NAP Edge Cases, HOAs, and God as Ruler | Patrick & Larken

[00:00:00]Boom.

[00:00:02]I am here with the one and only Patrick Smith and we are in the same room. We've had interviews from a couple thousand miles, many many a time or at least 1,000 like Arizona, whatever.

[00:00:14]But having just done our approaching humanity event, which was a ridiculous circus that was very fun, and I'm very pleased with the outcome. I don't know if anybody else is, but I am.

[00:00:26]>> Uh decided to >> the ros channel.com.

[00:00:28]>> Yeah, the rosechannel.com.

[00:00:30][laughter] Why do I never remember to do that? Uh, so I decided to kidnap him and bring him back to Phoenix because Phoenix in July that's, you know, where else would you want to be but the hottest place on the planet?

[00:00:42]>> I think it's better than Dallas in July.

[00:00:44]>> Yeah. So do >> it's it's hotter but not not humid.

[00:00:46]>> Yeah. Drink water or you'll die. But otherwise it's still more comfortable.

[00:00:51]115 is literally more comfortable than 90° in Pennsylvania, >> which is weird. Um, however, having dragged him down >> weather forecast over, moving on.

[00:01:01]>> Yeah, [laughter] >> the weather tomorrow, we figured, hey, since we're in the same location, which is a rare occurrence, um, we might as well do a video responding to some random comments by people, um, to like have a few little chunks of responding to things people think about and say about. And I don't know how many of them are worth an entire video on their own, but we can do a responding to people's inputs and complaints and questions and whatever the heck.

[00:01:31]>> Yeah, if we get one that's like, "Oh, that's a huge topic." We can do something bigger. But I I don't think most these are or we've already done full videos on some of these. So, >> all right. Um, >> so Alfredo says, "Some talk on objective morality would be good. I know y'all had the back and forth about it in the letters from anarchist series, but an in-person discussion would be good, too.

[00:01:54]Uh, yeah, let's save that one for a later comment. Uh, let's move on and we'll come back to that one. Audaciously disobedient. Uh, says, "A discussion about things that could be argued to not violate the NAP, but you would still fund the enforcement of and be willing to be held accountable for funding it."

[00:02:14]And so like I was thinking, okay, I could think of some things in a free market where I would, you know, fund.

[00:02:20]But then he puts in parenthesis like speed limits, drunk driving, pooping on beaches, openly masturbating to women or children in public.

[00:02:31]So why don't [laughter] you WHY DON'T YOU TAKE THAT ONE?

[00:02:38]>> [laughter] >> And my immediately my immediate response when you first read that was well who owns the places like other than that last one you can like involving children you can say that I don't care if the owner is okay with that. Like that's can still be traumatic to kids in such a way that I don't give a crap if the owner is okay with it. But for most of that it's like well if the if the guy who owns the road says yeah you can drive 190 here.

[00:03:03]Okay then you can drive 190 there. So most of of his examples I would say actually count as acts of aggression anyway. Um at least in the broader sense. So they wouldn't be and and that would sort of be my answer anyway is if it's in my freaking house or on my property then I can make up any damn rules I want. Um and and have them enforced. Of course, they're mostly enforced by don't be here if you're going to do that.

[00:03:32]>> Rather than I'm not going to tell you ahead of time and if you come in here and say the wrong word, I'm going to blow your head off. Like it's not really the way to do it.

[00:03:40]>> But the the freedom of disassociation and the being able to say you don't get to be here. Bye. And I mean that's a thing I practice on like my Facebook page and YouTube channel. People like it's censorship. Like this is my singing channel. I'm not stopping you from saying whatever the hell you want somewhere else. But if you come here and make stupid troll noise that doesn't add anything to the discussion, yeah, >> I'm going to delete it and block you.

[00:04:03]They're like, I'm the victim here. I thought YOU BELIEVED IN FREEDOM. Go be free over there. Freedom. And and I use the analogy like if you came to my living room to give a stupid troll rant about something irrelevant. I would say, "Get out of my living room." You're allowed to say that. You're just not allowed to say that in my living room because I get to decide who's in my living room. Um and that solves so many things including the um thing we just mentioned the the other interview. If there's some people like in this household we don't use that word. Okay then you [clears throat] can say >> people who use that kind of language you don't come in here and some people will do that. There'll be religious communities that are like, "You're going to be dressed head to toe in a burlap sack or you don't come onto our property and other people can prance around in bikinis and go, "Yeah, if you want to do that, you can do that over here." And there isn't a need for conflict. But I would say that's all still within the the non-aggression thing because it's it's the trespass thing is if you're here without my permission and the without my permission just means hey I told you if you're going to be here don't do that and you did that so don't be here.

