CAS207-Liberty's Secret Agents with Adam Knott - Church and State

Coquine Valley could become a sanctuary city. A different Houseman Caleb Collier says that this I'm. Proposing that the City of Spokane Valley issue of proclamation stating that our city is a second Amendage sanctuary. Welcome to the fire today on Church and State Liberty, secret Agents with Adam not Helocation Patriots, and welcome to Church and State, where we drive morality and religion over tolerance and apathy. And I'm your host, Caleb Caller, once again your favorite far right chock jock, and the show talks about politics and religion. Jesus Christ is our referee, so it's always nice and clean. Real quick point you to the website Church and State dot Media. Fill out this form, get our newsletter and personal phone call from yours truly. While you're there, perused through and check out the most recent episodes. We continue to cover hard hitting topics, have great guests on and please share with friends, family, and neighbors. Also check out the futured guest page. We have incredible people that have joined us over the almost decade I've been doing this. With all of those, just click on the name that'll take you right to the episode or episodes. Also proves through the great affiliates that we have. These are great companies that I believe in that I shop with personally. And of course when you use the promo code Church and State, you help support us and many of them you'll get a discount as well. And speaking of support, we need it. We need it, ladies and gentlemen, as we continue to expand. We're already part of great networks and OURBTV preparate broadcasting network, your news newscasters CDM. There's so many great ones that we're a part of, and as I said mid August, we will be nationally syndicated on AMFM radio. But we need help, We need money to do so, so please hit the donate button and those monthly ones, wow, they really mean the world to us. Lastly, if you want to get ahold of Us and State seventeen seventy six at proton dot me. With that, let's go ahead and bring on our guest, Liberty's Secret Agents. Adam Nott is a libertarian philosopher. He's going to be a speaker at the Freedom Fest in Las Vegas this weekend. I will be in attendance to that and look forward to hearing his speech, but Adam was gracious enough to join us on Church and State and give us a little preview of what he's going to be talking about. Adam, thank you for joining us on Church and State. Thank you, Calee, thank you for having me. Absolutely, it's a real pleasure. Number One, there's a term here right on your website that I don't think most of the audience is going to be familiar with, and I might even butcher it. Praxeology. Yes, all right, can you explain that for us gladly? Well, you know, a lot of the libertarians have heard of. The term comes out of the Austrian School of Economics, which people have heard of. That was a group of European economists, a school of thought that started in the late eighteen hundreds with a man named Carl Manger, and then kind of there was a number of very important scholars. They're all economists. But Ludwig bone Misus is one who had to come to the United States due to World War Two. I believe he was Jewish, or at least partially anyway. And praxeology is a word that he coined to me. Essentially a discipline that studies the laws of human nature. So what Carl Manger said was that there are two kinds of laws. There is empirical laws and there are exact laws. So the way I like to your viewers, the way I could explain it is, if my intention is to walk to the other side of the room, will I arrive there? And I think all of us would agree that most of the times I will if if I'm intending to walk to the other side of the room, probably will arrive there. But not every time. Something might happen. I might trip, might have a heart attack, earthquake might happen, I might get distracted and actually something I make at a phone call and go the other way. So it's not one hundred percent, it's not an exact law. It's not something that must necessarily happen. However, if I walk towards the other side of the room, must I walk away from the side of the room that's behind me every time? Or is that only sometimes? I think we could all agree that it's every time. In other words, I if I walk towards the other side of the room, every time I do that, I'm going to walk away from the side of the room behind me. That's what so that gives your viewers an idea of what are called manger called exact laws. In other words, every time you're planning on doing this, then this is what must happen. This is what must come with us. There's no exceptions to that. So Mesus said that the study of that part of our activity is called praxeology. In other words, when we only study the part about our activity that when you do a that b has to happen, we're going to call that praxeology. When we study the other stuff that where you do something and it may or may not happen, it's only possibility, possibility or a probability, that's a different science, so we'll call that something else. We'll call that, you know, history or natural science will give it another name to it. So praxeology, basically, according to Mesus, is the study of human nature of laws, the laws of our activity that are certain, where every time you do something, something else has to also come with that. But the hope is that you learn something new from studying that, and you're able to show people something about their activity that they didn't know. And usually what we're trying to what we'll be trying to say is, well, this is something that might be slightly painful to you or might cause you you anguish or or unhappiness. So if you if you do this, you might want to consider a different technique. Because praxeology shows us that these two methods are not the same, one of them may be harmful to you. And now I'll give you a very simple example. There are at least two ways I can interact with another person. I can interact with another person when their mind is present to me. So, for example, Caleb, right now, I'm interacting with you, and in my as from my point of view, I think your mind is with us. In other words, I feel like you're watching me, you're listening to me. There's another consciousness that I have to now be concerned about. So that has an effect on me. Now I have to I conduct myself differently when I think