I heard from some place, so potential hearsay, that some of the major players didn't like free blacks and lower class whites fraternizing either and so set up a race based system we're still suffering the effects of today
When I grew up we listened to people not only because we agreed with them or knew in advance we WOULD agree with them, but because we wanted something resembling a healthy exchange of ideas. From your astonishment that appears to be something that's lost in this most polarized of intellectual climates. I "thumbed up" in case you're wondering.
@@dantean Ir was about setting up a new nation of property owners independent of England. The main purpose of the US Gov;t was defense of the rights of businessmen and slaveowners. When the slave owners rebelled against the merchants who had become industrialists and wealth mill owners. They crushed they by using the Black Slaves as US Colored Troops. The Black men became Republicans who were part of the Reconstruction Governments of the Southern States. The greed of the wealthy mill owners had set in motion a process that they could not control. Black slaves proving the were men and not slaves with the crack of an 1861 Springfield rifle. About 190,000 US Colored Troops served in the Northern Army and Navy.
I could be wrong, but the core point seems to be anti central bank and large government, which I all agree with. Economic nationalism is but one motivating/symptom of that. So I agree with everything so far ( 22:00 ) it's just reductive to say this is simply the cause of economic nationalism. It mostly seems to be motivated by greed, power and now egalitarianism.
Faux egalitarianism. It’s just another excuse for politicians to do things that benefit them and their partners (just like the Covid response). Another “emergency”.
There's no such thing as a fictitious entity with agency. Businesses, factories, gov'ts, cannot think or feel or act; only individual people can. Fact is, Socialism/Communism work perfectly fine and exactly a designed. This becomes evident when the vague definition of gov't ownership of means of production is clarified. By gov't we mean a leader or small group of leaders. By Socialism/Communism we mean slave owners, where a person or small group own all people and all property in a given geographic area.
I'm watching this now, so I'll make points as I go. I think I'll agree with some of this and not other parts. Anyway, a core point of mine would be for most of its history the USA had no income tax, the federal state depending on import taxes. Import taxes are so obviously bad, but in a way this is good as it limits them, the government can only go so far before negative effects are felt. Also Ireland has embraced free trade, but internally the economy is hamstrung by high taxes and lots of regulation, and you could argue it has depended so much on free trade that it hasn't sorted out its internal issues. Finally, would you believe in free trade with a country that openly has Jewish concentration camps and the trade helps them build the camps?
So this is a great speech, I was expecting something along the lines of Trump man bad, but it's honestly very informative. My main point of contention is a lot of the examples are motivated by egalitarianism, greed, will to centralisation and power. Economic nationalism is but one element, and the new deal is more motivated/influenced by socialism, egalitarianism and the Soviet Union, not to mention as a (wrong) reaction to the depression. So it's a great speech, but a bit disingenuous to blame this all on economic nationalism.
I think Rodger Sherman wrote a book even prior to the revolution the Constitution wounded in the house of its Guardians Thomas Paine good book Edwin Vieira great book Pieces Of Eight Henry Ford great book not allowed to say the name
savagerobuxanddiamond playz Whatever Non libertarians rely rely on hasn’t worked yet. You may call it theory, but the data and historical proof shows that mere libertarianism theory works
It still shocks me how quickly the major players of the time were working to dismantle liberty so quickly after the Revolution.
Bill Melater scary isn’t it? Think about how close to the brink that we were. Wow!
I heard from some place, so potential hearsay, that some of the major players didn't like free blacks and lower class whites fraternizing either and so set up a race based system we're still suffering the effects of today
It seems they were already masters of parasitic exploitation
Yes. Literally had a new beginning and could have gone in any direction. Could have been worse though.
@Jean Jourdain And that is a fatal flaw. To compromise on Liberty is to throw it away.
"It's amazing how many bad ideas came from Hamilton."
DiLorenzo is brilliant. Very good racconto of state power, debt and economic nationalism.
This is why capitalism fails the ruling class of bosses can help but become nationalist and hostile to others in the world market.
It astounds me how anyone could "dislike" these videos. Why are you watching if you don't like it?