[00:05:12]>> It's literally just property rights and all the the rules made up by the property owner like doesn't matter what they are. That's kind of irrelevant to the thing of I get to decide who's here.

[00:05:22]I can say if you like K-pop, you can't set foot on [laughter] my property. It's like, okay, it's a little arbitrary, but it's just property rights [snorts] is the basis of all of that. Yeah, I agree 100%. But just to make sure that we give a satisfied answer, let me try the opposite direction where it's like, okay, future Patrick in future free society. I'm living in a neighborhood or I'm thinking of purchasing a house in a neighborhood and I find a neighborhood that has an HOA and part of the HOA's agreements are that okay, if you buy a house and you live here, you have to agree not to let like homeless people sleep on your sidewalk or your lawn. Um, and we and we pay a a defense company to patrol our neighborhoods to make sure that that doesn't happen. Um, so that would be something that I would pay for. I would be fine joining the HOA and, you know, paying my whatever they call the annual fee to be in your your HOA dues or whatever to help fund the defense agency to keep the neighborhood free of, you know, people sleeping on the street or whatever. I would do that. And and you say, "Would I still fund the would I be willing to be held accountable for funding it?" Yeah. Because, you know, we're we're enforcing the will of the property owners in that area. So, >> and it can be Yeah. So, it it still falls back to to property rights and it can be anything anybody wants. You know, we we don't make any sound above a whisper out after 8:00. Okay.

[00:06:50]>> Yeah.

[00:06:50]>> Make sure you let everybody know that.

[00:06:52]And then >> Yeah. Yeah, I was just trying to come up with something that I actually would want want to have a rule for like >> like I live in an HOA now and you know it's pretty typical. Um, it's not run by like busy bodies like a lot, so that's nice. But there are rules and the rules do get enforced on me sometimes. And it's a little bit annoying, but like I I I agreed. So, I can't complain like, "Yeah, >> yep, you're right. My grass sure is longer than I agreed to allow my grass to get. So, I will take your $25 fine because I forgot and and uh move on with my life." That's look, that's that's agreements. That's consent. That's property rights. you know, it it would be like violating the consent and property rights of my neighbors if I, you know, didn't go along with that system that I agreed to.

[00:07:40]>> Yeah. I think the biggest potential for catastrophes that HOAs often turn into is I agree to this set of rules and whatever random rules they make up in the future. And I think in a world of people who are self-owning and understand that, people would go, "We're not doing that part. You don't get to in the future change the rules and I'm bound to whatever you decide to make up, which is how most of them work now.

[00:08:03]>> Yes.

[00:08:03]>> But right now, you you kind of don't have that choice because it's people are so used to being in the the subject mentality that they assume HOAs, well, you can make up new rules and have board meetings and do your little pseudo government routine and then change the rule. Now, your grass has to be a quarter of an inch shorter than that.

[00:08:22]you have to buy a new lawn mower just because we changed the rules. And I think that's something that in a naturally free society, people wouldn't agree to. But in this society, because it's so much the norm, like good luck finding a place that I mean, in Arizona, there are places where there aren't a HOA, there are EOAs. I forget what it's basically like we maintain the roads and uh there's a public well over there. The end like and you chip in a very much smaller amount. so that you can have access to the well and the road to your place.

[00:08:56]>> The HOA thing was a perfect uh subject matter lesson. I forgot what the word for that is for my children. Yeah.

[00:09:03]>> Because my kids are very aware of our opinions on the government and how it's not okay to make rules for people without their agreement.

[00:09:10]>> And then they also see us like bitching about >> getting fined for our grass getting too long. Like whoa. So it's like a government. No. And so then we sit down and we explain in clear terms, look, the difference is we didn't have to move here. We chose to. And they handed us a contract that spelled out exactly what we'd be subject to if we lived here. And we agreed. And it's like that's what the government never does and never has done. [laughter] And that's why it's not valid. And they're like, it's like, this [ __ ] is so easy. Kids can get it.

[00:09:40]>> Yeah.

[00:09:40]>> But grown adults need YouTube channels like ours. [laughter] >> Yeah.

[00:09:46]All right. Uh, let's see. So, this one, I don't know how deep we want to go into it. Uh, it's from Moose. He says, "The anarco-Christian topic that we touched on during that last stream that we did, um, they they want to hear my argument about why I think anarchco-Christians um, can't be anarchists."

[00:10:09]>> Well, let's do it. I think I can argue their side. Okay. despite not being >> and I kind of didn't want to do that without one of them here to talk to because it's like, oh, I'm just going to own the people that don't that aren't here to defend themselves, right? That's not how I like doing it.