Caleb's with me or his mind is with me, than I do when I'm in isolation. Sure, so I can conduct can interact with Caleb this way. That way are we doing now? But there's another way. Caleb or I could could have a vending machine that we put somewhere, you know, a few miles from our home and in that vending machine, I'll put some Coca cola and some water and some Snickers bars, and then Kleb's Caleb's going to know about that vending machine. Now, So Caleb's going to go to that vending machine, and I'm going to be asleep at night. But We're going to be socially transacting, but without each other's mind present. So when you do that kind of social interaction, it eliminates an entire set of problems. So, but it also precludes certain opportunities. So for example, if if if it's if I'm feel certain negative things when I'm interacting with people. I'm shy, i feel judged, or whatever. So I substitute another way of interacting with people by, for example, using a vending machine or interacting online like through Amazon. That's social interaction because other people are on the other end of those trades, but yet I don't deal with them directly. So the benefit to me is that I avoid all those issues that come up when I deal with somebody directly. But there's also something that I can't do. Now, it's harder for me to coerce somebody. Sure, So my argument would be the reason libertarians are pro market is because we can view the market. As the market expands, and if you think about this, you might see that that I'm onto something. As the market expands, there's more and more opportunities for me to transact with people without dealing with people over time. Yeah, I can see. That makes sense to me. And let me pause you there because you've said quite a bit to and I want to expand on this with the audience. Number one to your first point, you know, they basically actions have consequences, you know, and not all consequences are bad. In your example, walking away from one wall to get to the other wall, Yeah, there's a consequence you're moving away from the wall. Like my case, I'd be walking away from this really cool backdrop that I have to get to the other side of the room. But our founding father is when you look at like the United States, for example, they were able to examine this and say, there's going to be consequences for our actions. What kind of government are we going to give the people? And they ultimately decided on a republic, which in my opinion, is a way better system than most of the other ones out there. You know, as a monarchist I'd go probably a little bit further than they would. I'm sure you would go a little bit further as well, but still a very good system of government. And they understood the consequences of that, and we have benefited now for two hundred and fifty years. Now, are we in that empire state currently? Yeah, it's kind of fallen away from the original intent there. But I really like what you're saying here on consequences of actions. Well, staying with on this topic, I think our founding fathers would have said this. They thought that every time that that once you establish a government, it's going to have certain tendencies, and those tendencies are going to be bad for the citizens. That the tendency of government to grow and to usurp the free choices of individuals is inevitably going to happen, and that's inevitably going to lead to bad things. So they believed in a kind of universal cause and effect. So the the opposite would be, well, no, I'm I'm a socialist. Let's say I think that I think that this is an empirical issue. I think that, yes, some of the socialism that has been tried in the bad in the past has done bad things, but I'm so smart, I'm going to do it with an adjustment so that it's going to lead to human happiness next time. So that's why ye still waiting on that, Adam, how much time we have, but yeah, still waiting on that. It doesn't seem to have worked any time it's ever been tried. And then kind of going back to you know, your your second point here, which I also I think is fantastic, and I agree you have that that free market, and you're going to have transactions with people people that you never physically meet face to face. But there's also when you were talking about this, I also saw this this merging of the two that we've seen with technology, because when I look at some of the conversations that I have with people, you and I we're having a great conversation, great dialogue, we're engaged with each other. But I also see people who are stuck to their cell phones and they're having a much more transactional approach to the conversations. They're they're distracted by this thing or even just text messaging with people. It's not the same as face to face and makes it a little bit more transactional. I guess the way I would explain it is uh, at least in my philosophy. The way I would explain the advent of the cell phone and especially social media is what you remember. And I remember when it was just the Internet by and large. So let's go back to the you know, the mid nineties, and so the Internet at that time was kind of one way. In other words, I could consume content from it, but it wasn't another person necessarily wasn't there. I mean, maybe they had some capability for that. And then so social media it's a different level because when you're posting on social media, even though you're not with somebody, you feel that you're posting to another mind as I as I say it. So I think the danger is that people assume that social all social interaction is positive. The more you do, the better you feel. I don't agree with that. I think that if you really look at if you really look at how your mind works, you're going to find that there's a lot of happiness in isolated kind of contemplation. And I think social interaction is kind of difficult. The reason is when you're dealing with another mind, you can't observe the other mind you don't know what's going on, and so you have to concentrate because you can't see the thoughts of the other person. So on a very subtle level, on a very subtle level, So social interaction is tiring, is very is trying to our own minds. So the relaxation from that is not to find a better person. The relaxation from that is to turn your mind to an object that you believe doesn't have a mind. So you go, if you do some gardening, or you read a book, or you uh do you