Adam Kokesh versus Larken Rose on Using The Political Process To Get Rid of Politics

Anarchast Ep.407

Larken Rose vs Adam Kokesh great debate on Anarchast. Topics include: debating the usefulness of using the political system to further the cause of Anarchism, democracy is inherently bogus, is any degree of statism acceptable, Ron Paul is at least a voluntarist, declaring the federal government of no authority, a practical way out of statism, people waking up en-mass, does the president have the power to remove the post of president, the Libertarian takeover of the libertarian party, political authority is fake and illegitimate, principal vs pragmatism…

Larken Rose:

Adam Kokesh:

Anarchapulco:

Anarchast on Facebook:

Anarchast:

Enjoy our content and would like to see us get more amazing guests and spread the word of freedom? A donation to this BTC address will give us more resources to do so: 16AJs5DFEcfCuXkwmx1o54Ld4yXzPP1gVR

45 Comments on Adam Kokesh versus Larken Rose on Using The Political Process To Get Rid of Politics

  1. I agree with Larken 100%. We are free because we are born free and I don’t care what they write on their pieces of paper anymore.

    • Haha, no I really don’t think so. I’ve met him a couple of times and he’s very genuine and visibly passionate about what he is doing. Don’t you think it would be massively counterproductive for the government to have someone convert thousands of people to voluntarist thought just to try and reel some of them back in?

    • He was arrested many times and challenged bogus laws with civil disobedience more so than anyone. People are quick to forget.

  2. Both have good points but Larken’s position is more solid with no holes… so while both arguments are convincing, Larken wins this one.

    • Carson Wentz I’m making none of the above a serious option. That’s the point of the campaign. Thanks for your vote!

    • You know you can still campaign for “none of the above” on the ballot. But you just want “Adam Kokesh” on the ballot. Why even attach your name?

    • Carson Wentz Please check out the platform and you’ll see what I mean: KokeshForPresident.com/platform

  3. I agree with both of them. Government is horrible and needs to die a death of a thousand cuts (actually that may be too humane of a death for government). Maybe this is what’s going on. Being an anarchist I do think Larken Rose’s cuts are deeper though. But for those who still believe in the lie of governments Adam’s cuts may be deeper. I’m just glad to see both these guys showing government for the scam that it is.

  4. “Authority has been the ideological disease of mankind. And finally, a mass of anarchists have been injected into the artery of society as antibodies geared to combat this illness.” – Sterlin Luxan

  5. Can the outcome of anything Adam is trying to do result in anything bad? That question should have been brought up. I can not see any reason both Adam and Larken in their quests could result in anything bad.

    • Larken did say it, several times, and fervently so in his closing arguments. It legitimizes the notion that we need a ruling class/king/president to grant us freedom.  It legitimizes the whole political process: voting, legislation, and having some magical person at the top of the food chain.  No one has the right rule, and electing a ruler for any reason is diametrically opposed to freedom.  (Not his words, obviously, but that’s what I believe his point was).

    • Last year or perhaps 2 years ago Jeff also threw his hat in the ring to run for office and tried to enlist others in this movement to also do so. I forget who spearheaded that idea and got others to join, but Jeff didn’t stick with it for long, it appeared to be a half-hearted effort. No offense intended Jeff. You even said you had no intention of taking office if it came down to that.

      For the very same reasons as Larken states here I was opposed to seeing people spend their resources in “the game” as opposed to doing the same tours the same talks the same interviews based on the freedom platform and non aggressive principles.

      On the other hand, I like what Jeff said that we should let anyone use whatever methods they choose to reach the widest audience, and we know statists are that audience. It’s a shame but true, that many statists wouldn’t give an iota of attention to somebody discussing politics UNLESS they were seen as a contender for political office.

      In that regard Adam’s campaign may reach huge swaths of people that otherwise wouldn’t hear him, just like Ron Paul did. I also agree with Jeff it is counterproductive to publicly denounce another’s methods when they are actively promoting a voluntaryist perspective, even if it isn’t a perfect perspective, even if it contains inconsistencies. Such inconsistencies DO need to be called out, but IMO not publicly UNLESS they are more harmful than helpful. Larken, you & Adam should find common ground and stay on THAT page.

      I would be remiss if I neglected to say I am so e x t r e m e l y grateful for Larken’s clarity and rigid adherence to logic and consistency. Unfortunately that is a virtue most people and definitely most statists have little concern with. Larken’s rigid adherence to principle also came up in the debate on borders with Loren Southern. It’s difficult to reach statists on principle when their focus and fear are on more immediate, day to day matters.

      My gut tends to side with Larken due to the rock solid and consistent foundation of his arguments and stance on principles, however my empathy leans toward cooperation and finding common ground. I like what Adam said about the false wedge between practicality and principles. If principles are practical (they are, but may not be easier) then we need to find a way to demonstrate that. Unfortunately to most practical is equated to easier, and that usually trumps principle.

  6. Larken wins Hands Down!! Leave the ideology in the hands of the Great Philosopher, Larkin…

  7. I think Larkin has no real practical Solutions for arriving at stateless society, and I’m 100% in support of what Adam’s trying to do. Thanks for hosting this great debate.

  8. I’m with larken, authority of government is a serious superstition that needs to be moved BEYOND

  9. Freedom is yours to be had….if you want to invest your time into the political system then I definitely support you. I’ve been watching the old talks posted by ‘LibertyInOurTime’ and the early Libertarians were doing some great things. Please get involved with Adam’s campaign if you have the time to offer voluntarily!

  10. Larkin makes some good points. However if Adam makes it to the spotlight, which I doubt he will. He will shine the light on a moral dilemma called government. I’m torn, as they both are doing good work to bring Anarchy to people minds.

  11. Without knowing who either of them is and not too familiar with this cause, I’m seeing that ideologically (and logically), Larken makes perfect sense.

  12. Kokesh 100%. Kokesh hasn’t done anything that directly violates the N.A.P and in the
    same fassion as Ron Paul has been promoting the principles of Liberty. END OF STORY.
    How you choose to enact change is entirely up to the individual. Larken may
    find The Kok’s approach ineffective and potentially counterproductive but quite frankly that’s immaterial from a Voluntaryist perspective.

  13. WOW! 3 of my favorite gentlemen in one video….. While we all want “the root to freedom” as Larken speaks of, the masses are not ready. What Adam offers is a “step” to freedom. The masses must crawl before they walk. I love Larkens goal but to achieve it we NEED Adams strategy. Adams communication style will reach the masses also. To achieve our goal we MUST reach the masses. They simply are not ready for Larken but I do think they’re ready for Adam.

Comments are closed.