’m a coward. I’m a big believer in it. Cowardice will save the world.” … “We shall never end wars Mrs. Barum, by blaming it on ministers and generals, or warmongering imperialists, or all the other banal bogies. It's the rest of us who build statues to those generals and name boulevards after those ministers. The rest of us who make heroes of our dead and shrines of our battlefield.”

Read more of this interesting conversation from the movie here.

24 July, 2014

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: the Heretics Speak Truth to Power

In my pre-libertarian years, I have to admit that despite my complete ignorance about the issue of violence in the land of Palestine, back then I still would have not hesitated to give my opinion about it if asked.  It was as if I somehow knew with confidence what was going on in Palestine and who the good and the bad guys were.  I guess it was  my subconscious memory at work, the information that was fed to me by the Western media over many years without me even asking for it and without ever giving it a second thought.  It was like second nature, things that I had heard accidentally over and over for so many times have become the truth.  Perhaps this is a solid example and a proof that media propaganda can be so effective, whether we are paying attention to it or not?

Having been inspired by the Ron Paul Revolution over the years, I have encountered the issue of Palestine on many occasions and it naturally became a part of my long libertarian educational journey.  There is a wealth of information and disinformation about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict online.  Much of it is pure propaganda from both sides.  However, I have found that the best and most truthful sources come from whistle-blowers and other individuals and groups, who at some point had a change of heart and are just going against the prescribed conventional wisdom prescribed by their national leaders.

My main intent with this post is to share some of the sources that I have come to trust when it comes to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  I hope that everyone will give them a chance and find out what these people have to say, and then, combined with the usual everyday propaganda on this issue, decide for yourself what to believe.

Let me begin by recommending Miko Peled, the General's Son, whose deeply sad personal story and an excellent but shocking historical presentation had completely changed my conventional understanding of the conflict.  Not only that, but it also presented me with the solution which I have fully embraced ever since.  But more on that a little later.  His one hour long video presentation is definitely a must watch.

Next, there is nothing more credible than a growing number of Israeli soldiers and veterans (such as here, here, here, and here) who, having had participated in brutal oppression of Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza, now condemn actions of their government, and join in a peaceful cause by the name Breaking the Silence for exposing the Israeli public to the harsh realities of everyday life in the occupied territories of Palestine.  You can see more photos of their educational work on their Facebook page.

Mosab Hassan Yousef is a Palestinian and son of the Hamas leader and founder Sheikh Hassan Yousef, who having had been presented with evidence of violence of his organization, had a change of heart.  He then betrayed Hamas and spied for Israel in order to help prevent dozens of suicide attacks and saved countless lives of innocent people, and is now working on exposing the Hamas as the evil organization it really is.  He wrote a book titled Son of Hamas, and his highly recommended YouTube presentation exposing the truth about Islamic extremism of Hamas can be seen here.

Gideon Levy, an Israeli journalist on a lifelong mission of reporting about the Israeli occupation to Israeli readers who have no idea about what is happening in the occupied territories.  This most hated man by his own people in Israel says: "Terrorism is a weapon used by the weak.  It is a terrible weapon and I am completely against it.  But I understand where it comes from.  It comes from despair." ...  "I often feel ashamed of what is being done in my name.  I feel really guilty towards the Palestinians.  I think we are doing terrible things to them."  ...  "There should be a new intifada.  To remind the world and the Israelis there is a problem.  I'd completely understand the Palestinians if they started and intifada.  Israel has left them with no other option.  I can't imagine what the Israelis would do if they were under such an occupation.  The Palestinians have got nothing without fighting for it. They must fight."  Please watch the Al Jazeera documentary of Gideon Levy titled Going Against the Grain here.

Jewish peace organization Neturei Karta - the Orthodox Jews whose protests (such as here, here, and here) and educational rallies (such as here, here, and here) in major cities around the world remain completely unreported in the media.

All these so called heretics and traitors of their own kind speak truth to power, and are naturally disowned and ignored by their own sides.