[00:10:21]>> I think I can take I think I can take their position, I think I know it well enough.

[00:10:25]>> Okay. So, um >> and if they think I didn't, they can yell at me.

[00:10:28]>> And and if and if you know a one that wants to talk through it, I'm happy to do it. I' I'd be I'd be more comfortable talking about this with opposition.

[00:10:36]>> Mhm.

[00:10:37]>> Uh okay. So uh it usually comes down to the objective source of morality uh being present in their god and um and it also comes down to where the it's like [clears throat] Larkin's argument when he talks about the government. He's like okay the government has a law that you fundamentally disagree with. Um can you choose not to follow the law if it's evil enough? And most humans, thankfully Larkin's right, most humans will say, "Uh, no, I wouldn't follow that evil law." Like if there was a law that told me to kill my neighbor, I wouldn't do that. And I would put my judgment above the law, right?

[00:11:19]>> How dare you?

[00:11:19]>> And um and so you can kind of take that exact same argument and apply it to faith in God. God is the lawgiver, the law lawgiver, the objective law, eternal universal lawgiver. There can't be a more valid lawgiver than if there was a god up there make having law opinions on us, right? And um and so you can kind of frame all of the same arguments that Larkin makes about the state about God.

[00:11:48]Like if God tells you to do or to not do something that violates your conscience in some way, are you going to decide to violate God's will? Are you going to put your judgment above the law? Um and and also I guess I could make another angle of attack in just saying like the definition of anarchism is an arcos, no rulers. And so to say that you believe God is your lord, lord and savior and he is your king, they will say no king but Christ is is a slogan of a lot of anarchoch Christians.

[00:12:29]Uh you can't square a king with being an anarchist. Like those terms are directly in contradiction unless you make like a special pleading exception like okay I just mean no kings that are humans but kings that are gods are okay.

[00:12:46]It's like okay but it's still a king.

[00:12:51][laughter] So but look like and let me let me and I'll shut up after this so that you can say say whatever. Um, I get along great with a great many uh anarchoch Christians and I really don't care uh if someone is an anarchoch Christian because they affirm the non-aggression principle. Now, they may affirm the non-aggression principle because they think their god told them to. I don't care. That's fine. I really don't care how you get to the non-aggression principle as long as you do it in a way that I can believe you're going to stick to long term, right? because that then I can trust you.

[00:13:30]>> Um, so this is not like a personal thing where I'm like >> shitty about it with people or like I I am perfectly good friends with anarchoch Christians.

[00:13:43]>> But if you want to have the philosophical debate about it, I'm happy to. And I think I can make good arguments against [snorts] why it's incompatible. So, >> and I think for a lot of self-described Christians, like people who wear that label, that argument totally works because it it's still true that if if you think your God commanded something and you're like, I'm not so sure about that. The logic still applies even if you think it's a deity.

[00:14:09]But I don't think it has to apply to Christians. I don't think it has to apply to religious people in general that being a Christian necessarily is in conflict with that. And one of the things I will often ask um somebody who's a Christian is which of these describes I've said this before which of these describes your god more closely all knowing all powerful thing makes up rules and if you disobey you get punished basically the the authoritarian government version or all caring allloving guide who is telling you what will make you happy and fulfilled because it'll be in line with what you're supposed to be. In other words, it isn't obey me or I'll kick you. It's like do if you don't behave in this way, it's going to screw up your soul. Um, and the funny thing is I I grew up in a [snorts] a little religion.

[00:15:02]I won't bother to get into detail about that. There was very much about the latter and it was it was based on the the writings of a guy named Emanuel Swedenborg. And his description of the other world isn't it was basically nobody gets cast into hell. The people who die in the afterlife don't want to be in the place where people get along and think they own themselves. And the funny thing is he describes hell. And it is exactly the US political system. It's literally they take turns trying to violently govern each other and they fight and they hate each other. They can't stand being among people who just peacefully coexist. And that's already true in this world. So doctrine aside, if somebody doesn't view like their god as and the term king does sort of imply the authoritarian thing. He tells me what to do and punish me if I disobey.

[00:15:52]Um so that you know that's a point in favor of your argument. But I've seen more and more religious people side with no it's it's somebody who wants me to do what is in line with what we're supposed to be because that's what makes us happy and fulfilled. And it is and the thing is the the issue of you know well what if you disagree with that that rule.

[00:16:14]Here's where I'll say something um that that may offend a few religious people.

[00:16:19]Um I I know I've said it in front of you.

[00:16:22]>> I think most people are bit better than their religions tell them to be.

