It's actually contrasting "freedom in the abstract", i.e. freedom to technically do more things, with "freedom in the actual", where even if they could theoretically do more things they in actuality can't do them.

Like when ofthevoid was arguing we are "freer" because we get to choose insurance companies, but ignores that the "freedom" to choose insurance companies results in being tied to a specific job because of the insurance it has whereas in a centralized system you would be more free to move jobs. Sure, you could technically move jobs and sacrifice your insurance, but the system actually creates more cost which limits your ability to do things.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 23 2020 01:43pm

pro tip: if you're going to compare someone's posts to someone's "schtick" at least have a few examples lmao

also, u should, i listened to all of Viv's videos when they posted them even though i thoroughly disagree with the host and most of the guests.



in general i'd say where you have the most chance to fail is where you have the most freedom. then we can discuss if that much freedom is good. but if we're just talking freedom we are the most free, the most free to become millionaires or homeless.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 23 2020 01:45pm

I mean, my favorite example is when he said "If their houses are in danger of flooding from global warming, why wouldn't they just sell their houses and leave?"

Ignoring that nobody would buy a flooding house.


Honestly anything related to global warming is fertile ground for Ben Shapiro. He's said numerous times that he would believe in global warming if the leftists didn't propose solutions that would destroy the economy. Like, dude, the fact that global warming is happening doesn't care about your feelings about the proposed solutions.

I mean, it depends how you are defining freedom.

A system where anybody can literally do anything without collective punishment is the most free system possible in abstract terms, but in actuality most people are going to spend so much time guarding their possessions, lives, and means from intruders that it wouldn't result in much actualized freedom. Same with a totally controlled system on the other side of the curve. You could technically switch jobs but if you are being forced to stay by an outside authority then you won't, even if your means are high enough that you could technically do anything.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 23 2020 01:49pm

it sounds a bit like you've got a micro exposure to his global warming position. he accepts the world is getting hotter, accepts its driven by man, and then questions the left on accuracy and their opportunistic grabs at "fixing it" through tax increasing legislation. hard to argue that's real when a covid stimulus plan had green energy initiatives drafted into it's first draft.

but you are correct that he's deeply biased against the left, and it does cause him to exaggerate or say the occasional stupid thing. he was a lawyer, and a journalist. so i tend to trust what he says on law and the media more factually, and listen to the rest for entertainment.

You make it sound like we live in an apocalyptic wasteland and the government is Mad Max come to save us.

a dog defines it's freedom by what parts of the yard it's leash let's it get to, if there's a porcupine in the bush it's still more free if it can reach it, regardless of quills.

america as a leash lets the dog get to every corner, its just also a really dangerous minefield of a yard, which also has buried piles of gold.

Yeah, that's freedom in the abstract. If you say "you can go dig up the gold if you want, but there's also a ton of landmines that will kill you" are you really free to look for the gold? No... not really. You're not even really free to go into that section of the yard.

Remove both the gold and the minefield and suddenly you've got more yard to explore. You've sacrificed the "freedom" to find gold or die, and in return gained more yard to live in. In practical terms you've actually gotten more free because you were never going to risk your arm getting blown off.

He touched on Somalia historically, and mentioned how parts of it carry forward to today, and that's a reasonable assessment. Somalia's stateless period was one of considerable growth for them, relative to their peers. So you can definitely say the system flourished.