So what did I learn from these muzzled, hated, and ignored voices?  One thing that I learned is that what people are usually arguing about when they are discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is about which of the two sides is more evil, according to whatever recent or past action they had done.  I find myself drawn in this blame game by both the pro-Israeli and the pro-Palestinian opposition, every time I get to talk about it.  However, counting points on which side did what evil thing yesterday is like talking about symptoms of a disease rather than about its cause, and this tit for tat countering of each other's actions by Israelis and Palestinians only furthers the conflict and does nothing to resolve it.

The root cause of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as so many of Israeli whistle-blowers have said on camera and are campaigning for to end, is the military occupation. Therefore they all agree that the bare minimum solution is for Israel to act unilaterally by ending the military occupation of Gaza and West Bank.  This means lifting the Gaza siege, bringing to an end building of Jewish settlements in West Bank, letting the Palestinians determine their own destiny, and working with them politically in establishing a permanent peace through a one or a two state solution.

But what of the evil Hamas?  Will they not then come out freely and destroy Israel as they vowed?  By Israel acting unilaterally and giving Palestinians back their dignity and a chance to determine their own future, Hamas would lose its purpose and would quickly become marginalized by the honest and peaceful Palestinians, first to a point of a small gang, and then eventually to the point of disappearance.

We should also understand that Israel's running of Gaza concentration camp and keeping and expanding of Jewish settlements in West Bank by taking even more Palestinian land and separating their communities by high walls and roads for Israelis only to travel on, only benefits Hamas as the military occupation by Israel is the sole reason for the existence of Hamas in the first place.  Hamas thrives on Israel's oppression of Palestinians, enabling it to wield greater political power and oppress and radicalize the innocent people living in Gaza and West Bank.

It is equally important to understand that this arrangement also benefits the Israeli militarist government and its military industrial complex, as the Israel's politicians are able to wield more political power, manipulate the propaganda machine to keep honest and hard working Israelis in line, and continue to give out new weapons orders and award arms contracts to their corporate cronies.  It should therefore be no wonder that Israeli government was instrumental in financing the establishment of Hamas.  Hamas on one side and the Israeli militarist government and its military industrial complex on the other, is like a marriage made in heaven.  Weaken or bring one down, the other is sure to suffer from loss of power and influence.

So in order to really address the root cause of occupation and bring a lasting peace in Palestine, there must first come a change of attitude in Israel's government.  The only way to bring that change is by creating both an internal and an external pressure on Israeli regime.  The internal pressure on Israeli government must come from the Israeli public and prominent professionals from all walks of life within their society.  To nurture and grow this pressure, it requires continual and tireless efforts of activists, like the people that were mentioned above, to continue educating the public and provide leadership in organizing and delivering pressure on the Israeli government.

Such significant internal action by the Israeli people will also help in bringing the Israeli-Palestinian issue to the world's attention and help put pressure the international community, especially on vital Israeli allies, to condemn and pull away their financial and political support from Israeli militarist government, eventually forcing it to reevaluate its Zionist policy towards Palestinians.

I would like to see this eventually go a step further, where the Israeli government would in time be made to also correct the injustices of the past.  Contrary to what we hear today that Israelis and Palestinians cannot live together in one country, the overwhelming historical evidence proves otherwise.  Palestinians and Israelis have lived next to each others for many centuries, and it can all happen again.  For that reason I am in favor of the view espoused by the General's Son that it is only fair that Palestinians should eventually have their right of return to their entire homeland of Palestine fulfilled.  After ending the occupation and allowing the two peoples to communicate, learn from each others, trade, and learn to trust each others again, there should come a time when Palestinians and Jews will begin to move around freely and settle wherever they desire in all of Palestine.

Theirs is a struggle which is not unique in the world.  The history of the world is full of examples of essentially the same problem.  Of mixed up people living on a stretch of land, with various slight differences that are barely distinguishable, having had fought countless wars for domination through rivers of blood, enslavement, and expulsion.  In this 21st century the humanity owes itself to learn from the mistakes of the past and begin resolving differences through peaceful means.  But we may only become capable of accomplishing such feats once when we evolve enough to respect and value individual human life and so much so that we will keep the powers away from those who desire to make decisions on individual's behalf.