know, uh uh, sit with your pet. So what happens is your mind now relaxes because you don't believe you're in the presence of another consciousness. So I see the danger in social media and and and the smartphone. Is that for a person who believes that social interaction has no negative consequences, I disagree, of course. I use the cell phone, I use social media. I text my daughter, I text my family. You know, I've talked to Caleb. So I'm not saying we shouldn't have social interaction. I'm saying we should be aware of what it is and the value of non non social interaction, because there's a huge value to it. That's how your mind gets rest. And I feel that if you look and to bring this into politics, if you look at the people who are anti market, and then if you take my definition of market, which is the expansion of the ability to transact with people without dealing with people, the anti market side wants to eliminate your opportunities to do that. They want to bring it back to direct where you have to get permissions, so you have to deal with other people. And I don't think it's a coincidence that those people are less happy because the more interpersonal combat you do, and more interpersonal interaction you do, and you're forced back to it, even though you don't want your natural self would want to rest from that. But the more you're forced to, in a sense socially interact when you don't actually want to, the less happy you're going to be. So nobody can explain why liberals and especially apparently according to studies, liberal women are less happy, but I think I can explain it by my theory. It has to do with the frequency of social social interaction and the intensifying of that as opposed to getting a rest from that and just doing it selectively. I'll just do a quick give you a quick anecdote. In my personal life, my wife and I, of course we consume lots of Internet content, but it's almost always one way. In other words, I spend a lot of time watching YouTube videos of my favorite songs, of my favorite podcasters, and she's in the other room doing that. We spend a lot of time not talking to each other. I mean, out of twenty four hours, we probably talkless than an hour or inner, you know. In other words, have concentrated where I have to concentrate on what she's saying and she has to. It's very minimal, and I think that's the key to happiness. But you know, that could be a controversial statement, but I don't mean it in a bad way. I just mean it your your mind needs a rest from concentrating on the unobservable mind of another person, and if it doesn't get the rest from that. So the beauty of the market system is that as it expands, it starts to provide you more and more ways to to trade with people without that without you have a choice. Now, so I can go to Walmart if I want and talk to a clerk, or I can go to a coffee shop and talk to somebody. But as the market expands, I have a choice now to obtain that which I want from other people without the concentration necessary necessary, which is a form of unhappiness, because when I concentrate, it's a it's a drain on me. It's a it's a it's the same thing as like running a mile. It doesn't mean it's a bad thing, but it starts to drain you. No, I agree with that. This is I mean, this is fascinating, honestly, Adam, I got to tell you. I love this fact because when I'm looking at social media, for example, and the amount of people that literally scroll through social media twenty four to seven almost I mean, well, that's not fair, but they're interrupted by their sleep. But other than that, the phone is the first thing they touch when they get up, and it's the last thing they touch when they go to sleep. And I've seen a lot of unhappiness with people. And it could be tied directly to what you were saying, because you're constantly in those social interactions, even if it is social media, instead of doing something like reading a book at night. Yeah, there's lots of ways you can phrase it. You could say But the bottom line is the way it works is think of all the things that you observe, and all the things you observe having an unobservable aspect. So I have the example I like choose. Ok, I'm looking at a mountain out my window, there's a part of the mountain I don't see, or if I look at my desk, a part of the desk I don't see. But the way I see it, that desk doesn't have anything within it. On the other side that's of concern to me. There's nothing to me. It's inert. Now I'm not saying I know that it's an ert. I'm just saying to me, I feel that it is. So therefore I relax when I'm around my desk. When I'm looking at a mountain, I relax because I don't think there's anything in that mountain that has any designs on me, or it has any sorts of machinations going on. So I just I relax. There's nothing to be concerned. When I'm in the presence of another person, that changes. Think of the example of a You walk into a park and there's a bronze statue that looks like a person posing as a bronze statue, and then as you get closer, it's like, I think that's a bronze statue. So your psychology changes. Whether that's a bronze statue or another person, your body is going to change. Sure one of them is like, it's just a piece of metal. So now I can do all you know, I can do all sorts of goofy things I might not do in front of a person. If there's a person there, it's like they might jump out at you, or or they're they're judging you, they're laughing at you. There all of a sudden, my I don't want to get physical here because I don't like physics but applied to social things. But your body chemistry is going to change because you're you get you're going to get a shiver. It's like, you know, you're not sure what that person is going to do. So now I have to start concentrating. Now I have a problem in a sense, I have a problem. But if it's a bronze statue, but there's nothing, it's just zero, So yeah, there's something there. And that's my more technical philosophy, which is praxeology that's pretty advanced. But if somebody ever wanted to. If somebody about there feels that they're they're an advanced libertarian or an advanced freedom fighter, praxeologies where you're where you're probably going to end up, because you're going to find some amazing things about human nature by studying praxeology. Sure. Absolutely, And so let's move over into you know the title of the show, Liberty Secret Agents. You