[00:16:26]>> No, that's definitely true >> because if you read Deuteronomy 13, if you want an excuse to be a violent intolerant psychopath, it's right there.

[00:16:35]But most Christians read that and they will either say, "Well, that was like the guidance for the old generations or Paul wrote that and we like we don't really think that that's the word of God." Like that that wasn't Jesus saying that or >> or the pope will get a phone call from God that changes some rules, >> right? And some rules change. Whatever their reason I and you know the the doctrinal side, I don't particularly care, but if they basically have a reason to say, "No, I don't like murder anybody who doesn't believe in the God I believe in. That's screwed up." good. I don't particularly care why. And it may be it may be excuse making inside their head where it's like, well, the Bible does talk about like anybody who doesn't believe in our God, go slaughter them all and leave, you know, no stone on top of another and slaughter all their animals and everything else. Deuteronomy 13, if you don't believe me, among other places, but the fact that lots of of Christians will go, "Yeah, but we're not supposed to do that. That's Old Testament stuff." now like we care what Jesus said and how he described you know you should interact with other people which is 100% [snorts] anarchist incidentally and so and I think that's true of lots of like you can look at the the Talmet you could look at the uh the Quran and go well these passages say that and I constantly see Christians going look what the Quran says look what Deuteronomy 13 says how many um followers of Islam are like yeah murder anybody who doesn't agree with you. Like most of them go, "Nah, we don't do that." Some of them do. Just like some Christians go rah rah for wararm mongering, actually a Christian nation, and we'll blow you up if you disagree.

[00:18:12]Um, so to me, as a, you know, I know I've said this to you, too. I don't care whether somebody calls themselves a a Christian because the label somebody affixing that label to themselves means absolutely nothing to me because I see all the way bootlicking nationalist psychopaths calling themselves Christians and I [snorts] see other like totally tolerant volunteerist sweet people um calling themselves Christians and I'm like well if you're all wearing that label then I have to ask some questions to figure out what you actually are because that label isn't anything by itself. It doesn't mean anything if people call themselves that and then might be just bootlicking psychos or might be actual tolerant people who know how to peacefully coexist.

[00:18:58]>> Kind of like the word anarchist.

[00:18:59]>> Uh yeah, >> psychos that are communists. [laughter] >> Imagine that. Yeah, I you were I mean you're spot on with bringing up that there's a vast wide and deep spectrum of people that call themselves Christian Christians and there's all there's all the way from the super anemic sort of watered down ideas of God which don't really conflict very much with the nap or with self ownership. That's really the thing.

[00:19:27]>> Yeah. Like self ownership is kind of at the root of a lot [snorts] of our ideas.

[00:19:33]And if your faith leaves you believing that you are owned property of God instead of yourself, that's a significant root change that brings back in the concept of a ruler.

[00:19:47]>> Yeah. And I I mean this try not to get too drastically doctrinal and philosophical or anything, but when people say, "Well, God owns me." I say, "No, he doesn't."

[00:19:58]Like, "Do you have free will? Do you have a conscience? Do you have the ability to choose?" If your creator gave you free will, he gave up ownership of you because he gave you the ability to decide things. Like if I made a robot, >> but it okay >> and let it ch and gave it the ability to freely choose its own thing and then say you're my robot. It's going to go no I'm not.

[00:20:21]>> And from its perspective, why would it view me as its owner even if I was its creator? And so and I know people can debate about things that like how you phrase it kind of who cares in the end.

[00:20:34]But I think if you have free will and a conscience and you can tell right from wrong using this whether it's influenced by religion or your internal moral compass or whatever you want to call it to say that you're owned even by God doesn't make any sense because like if you think God is the thing that gave you free will and the ability to judge right from wrong, he let you loose. It's like a parent who got you ready to be a self-owning adult and then let you free.

[00:21:02]There you go. and to go, wait, I'm still your parent. I own you. Like, you probably shouldn't have given me free will then because now I don't care. Even if they still respect the God. And so, I've had some of these, you know, sort of [snorts] debates with people and and sometimes it comes down to semantics.

[00:21:18]But I would say, no, God doesn't own you even though he made you. And if he made you, he's the thing that made him not own you by giving you free will and a conscience and the ability to choose and the ability to judge. like he he let you loose. It's like if he if he was your rightful owner at some point theoretically and he freed you, you're free and you are. If you have free will, if that thing gave you free will, wherever it came from, you're free now.

[00:21:46]You're self owning now. And some Christians have gone, "Yeah, that totally makes sense." And some, "Well, he still owns me." Like, >> yeah, it's very difficult to argue against the Christian worldview because it's just so broad. Like, >> yeah, >> every single Christian you and they argue amongst themselves is going to have a totally different idea of this.