14 July, 2014

Public vs Private Land Ownership: The Case for More Affordable, More Abundant, and More Efficient Land Use in Hong Kong

One of my ongoing personal frustrations about Hong Kong has been in regards to my inability to start my own property development firm here, despite the fact that this industry is highly lucrative in the territory.  Yes, I too quickly figured out where the best money is!  Over time I have learned the reasons for this situation, as is perhaps most prominently detailed in the now famous book titled "Land and the Ruling Class in Hong Kong" written by a local industry expert Alice Poon and also in "Uneasy Partners: The Conflict Between Public Interest and Private Profit in Hong Kong" by Leo Goodstadt.  A short review of these two books with insights as to the inner workings of the property development cartel can be read here.

What, in my view, many people in Hong Kong continually and erroneously identify as the solution to the territory's high property prices, is the need for government to make more land available for development.  However, this has not been a successful strategy thus far, as the property cartel is keeping a firm grip over the land procurement in Hong Kong.  Government works in collusion with the cartel, so that land lease is done in such ways so that it benefits the cartel and ensures that in most situations no other players can enter the game.  This kind of arrangement of government in bed with big business is clearly detailed the above mentioned books.  It is also summed up in this 2013 post.  However, in my view, it too still fails to spell out the right solution, by concluding that the Hong Kong government should end the collusion with developers and reduce high land price with which it jacks up its revenues.  Why is this solution wrong?  It is wrong because so long as the politicians have the power to sell favors to the highest bidders it is destined to keep happening, and no amount of legislation will be able to prevent it.

In my earlier post, I have already written about the right solution to this problem, through addressing a related problem of ever growing waiting lines for subsidized public housing, despite scores of empty public housing units being available and offered for habitation, all allegedly due to existence of choice (three apartment choices).

The following segment of my recent video interview with professor David Friedman during his recent visit to Hong Kong is an expert's confirmation that what causes Hong Kong's high property prices cannot be remedied by tinkering with symptoms, but only by eliminating the cause.

Son of famous economists Milton Friedman and Rose Director and famous in his own right as a renowned libertarian thinker, David Friedman is also an author, economist, physicist, and legal scholar, and he is currently a professor of law at university of Santa Clara.  He has written several books, most notable of which is “The Machinery of Freedom” and which talks about his version of free society, the so-called consequentialist anarcho-capitalism.

Upon my question of possible effects of private land ownership in Hong Kong, professor Friedman responded:

"It would be less scarce, because you would have multiple owners, and there would first be an incentive to make more land – which has happened in Hong Kong, of course. Noticeable parts of Hong Kong are land, where they filled in the water. And in addition to that if you add people competing for land, you would tend to get more efficient uses of land, and so forth. I don't know much about Hong Kong, but you were telling me earlier that in practice almost all the development is done by a small number of firms that worked together and have an effective cartel over the industry. And if that's right, it's unlikely that they are using the land in its most efficient fashion."

Watch the video segment below or see it on YouTube here.

So the remedy to Hong Kong's high property prices lays in private land ownership.  To paraphrase the words of Milton Friedman, government should only own the land its buildings are standing on, nothing else.  If all land in Hong Kong is private, then there would be no obstacles for all sorts of property development firms to arise and compete with their products and services, delivering abundance of best housing at most affordable and most competitive prices that a free market could offer.

10 July, 2014

Hong Kong's Public Housing Waiting Problem: Freedom is the Answer

Background information:

Public housing in Hong Kong is a set of mass housing programmes through which the Government of Hong Kong provides affordable housing for lower-income residents. Learn more on Wikipedia.

Not only are the low income people offered subsidized housing, but they are given choices in doing so.  While waiting for public housing to be available, they are given up to three offers to choose from.  If a family is not happy with the first available choice offered (usually due to bad location or due to being an old housing that was occupied before), they may choose to wait for the second and third public housing offers to become available, so that they can pick the one choice that suits them best (hopefully a shiny new apartment in a brand new housing estate with fine facilities, close proximity to subway, shopping malls, parks, playgrounds, and their workplace).  All that at taxpayer's expense.  Isn't that nice!

