Next up! – Martin Meyers and Derek James. They will be debating the topic: Is Anarchy Compatible with Human Nature? In preparation for this debate, which will be published soon via our RSS feed (available on all podcast platforms,) we’ve posted a few questions to the participants. Here is what they had to say:

Derek James

Arguing that Anarchy is not compatible with human nature

What is your political affiliation?
Classic Liberal.

What is a brief summary of your political history?
Discovered anarchism by way of Emma Goldman at around 14 years old. Read her and Kropotkin, bought into the criticisms of capitalism and western culture. After a few years of that, I came to decide Anarchism as they proposed it wasn’t possible, and you cant collectivize production without force. Became libertarian. Supported Gary Johnson in 2012 and 2016. Became a bit annoyed with the title ‘libertarian’, became more aware of the true important roles of government, feel more comfortable as a classic liberal. An admirer of John Locke, Thomas Jefferson. Heavily influenced by Jordan Peterson. Believe there’s value to be found in all political stances, and as a result, communication across political camps is essential.

What led you to take the position that you’re taking in this debate?
That answer would require more writing than the last question haha. Let’s save it for the debate.

What arguments do you assume the other participant in this debate will make?
I assume my opponent will argue about the forceful nature of government and the efficiency of the free market. Both excellent points for a strong argument.

What is your favorite menu item from taco bell?
Cheesy gordita crunch with a fiery shell.

Martin Meyers

Arguing that Anarchy is compatible with human nature

What is your political affiliation?
No direct political affiliation. I describe myself as philosophically Anarchist and realistically pragmatic.

What is a brief summary of your political history?
I actually had 0 involvement in the political realm until the recent election cycle. Prior, I generally aligned with what was considered Liberal qualities ( or at least what moderates considered Liberal such as being pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, etc ). During the election cycle, I gravitated towards Rand Paul and really admired his realistic approach to issues. At the time I lived with entirely die-hard Bernie supporters, including my girlfriend at the time. Over the course of time, I started watching a lot of Congressional hearings, listening to podcasts and lectures from the likes of Tom Woods and others from Mises ( DiLorenzo, Salerno etc ). That led me to really start delving deep into studying the ideas of free markets and what constituted individual freedom.

What led you to take the position that you’re taking in this debate?
Analysis and observation of people and groups that I’ve been involved with politically over the course of a year.

What arguments do you assume the other participant in this debate will make?
I’m assuming that my opponent will argue against Anarchism by bringing up the tribal nature of man and how humans naturally gravitate towards groupthink and conflict.

What is your favorite menu item from taco bell?
Grilled Stuft Beef Burrito with extra pico!

 

Don’t forget to subscribe to the Think Liberty podcast on Soundcloud or iTunes to get notified when this debate is published!