sent me a document. This is going to be what you're speaking at or speaking about with at Freedom Fest, and you're talking them as starting a freedom movement. And before you get into that, though, you and I were talking off camera and you had a great analogy centered around a basketball game, and I think that's the perfect starting off point into starting a freedom movement. Can you share that with the audience? Yeah? So, if I were to ask you or your viewers, why don't we have a freedom a free society or or a libertarian society, or why do things keep going? What's the main reason things are going bad for us? What's the number one reason? And I'm sure if I had one hundred people here and they all raise their hands, and I think they'd all get it wrong. The reason why we're losing because we are losing. I mean, it's as I said, the freedoms from the left of the line is to the right and down. So let's just admit where we are. But why is that? Why are we in this bad situation? And there's one reason, because the society that exists is the anti libertarian society. We have scholarship, we have podcasts, we have books, we have conventions. We don't have a free we don't have our society. When you and I talk about free society, it's just an imaginary society. So the analogy of the basketball game is, you know, we are to non libertarian society as a basketball game would be if the other team was on the court playing basketball and we're in the stands and we're criticizing them. We're saying, oh, you know, I don't like how your coaching is, or you know what what a terrible shooter he is, and what you know, look at the strategy, it's just terrible, and oh, you know, we're critics of mainstream society, but we don't have a society of our own. And that's why we're losing because everything we talk about is as an imagine, is just an imaginary institution. So if I say, oh, well things should be voluntary, well that's imaginary. They're not volunteer. We're in a coercive society. I pay my taxes because they say pay your taxes, you're going to jail. So we're not in a voluntary society. Wake up. So that puts libertarians or freedom advocates and a huge disadvantage because we paint the picture of a society that doesn't exist. Meanwhile, mainstream scholars, so who's that New York Times, all the mainstream media, all the universities, all of the institutions, all of the politicians, all of the unions, they talk about something that actually does exist. They are the ones who are talking about quote unquote reality. We're not talking about reality. So the challenge for libertarians and freedom lovers is to get on the board, to get on the court. So my. Goal. Half of my goal is besides praxeology, the other half is how could we get on the on the court. How could we get off of out of the stands and off of the sidelines instead of being critics and become participants. That I love this idea, I really do. We need to stop brooting for the red or the blue team, you know, wherever you're at, and actually develop a black and yellow team, right color pun intended there. For example, if somebody says, well you need to like they want to do a new political party, it's not going to work. We need to start a free society. So in the same I don't know if you remember at caleber how much familiar are with bitcoin, But there was a time where bitcoin was trading for ten cents and it was considered a joke. Well it's not a joke anymore. So what happened. Somebody launched a program and then he got some other people to start mining when nobody even knew it was going on. So it started basically like a grain of sand, and then the grain of sand became two grains of sand, then it became three grains of sand. And there was the famous pizza transaction. You may be familiar with it, maybe not, where somebody bought a pizza for ten thousand bitcoin. You can imagine that. But then bitcoin's on the board. Now bitcoin's on the board. It's in the game because now it has a value. Well, we don't have a value as libertarians or freedom fighters, where we're just we're still in the stands, we don't have our own society. Can you imagine what your podcast would be if a libertarian society started, so that you could be calling You could be like the calling the shots with your established setup that you have and actually observing and commenting on a society that was being built in front of your eyes, not just bitcoin, but the actual society. In other words, there would be an alternative to the socialistic society that we now have. I mean, it would be a build. Imagine, yeah, like a Gult's gould for a section. Or I know that there's an experiment right now in Rotan, a libertarian experiment there. So yeah, there is a possibility, but how do we get there? And one of the things that you write about and are going to be speaking about is peer to peer liberty. Now, and I really like this because you approach this from a free speech perspective. Can you enlighten the audience here? Well? Yes, so peer to peer liberty. I'll explain that in a second. The reason for using free speech as an example, there's some really good reasons. First of all, speech where no regulated speech is coming. You can see where we're going, because in Europe they're already doing it. England's get going crazy and they're regulating speech like crazy. So we see where we're going. And so if England's doing it, then then all the left here we know they want to do it. Our constitution is stopping them, or let's say it's slowing them down. It's not stopping them, but it's slowing them down. The other reason for using free speech as an example is if you want to pick a place to make a stand, speech is a great area because it's inexpensive to do so. I think free speech is a great place for libertarians and freedom fighters to make a stand, a principled stand for freedom, because we could start to prepare for it now because we know what's coming in five or ten or fifteen or twenty years. Yes, so free speech would be where we can draw the line in the sand and start to make a free society through what I'm calling peer to peer liberty, and peer to peer liberty is it's a pretty cool idea, and it has to do with the fact that in our relationship, Caleb, for example, we can decide a lot about our relationship and it's pretty inexpensive for us to do so, and it would be pretty expensive for someone else to stop us. So if we decide we don't want speak