KOL231 | Let’s Talk Ethereum—Libertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism & Blockchains
Dec 12, 2017
53:45
Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 231.
This is my appearance on Let's Talk ETC! (Ethereum Classic) (Dec. 8, 2017), discussing the referenced topics. The audience is not really a libertarian one so I explained different approaches to libertarianism and some of my thoughts about libertarian activism, the prospects of bitcoin and other technology possibly aiding in the fight for human liberty and the battle against the state, and so on. The host was very good, the discussion very civil, and the audio quality is pretty good.
Transcript below.
Youtube:
https://youtu.be/B4k9Wv7obWA
Original Youtube:
TRANSCRIPT
Let’s Talk Ethereum—Libertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism & Blockchains
Stephan Kinsella and Christian Seberino
Let's Talk ETC! (Ethereum Classic) podcast, Dec. 8, 2017
00:00:05
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Hello and welcome to another edition of Let’s Talk ETC. I’m your host, Christian Seberino. And today I have a special guest with me, Stephen Kinzella. Did I pronounce your name correctly?
00:00:20
STEPHAN KINSELLA: No, Stephen Kinsella, but that’s close enough.
00:00:24
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Okay, Stephen Kinsella. And so I think you'll agree he's a will be an interesting guest for us. He is – let me read part of his Wikipedia page. So Stephan Kinsella is an American intellectual property lawyer, author and deontological anarcho-capitalist. He attended Louisiana State University where he earned a Bachelor of Science and Master of Science in electrical engineering. So he does have knowledge definitely of technical aspects and a Juris Doctor from the Paul M. Hebert Law Center, and he also obtained an LL.M. at the University of London.
00:01:11
He was formerly an adjunct scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, faculty member of the Mises Academy, and he also co-founded the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, C4SIF, of which he is currently the director. So wow. Welcome, and congrats on that very impressive resume.
00:01:37
STEPHAN KINSELLA: Thank you very much.
00:01:39
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: So the reason I thought it would be interesting to have you on the show, and I think the audience would agree – so a lot of people get into blockchain technology and Ethereum Classic, which is one of the main focuses of the show, because they have libertarian leanings. That's not a requirement, but I do notice it attracts a lot of those people. And they were all – or most of us are technically minded, and so a lot of times people will say things and I'll wonder, well, is what you're saying really backed up by the people that know about the law and economy more than developers?
00:02:26
Would they agree with the things people are saying? And so that's why I think you're a very helpful guest because you bring that that side of things. We don't usually discuss things with lawyers and people that know so much about the economy. So why don't we – why don’t you start with – why don't you describe from your website what a deontological libertarian is? Now, when I searched for that on Wikipedia, it came up that it was the same thing as a natural-rights libertarian. So can you kind of talk about that?
00:03:05
STEPHAN KINSELLA: Sure. Well, keep in mind that I didn't write that page, so that's someone else's description. I don't strongly disagree with it, but I think what the person writing that was trying to get at was there are – there’s considered to be two basic types. Now there are some people that think there are three or more but two basic types of approaches towards, say, ethics. And to simplify it, they’re empirical/utilitarian and natural rights/deontological.
00:03:40
So the first would be kind of a consequentialist approach, which is basically, we're in favor of rules in society and laws that lead to the greatest benefit for society in general. And that's sometimes called utilitarianism. It's an empirical approach that a lot of economists favor, like they try to say, should we adjust the tax code this way? Should we have this kind of law? Who’s it going to benefit? Who’s it going to hurt? And we sum this up, and we try to do the overall best good for society.
00:04:14
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: All right.
00:04:13
STEPHAN KINSELLA: And then the deontological approach, and by the way, people that are familiar with the philosophical idea of ontology, which is the philosophical study of the types of things that exist, the word sounds similar. But they actually have nothing to do with each other. So deontology and ontology have literally nothing to do with each other. Deontological just means an approach that is more rule or principle-based, and that's why it's more geared towards the natural law. So the idea is that we're in favor of rules that are right, no matter what the consequences, so that's the kind of classical division.