The problem presented before the Hong Kong Legislative Council (LEGCO):

The problem in this kind of multiple choice public housing scheme naturally becomes the fact that many older and less desirable flats in public housing remain empty, despite the fact that there is an ever growing list of low income families on the waiting list, all waiting for more housing to be built by the government so that they can have their two or three choices to choose from, especially if the first offer was shabby and old like this one.  So LEGCO has recently assembled a Panel on Housing meeting for submissions of ideas by public and business sector for consideration in dealing with this growing problem of long waiting lines and increasing numbers of empty public housing.

Freedom solution:

Had I been present in the Panel on Housing meeting, my speech (limited to just 2 minutes) would have been something along the following lines.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
We are here to discuss the problem of accepting waiting offers in subsidized public housing.  This problem is caused by and exists solely because of government meddling into housing by keeping tight land supply through collusion with property developers.  A couple of very popular books amongst local readers have shed a light on this chronic problem in Hong Kong.
The effect of this practice of crony capitalism in housing has been the sky high property prices and armies of low wage earners who are unable to afford decent affordable housing.  Therefore, what is being considered here today is the treatment of the unwanted effects, instead of addressing the underlying disease.  When you subsidize something, you are destined to get more of it.  Worse still, when you subsidize something and provide choices, you are also destined to create vast amounts of unwanted waste.
While the solution to this waste in public housing can be remedied by a reduction in public housing choices or by building more housing in order to allow for more choices (to an even greater pleasure of developers laughing all the way to the bank and of politicians securing their cushy seats), the problem of the continual growth in number of families sitting on the subsidized public housing waiting list is bound to remain.  Therefore, the real subject for discussion in these fine cushy chambers should be the elimination of the underlying disease by phasing out the collectivized public housing and allowing the free market to operate.
Existence of public housing is also wrong on the moral level as well.  People are not born with rights to housing. Each individual has a right to his life, right to the fruits of one's own labor, and liberty to do with his life as he so choose. Understanding and accepting this universal and moral truth of humanity, helps one to properly determine and act in the accordance of what the proper role of government ought to be. The purpose of government in that respect is to secure the basic rights of life, liberty, and property, nothing else! The Hong Kong government has failed its people in many of these areas, and its determination to take on even more roles in people's lives, such as that of continuation of running the subsidized housing scheme, instead of focusing on securing the essential liberties, only perpetuates HK people's problems.  Let's return freedom and fruits of individual labor back to their proper owners by abolishing the Hong Kong Housing Authority and taking power away from politicians to award contracts to their crony special interests.
So long as the free market mechanism - that wonderful system which enabled the creation and widespread consumption of glorious wealth amongst all segments of HK society - so long as it continues to be prevented to operate in housing, and therefore as the people of Hong Kong continue to remain un-free, the lines for subsidized housing will continue to grow longer and longer, politicians will continue to gain more and more political powers to act on people's behalf, bringing more and more people closer to the point when standing in line for free stuff is better than working for it.

19 June, 2014

A Conversation With David Friedman

A conversation with Dr. David Friedman about some of the solutions and potential issues of anarcho-capitalism, as well as possible ways of advancing ideas of free society and turning them into reality. 

Watch the entire interview in a YouTube playlist and with better resolution here

Part 1: Chaos, Anarchy, Capitalism, and Anarcho-capitalism.

Part 1 transcript available here

Part 2: Natural Rights vs Consequentialist Anarcho-Capitalism

Part 2 transcript available here

Part 3: Limitations of the Non-aggression Principle (NAP) & Protecting the Unprotected

Part 3 transcript available here

Part 4: Private vs Public Land Ownership

Part 4 transcript available here

Part 5: Protection Agencies vs Protection Rackets & Defending Against nations

Part 5 transcript available here

Part 6: Resolving Court Complaints, Non-aggression and Children, & Zero Role for the State.

Part 6 transcript available here

Part 7: Kejnesianism, Chicago School, Austrian School, & Anarcho-Capitalism.

Part 7 transcript available here

Part 8: Bringing the Machinery of Freedom Into Fruition & Ways of Advancing Libertarianism in General.

Part 8 transcript is available here