speech regulations between us, just the two of us, it's going to be very expensive for someone to shut that down. Because you and I can be awake twenty four to seven, we can communicate twenty four to seven. So you can see where I'm going with this. That just because somebody says, well, you're now you're not allowed to talk about conservative politics anymore because we've decided that conservative politics are Nazism, so you're not allowed to talk about it anymore. And you can't talk about Jesus Christ because we've decided that all the Christians are colonizers or whatever the you know what's coming. They've been saying it. So we could say, well, you know, no, we can let go of letting of society itself and let it go whatever direction it wants, and we can say, well, Caleb and I are just going to build. We're not going to have speech regulations between us. So as soon as we do that, as the second we do that, we have now formed what's called a polycentric legal order. In other words, everybody else who doesn't join our agreement is now subject to speech regulations. But you and I are not. So now a third person can join and say, well, my relationship with Adam, I'm not gonna have speech So Jerry joins us and says, well, in my relationship with Adam, I'm not going to have speech regulations. So now we have three people. So it's just like bitcoin was once worth a penny, and then it was worth ten cents, and then it was worth one hundred dollars. So you can start a free society with just two people. Of course, people are going to be have concerns about that. They're going to say, well, how does that work? What do you do? But you can see and principle you can if we talk about it long enough, you'll start to see. Yeah, I don't have to change my next door neighbors politics. I could just start something on my own with my buddies. I mean, how many libertarians are there in the United States? Let's say just have a free speech. Yeah. I apologize for avenue interrupt to you, but we've hit a heartbreak here. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Caleb call. You're with Church and State. Are you tired of your device spying on you? Ladies and gentlemen, we live in nineteen eighty four. Your phones, your tablets, your smart televisions, they all are spying on you. And this is why I heavily endorse Mark thirty seven dot com. This is everything you need for your digital privacy. Phones, tablets, laptops, all of them are ghost protocol, so that means that you are in charge of your own data. Just go to Church and State dot Media, scroll over to shop and hit Mark thirty seven for all of your privacy needs. Make sure to use that promo code Church and State. And we are back and thank you for staying with us. You're over at Church and State dot Media and I'm going to go right back to my guests. But real quick, let me plug one of our awesome affiliates. I'm think of Methylene Blue Chris. I love this stuff. I know you don't, but I do. I love it. It's the best. I use Best three sixty five labs. There's a lot of garbage out there, and you've got to be careful when you're taking this stuff. Trust the market, but do your research. I've done it, Best three sixty five Labs. I use this daily and it has been such a game changer for me. Mental clarity better sleep at night, plus all the things that are happening that I don't actually see at the mitochondria level. But go check them out. Use that promo code Church and State you're going to get a discount, and of course, help support us as well. And just one more time, hit the non ame button for us. Keep us alive, keep conversations like this happening. They matter, They're important, and I am excited to go back to our guests. So with that, we're going to go back to ad I'm not and we're talking about libertarian society. We're talking about peer to peer liberty, where if I get together with a group of five friends who are libertarian oriented and we all agree, Hey, everything is on the table. Whatever you guys want to talk about we can talk about. Nobody's going to get offended, bring it up to the law and try to get somebody busted for hate speech or something like that. If we just do that and start operating that way, operating as free men, it's a solution. Adam, please continue. Yeah, well, correct, And just to be clear, I'm not talking about anything that would have to be underground. I'm not talking about agorism or anything that's a gray market or black market. I'm talking about me asserting my right to use a libertarian term for voluntary agreements with another consenting adult. So no, I'm not going Caleb and I are not going to have speech regulations between us. We will assert that to the world and we'll explain our reasoning and we're not here to harm anybody. So this speech is a great way to start a free society or a libertarian society, as I was saying, because we know that speech regulations are coming, and we know that once that happens, you may as well give up. Because if you can't speak the opposite of communism or socialism, how are you going to if you if you're not able to say anything against it, how could how could you possibly overcome it? So it's a great it's it's it's probably the best place to make us stand. Do you mind if I play a Devil's advocate with you real real quick here? Okay, So you know, obviously there's going to be people that are going to be approaching this and saying, well, what about hate speech? There are certain things that people it doesn't benefit them to to talk about, or the other example that of course is going to come up is well, you can't, you know, yell fire in a crowded theater, So please from there. Those are Those are just two of the ones that I thought of that people are going to use to to ambush your theory or philosophy. Here, please take it away. Well, if you'll notice, if i'll call the attention to your viewers, I never mentioned anything about abolishing or altering the government that exists. So if the government that exists has speech laws, hates speech laws, and whatever, then and they want to come after somebody who does that, then they're free to do that. So I I I'm not claiming that we need to be that somebody has to allow me to do it. I'm saying I'm going to assert it. So now, whoever wants to stop me from doing non violent activity is going to have to make a certain expenditure to do so. And if my nonvaluant violent activity is very inexpensive