New Discourses Bullets, Ep. 119
We’re inundated with messages that somehow “diversity is our strength” and the path to that strength and growth is through “inclusion.” We also know that term is a Communist scam, and we’ve talked about that at length in the past, repeatedly. Well, it’s time for a defense of exclusion as it is rightly meant by Communists, specifically the “fundamental right to exclude,” which is a pillar of what defines private property. In this episode of New Discourses Bullets, host James Lindsay explains how this property, the fundamental right to exclude, is the basis for all wealth. It’s not just an important episode to catch but one that’s crucial to share with your kids who aren’t getting these lessons at school.
Additional episodes of New Discourses Bullets can be found here.
Subscribe to New Discourses Bullets on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Pandora, YouTube, Rumble, Odysee or by RSS.
1 comment
Though I in some sense feel “wealthy,” I am not so by any classical definition. By classical definition of “wealth” I am poor. I enter into many exchanges every week, and none of them increase my wealth, yet they do function to further my purposes.
To the extent that I am pursuing my purposes in life, I feel “happy,” or one could say, “wealthy.”
My argument with Marxist or neo-Marxist ideas is their insistence that someone else’s purpose is much more important than my own, even though sacrificing my purposes to the group – or other – purpose would make me unhappy. Thus I see those ideas as basically criminal. Marxism, etc., however, is not the only way to justify criminal behavior. So we can be up in arms about neo-Marxist wokeness, but eliminating it would not alone eliminate the problem of crime. And I think the problem of crime (or psychopathy) is a more important human problem than the problem of Marxism or neo-Marxism.