I accidentally like/dislike videos all the time on my phone
I was asking myself the same question.
When I grew up we listened to people not only because we agreed with them or knew in advance we WOULD agree with them, but because we wanted something resembling a healthy exchange of ideas. From your astonishment that appears to be something that's lost in this most polarized of intellectual climates. I "thumbed up" in case you're wondering.
@@dantean Ir was about setting up a new nation of property owners independent of England. The main purpose of the US Gov;t was defense of the rights of businessmen and slaveowners. When the slave owners rebelled against the merchants who had become industrialists and wealth mill owners. They crushed they by using the Black Slaves as US Colored Troops. The Black men became Republicans who were part of the Reconstruction Governments of the Southern States. The greed of the wealthy mill owners had set in motion a process that they could not control. Black slaves proving the were men and not slaves with the crack of an 1861 Springfield rifle. About 190,000 US Colored Troops served in the Northern Army and Navy.
9:00 a debt based model is terrible. Cripples the later generations and forces lots of restrictive taxes which then compounds the problem.
17:20 Implied constitutional meaning is honestly one of the worst things ever invented
Great presentation by the “GREATEST ALUMNI” of WESTMINSTER COLLEGE in New Wilmington, Pa.
I’m proud to have graduated from the same Economic Program.
I could be wrong, but the core point seems to be anti central bank and large government, which I all agree with. Economic nationalism is but one motivating/symptom of that. So I agree with everything so far ( 22:00 ) it's just reductive to say this is simply the cause of economic nationalism. It mostly seems to be motivated by greed, power and now egalitarianism.
Faux egalitarianism. It’s just another excuse for politicians to do things that benefit them and their partners (just like the Covid response). Another “emergency”.
There's no such thing as a fictitious entity with agency. Businesses, factories, gov'ts, cannot think or feel or act; only individual people can. Fact is, Socialism/Communism work perfectly fine and exactly a designed. This becomes evident when the vague definition of gov't ownership of means of production is clarified. By gov't we mean a leader or small group of leaders. By Socialism/Communism we mean slave owners, where a person or small group own all people and all property in a given geographic area.
I'm watching this now, so I'll make points as I go. I think I'll agree with some of this and not other parts. Anyway, a core point of mine would be for most of its history the USA had no income tax, the federal state depending on import taxes. Import taxes are so obviously bad, but in a way this is good as it limits them, the government can only go so far before negative effects are felt. Also Ireland has embraced free trade, but internally the economy is hamstrung by high taxes and lots of regulation, and you could argue it has depended so much on free trade that it hasn't sorted out its internal issues. Finally, would you believe in free trade with a country that openly has Jewish concentration camps and the trade helps them build the camps?
The biggest problem with FIT and MMT is that the federal government is nearly boundless.
34:40 lol that is epic, I wish they did that now 😭
So this is a great speech, I was expecting something along the lines of Trump man bad, but it's honestly very informative. My main point of contention is a lot of the examples are motivated by egalitarianism, greed, will to centralisation and power. Economic nationalism is but one element, and the new deal is more motivated/influenced by socialism, egalitarianism and the Soviet Union, not to mention as a (wrong) reaction to the depression. So it's a great speech, but a bit disingenuous to blame this all on economic nationalism.
I'm sure DiLorenzo knows, but he only had 40 minutes to talk. Wish he would have talked about it, though.
I agree with you but nationalizing the economy is how you get the federal leviathan.
I think Rodger Sherman wrote a book even prior to the revolution the Constitution wounded in the house of its Guardians Thomas Paine good book Edwin Vieira great book Pieces Of Eight Henry Ford great book not allowed to say the name
libertarianism relies too heavily on theory
Used to be much more practical and hands on, but feds and other "groups" have been cracking down very badly.
As opposed to what, astrology?
Just another troll. Good job.
Astrophysics relies too heavily on theory.
savagerobuxanddiamond playz
Whatever Non libertarians rely rely on hasn’t worked yet. You may call it theory, but the data and historical proof shows that mere libertarianism theory works