for me to do and very expensive for someone to prevent me from doing, then I think long term they're going to have to allow me to do it. So my theory does not My social theory, libertarian social theory does not involve altering the current government structure or for a number of reasons. But so if somebody sees, for example, if somebody saw me yelling fire in a in a in a in a crowded theater, then do what you would normally do, call the authorities or whatever. I didn't tell you not to do that. If you see somebody dumping pollution into a river, then call the appropriate authorities. But on the other hand, I believe that I should be allowed or I'm going to assert my my voluntary voluntary relationships with other consenting adults who agree with me, and we'll just see how how that goes. And I'm not I'm not going to choose the ones that are easy to shut down, and I'm not going to choose the ones that are inexpensive to shut down. And I'm not going to choose ones that are super violent or that are that are that are existential for society. I'm not going to try to eliminate the grandma's pensions, or the United States military, or the I R S or the FED. I'm not going to try to eliminate those. I'm going to start on the other end. When there's a law that says that you can that you're only allowed to have one hundred blades of grass in your yard, I'm going to say, well, I'm going to have one hundred one blades. So I'm going to to start a libertarian or free society. I'm going to start on the other end. I'm going to let society be. I'm going to give up on trying to change it and let let them let the cruise ship head for the iceberg, so to speak. And I'm going to start generating freedoms. I'm going to start generating freedoms while they generate restrictions. So now we're going to have two political processes going. We're going to have the current system, which generates restrictions because what next Monday is there going to be a new liberty or a new restriction next Monday restriction obviously, So that's that's that's getting back to it. We're not in the game because you and I know there's no liberties that are coming next Monday. So who's going to create them? Whose job is that? It's our job by people that don't ask permission. And we're not going and it's permissionless basically, And that's not meant as a taunt. That's just meant as why should I ask permission if I'm not hurting anybody? I mean, can you imagine if you had to ask permission for everything you do? I mean, that's where we're going, actually. I mean that's every public school in America. Sadly to say you also have a peer to peer liberty and government. This is another really fascinating idea. Now in your speech, you're using immigration as the example, and this one might be a little bit harder for people to wrap their minds around, but I got to go into it with you. Well, what's interesting is and you and your viewers will have to take me at my word on this, but the idea of peer to peer liberty and that name is just a name I came up with, you know, within the last year, so that we can call it whatever you want, but it's basically a way to initiate on a very small scale of free society, just by going person to person saying, well, you agree between us, there's no minimum wage. Okay, so once you do that, we're polycentrism. The rest of the country has minimum wage. You and I don't have it, So now we have two systems. So that was the idea, and whatever you want to call it. And it was only recently that just you can when you have an idea, Now you have something to hang the information you see on. And I realized that something that you and I are upset about that happens is actually a very good thing. And I'll explain. In the history of let's say, the laste hundred years, libertarians have argued against the growth of government, and they've argued against the growth of government basically saying two things. Listen, if you do that, you're going to harm my individual liberty and everybody else is individual liberty, and also our commercial freedom and ability to transact. So what's going to happen is you're going to harm people's liberty and you're also going to ruin the economy. So that's why the government shouldn't, we argue for the last hundred years, shouldn't continue to expand indefinitely. So those pleas were basically ignored by mainstream society. I mean, because where we are going now is to basically full socialism communism. Nobody ever thought, at least as far as I'm aware, I've never heard the argument. I don't know if you ever have that if government continues to rise, it will start to impede government itself. So if you think about it as laws and regulations just continue to rise and rise and rise and rise, the laws that were enacted ten or fifty or one hundred years ago start to be they get entrenched. You can't get rid of them. So like when we pass laws on race equality, so once you do that, you're not going to the legislative path to erasing those is going to be very hard. So let's say I want to start discriminating in college admissions. Let's just say somebody wanted to do that. Well, there's laws, and they're really hard to change. Now we have laws about equality of racial treatment. So let's say you have a burning passion to do something that's at odds with that. But you look at the legislation that's piled up and you know that to change those you can't change. You won't be able to change it. So what are you going to do? So what you do is you essentially make an agreement with another person who's in government that if you do something like that that they won't prosecute you. It's actually a beautiful thing if you think about it, because so the example I use in my talk that I'm going to give tomorrow night is let's just say I want to import two million people. Let's just say conservative. You know, in the next few years, I want two million people. I have my own reasons for it. Don't worry about my motives. I want two million people in. But you look at the legislation, and the legislation only provides for a few hundred thousand. The legislation also requires that I enforce the immigration laws of the United States. In other words, that's part of my legal obligation. So by if you go by the legislation, I can't do what I wanted to do. But what I could do is I could enter into kind of an agreement like we were talking about before, where I say to some the