00:04:55
Now, someone like me, I wouldn't really – I don't actually think there's a division. I think that the rules that are right and good sort of blend with and complement the rules that lead to the best results for society on average. So I wouldn't really distinguish between the two. I think people call me a deontological anarchist libertarian because I've written in the tradition of Ayn Rand, who's sort of an Aristotelian natural-rights theorist, and Rothbard, who was in the natural rights tradition.
00:05:27
But I myself have been more influenced by Mises – Ludwig von Mises in economics, who's an Austrian economist, and by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who is a German Austrian economist, who's been influenced by Rothbard and Mises. But his theory of rights is sort of a blend of consequentialism and the natural rights approach. So we could get into that if it's interesting, but basically I prefer to view my approach as logical and consistent and principled.
00:06:02
So you talk to other human beings that we live with, the ones that share similar values, basic values like peace, prosperity, cooperation. And we say, listen, if you apply the rules of economics and logic and consistency and honesty and evidence to these things, what would what would that lead you to conclude? So if we all are in favor of each other prospering and everyone doing better in life and we have some awareness of the laws of economics, the basic laws of economics, then what kind of laws would we be in favor of? What kind of legal policies would we be in favor of?
00:06:43
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Okay, so you want me to answer that? Okay, so two general classes of answers that I hear to your question is there's the camp that says that we give everybody – we respect everyone's freedom, and we leave people alone. That's what I think of when I think of libertarianism. I’m a simple guy. I think in simple definitions. That's how I would – your definition was obviously much more sophisticated than mine. But that's like a broad category. And then other people seem to want to focus on taking care of people…
00:07:22
STEPHAN KINSELLA: Yes.
00:07:23
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: What we would call the socialistic approach perhaps. And those are kind of the two big answers that I see, and they're always in conflict, maybe not all the time. But those are the kind of the biggest, two divisions that I see. Would you agree with that?
00:07:38
STEPHAN KINSELLA: I see. I think from the perspective that I come from, we don't agree with all these bifurcations exactly because we see that there are loaded presuppositions in the way that these things are framed. And so it depends upon who or which audience we're speaking to. But if I'm talking to someone that just is dabbling in this or hasn’t experienced the libertarian perspective on things, then that perspective that you just put out, so we would say that's a false dichotomy that, first of all, there's no conflict between rights, and there's no conflict between the desire to help people and the desire to protect people's individual property rights.
00:08:29
We think that those things go together. But there is a conflict between the idea of having, say, a legal right to be taken care of and a legal right to your property. They do run in conflict with each other because – and this goes into what libertarians sometimes emphasize, the distinction between negative and positive rights.
00:08:51
So basically libertarians tend to say that we believe in negative rights and the corresponding negative obligations, which means that you have a right to do whatever you want within your own territory basically, and your own property, your own body, as long as you don't invade someone else's rights, which is sort of what you stated earlier as the kind of rule-of-thumb way of looking at it. And that can be viewed as a negative right because the only obligation or duty that it imposes upon your neighbors is for them not to do something. All they have to do is not invade your property. They have to not hurt you. They have to not steal from you. They have to not invade your – so the only burden you impose upon them is to just not do something, to refrain from doing something.
00:09:38
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: I see.
00:09:39
STEPHAN KINSELLA: But if you believe in positive rights, which is the right to be educated, the right to a house, the right to food, these kinds of things, that requires that someone else has to have an obligation or a duty to provide you with it. So if you have a right to an income, that means other people have the obligation to give that to you. But that means that you have a right to their property, so there's always a conflict between the right that you have to your property and other people's rights to try to get a piece of it
00:10:11
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Okay so…
00:10:12
STEPHAN KINSELLA: It becomes positive welfare rights.
00:10:14
CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Okay,