people in government, I say, well, listen, if I'm going to let those people in, I'm going to give them an exemption, you know, so I call it a liberty. We're going to give them liberty from that law, the immigration laws, because they when the people are on the other side of the border, they say, well, we're afraid it would come across. We're going to get put in jail. And I say them, no, I've already taken care of that, I've already got you an exemption. It's a wink, but it's an implicit understanding. And then I go to the people in government who would be prosecuting me for breaking that law or for not enforcing the laws, and I say to them, if I do that, will will you agree not to prosecute me? And they say, yes, we won't. We won't, we'll We'll just let it go. So what they're doing is what I'm saying we should do, because what it is is when legislation gets starts to make everything you want to do illegal, and the legislative pas will not be able to reverse that, what are your alternatives? And my point is the government's already onto that. So what's what's actually happening is everybody who's law abiding is less free than everybody who's doing peer to peer liberty because what they're doing is they're actually giving each other's unilateral exemptions from the law. If you think of everything Anthony Fauci did, all the laws he broke, so I mean there's like ten, But so he did gain a function research right, and then he and his friends farmed it out to a lower biosecurity lab right. Then when the pandemic came, they engaged in a cover up. They use burner phones, they conducted government business on private emails. They foiled the FOIA process by purposely writing typing and wrong. I mean they broke like ten or But so what happened the people who community who were bidened it. But also even at the time, even if I didn't do that, there are other people there who weren't going to prosecute them. So what is that. Basically the legislation was clear on all those things. So somebody whoever is in charge of prosecuting said, well, we're just going to give you an exemption on that. Another great example that I like to cite is, you know, we I think as Americans rightly are proud of the Foyer process. We fought for. I wasn't a part of it, but someone fought for for to have transparency in government. What we'll do is, we'll have a law that you can tell the government send me what you have on this. Okay. So just to be clear, a law is not the same thing as a suggestion. If it was a suggestion, it's not a law. A suggestion would be we suggest you when you receive the FOYA that you give it to Adam. You give the information to Adam. But a law obviously has a penalty attached for non compliance. It's just to be clear. We're talking about a law here, So a law has a penalty attached. So as you and I know, almost all the foils on anything important now come out one hundred percent redacted. Well they couldn't come out one hundred percent redacted if somebody was agreeing not to if unless somebody was agreeing not to prosecute them. So here's another example of where the law is very clear, says Adam. Will you know, will apply for a foyer of a submit a FOIA request to get the information and you will respond within thirty days or whatever it is. But they're not doing that. So you and I will say, oh, well, I'm really angry. I'm going to let's burn the government down. I'm saying, no, guys, we're looking at this the wrong way. They're showing you that when society is close to being fully regulated and they have recognized that the legislative path no there was, they don't want to produce the FOYA information right, So there's an obvious pitch fix for that change the legislation, and they look at that and they go, that's not going to work. We're not going to be able to change that. Well what do we as libertarians? We're saying, well, we want to be free. Oh well, Adam changed the legislation. Well I look at I go, that's not going to happen. You're how am I going to reverse one hundred years of legislation. So they say, they're saying, we can grant, we can between each other, we can have an agreement to do what we want to do, and then we won't prosecute each other. So I'm saying we should just And I didn't get the idea from them. I came up with the idea independently and realized that they were already ahead of us. So if you think about it, I'm a law abiding citizen. So my ceiling is, let's say I'm forty percent free and sixty percent regulated. They're up here at seventy or eighty percent because they're doing peer to peer liberty. On top of that, what's allowed they get to Okay, I can go to wal Mart or Target, I can buy a blue shirt or a red shirt. I can travel around to different states without documentation. You know that I have all these freedoms, but then I reached my ceiling of what's allowed legislatively or from the regulation and laws. There's all these laws that I can't do. Now they are stacking on top of that all of their exemptions that they're giving each other and becoming libertarians. They're freer than we are. It's because we're not in the game and they're already ahead of us. So if I'm fifty to forty percent free or whatever, they're fifty sixty percent free because they have all the freedoms that I do, plus the ones they're giving each other to exemptions, basically unilateral exemptions from the laws, from the legislation. So what I would ask your viewers and yourself cale to look at as we in the next few years, not right like tomorrow, but when you start to see and realize that the legislation that all the governments of the world have legislated without any thought to how it might constrain them, and they've become starting to get too constrained or they can't reverse the legislation to do what they want to do. So what are their alternatives? They have to do? What they're doing they have to say, well, listen, like in Washington, the income tax is illegal. So what happened. The legislation said, we're just going to pass it, and they looked over to the judiciary said will you will you will you validate it? And so the legislation the judiciary said yes, because we're on your side. M hm. So they just bypassed the legislation. So basically, in a nutshell, the elites are practicing a type of totalitarian libertarianism. It's only for them and not for the rest of us, whereas the people that are true libertarians, we want that freedom for all. They only want freedom for themselves and their buddies. And you're right, you're pointing it out and we can use that where Unfortunately we're at the end of the program. I'm sure we could keep going and uh, well, we'll have to have another interview here. But I do want to point the audience to your website. If anybody's interested in reading a little bit more about this, you can do essays by Adam not and the website is adamnot dot com and not is k n Ott. But Adam tell us a little bit about the website. Thank you, Caleb very much. I really appreciate it. Well, I'll shoot my horn a little bit. I've been working. I've been a libertarian scholar for over thirty years, and nobody knows who I am, and that's that's a good thing because that allowed me to make a few mistakes when I was in my twenties and thirties and forties, and most people never got to see those. So the two essays on my website are basically, The Logic of Liberty is one essay, and that describes what I've just been talking about today, which is, how can we think of libertarianism and a free society differently so we can get on the board, how can we start something? And this essay explains that. The other essay is an essay in praxeology, and if I may say so, it's an advance it's advanced. So if somebody out there is interested in praxeology, you could learn a lot by reading my essay because I've been studying it for over thirty years. So it's I've been able to deal with, you know, the one hundred or two hundred issues that you have to deal with intellectually with praxeology, and so reading my essay would would basically a boost you to the front of the line as coology, as far as knowledge and praxeology is concerned. So I really appreciated, Uh, you're having me on and letting me speak to your your audience. It was a real pleasure. You know, I want to use my platform as as a Christian libertarian and on a lot of different Christian platforms. You know, there's there's not a lot of us out there, and so I want to open people's minds to a different you know, political philosophy, a different ideology, and and so I love having a guest like yourself, who's a true intellectual that can maybe you know, push people in the right direction, push people towards living a little bit more of a life of freedom without asking for permission. So it's been a pleasure having you answer. I'm gonna go ahead and close out if you hold on one more minute post production and sayah, goodbyes. I appreciate it. But again, thank you for your work in libertarianism and for coming on the show. Thank you Calem very much. Absolutely all right, ladies and gentlemen, there you go, Adam not really making us kind of question. Are our preconceived notions. And for those of you who are on the liberty your freedom side of things, maybe it is time to stop cheering for the red team or the blue team. Maybe it is time for us to get up and get in the game. Church Estate is brought to you in part by Colonial Life, Spook and Independent Agents, Finders Insurance and Mark three to seven dot Com. I'm Caleb Callier. I was born for a storm. Welcome to the fire. Hey, this is Caleb Callier with the Church and State podcast. Ladies and gentlemen, I want all of you to go to Galileo dot com. You need to stay connected no matter what comes our way, whether it's government intrusion or a meteor falling from the sky. Galileo has you connected. Ring veteran, I can tell you that communications is essential. Galileo hows you connected. Whether it's worldwide coverage, uncensored content, or real time alerts. Galileo is going to make sure that you're connected with your friends, family and neighbors. Just head on over to Church and State dot Media, scroll over to shop and hit Galileo dot com. Make sure to ask them for a free bitbystick and make sure to use that promo code Church and State. This is Caleb Collier with Church and State Dot Media. Ladies and gentlemen, if you're not sleeping on my pillow, do you even patriots? I gotta tell you this is the most wonderful stuff from a man who's given it all for your freedoms. Whether it be the pillow, the sheets, or the slippers. I absolutely adore my pillow. My pillow has the greatest products around. I know when I want to shuffle around in my bathrobe and slippers and yell at the neighbors. Of course I'm buying from my pillow. I need you to head on over to Church and State dot Media scroll over to shop because every single time that you purchase any of these products using the promo code Church and State, you ensure that we keep our message out on the air. I thank everybody for your support and using a promo code Church and State. You guys, you go to my pillow at dot com forward slash Church and State two and then you get your own known platform right there. Everybody, are you aware that the Holy Word of God tells us to eat beef? Roman's fourteen to two says one person's faith allows them to eat anything, but another whose faith is weak eats only vegetables. Look, it may sound kind of foreign, the idea of meat being an investment, but as you go to the grocery store you can see that everything is increased. This is including beef. So buy something that's got a ten to fifteen year shelf life and make sure that your family is okay, and that when there's a crisis, that you're not in a breadline waiting on the government asking police, sir, may I have some more? Have you read the ingredients in the meats that are now in the grocery stores these days. There's all sorts of synthetic products in it. We've got mRNA, they've got vaccine technology in it. Not for me. I don't want to eat that garbage. I know that I can trust the people at griddown showdown dot com because it is one ingredient, and that one ingredient is beef. But the process is so simple. All you do is go down to your basement or your bunker if you're so lucky, grab the vacuum sealed package, go upstairs to your kitchen, open it up, add a little bit of water, wait a little bit, and boom, it's rehydrated and you can make anything you want, tacos, lasagna, hamburgers, whatever you'd like with the beef. Your family is going to be happy and you're going to be well fed. I need you all to go to griddownshowdown dot com and put in an order for this storeable beef. You got lots of different options for you. Buy the seven hundred and fifty dollars one. You're gonna be set for a year's time. Remember griddownshowdown dot com. From a co church and state