[00:22:04]All right, let me say one more thing and then you're going to respond and then we're going to move on cuz this video wasn't supposed to be all about this.

[00:22:11]>> All right, so I would just say that um that that theory would be fine if if he gave you ownership by bestowing upon you, you know, consciousness and free will or whatever. Um, but if that is the case, then he still should have asked your consent to be subject to the suffering of this existence that he created and put you in. He should have asked your consent to be subject to whatever rules he has in place. And and if if he didn't if he did that without your consent, he's doing things to you in an aggressive knack violating way.

[00:22:47]>> Doesn't that apply to every parent?

[00:22:49]>> Yes. Yeah. Yeah, that in fact that's where I got this argument. Right. So I I I treat my kids like they own themselves to the [clears throat] maximal degree absolutely possible. Right.

[00:23:02]>> But you inflicted existence upon [laughter] them.

[00:23:06]>> But I didn't create the existence like I you helped.

[00:23:09]>> That's the difference. [laughter] Like that's the that's the difference. He created this assuming okay assuming >> because he's to blame for the universe.

[00:23:16]>> Assuming he's omnipotent and omnisient and all this stuff. He created it with full fornowledge of how it was going to work with all the suffering that you were going to experience and he's like boom good luck Patrick like >> he didn't ask me for that he could have he's omnipotent he could have popped me into existence before you know making me be born and be like hey >> all right here's your option >> you have an option like he could do this like this this is what blows my mind about like uh these conceptions of God is like if he's omnipotent then he could literally like pop you in existence be like all right you're about to have existence if you want behind door number Number one is Earth. It's got some suffering. It's got some happiness.

[00:23:52]You're going to have some hard times, but you're also going to have some really good times. Uh behind door number two, you're going to have >> Garden of Eden, >> the platonic existence with no pain and suffering. And that's what that's going to be. You know, pick your door, Patrick >> or none. If you just don't want to if this sounds like a shitty game, you can say, you know, like he could have done that. [laughter] And and that to me is the ultimate defeater for any kind of argument for the existence of a good God that is also omnisient and omnipotent. I don't think those three traits can work together because we weren't asked for our consent.

[00:24:26]>> Okay.

[00:24:26]>> All right. [laughter] >> That was my last word. I read your last word and then we'll move on.

[00:24:31]>> My last word will be greatly abre abbreviated from the rant. I could go on um about >> about why my when people say do you believe in God? I usually say no because what most people use that word to describe is so far from what I believe in that no if that's what you mean by God then I don't >> um I do believe in a weird power way beyond my comprehension but not a guy like if it's a guy who chose to have like a lot of Christians go through the thing of why would God allow this if he can just go there now children aren't suffering horribly like if you're a guy and you could have made that happen and you don't you're a jerk and a lot of Christians have trouble if they're picturing the the simplified version of if he could have made that not happen and he didn't.

[00:25:16]>> You're not supposed to be on taking my side on this.

[00:25:18]>> I would have [laughter] been saying all >> I know.

[00:25:22]>> So I'm saying that long enough to say I think that um a lot of people if they accept that okay God isn't just a guy we can't just think of well a smarter version of us because then it doesn't add up. It has to be something way more profound and complex than that and way beyond our comprehension to not just say, "Well, you're a jerk. If you could have made this not happen." And a lot of people are like, "Wait, you know, the devil's tempting him. Why why is there a devil?" Like, if he made everything and a lot of those questions come up, I think, as >> you're back on, sorry [laughter] about that. But I think they come up from our our tendency to oversimplify and just think of it, well, he's a big big nice guy. I'm not trying to be demeaning about it. Um, but >> [laughter] >> I'm insulting him more than you are and I'm supposed to be on their side. Um, but I think a lot of people realize it isn't it isn't that simple and it's beyond our comprehension like how it really works. So that it isn't just you're a jerk and you allowed horrible things to happen. But the simplified version, that's a perfectly valid complaint. But I think a lot of Christians are like it there's more to it than that. We don't necessarily understand what it is or how it works.

[00:26:29]And we have some theories and some of them sound totally bogus and whatever, but if they they if they basically just say like it isn't as simple as it's a guy with switches and levers up in the clouds going, "Yep, you get to suffer, little kid. Haha, sucks to be you." Cuz yeah, if it's that you're crappy God.

[00:26:47]Um, but they understand that, okay, it's something that's [clears throat] you think it is a guy with switches and less. I'm saying like the vast majority of Christian Okay, [laughter] look, >> moving on.

[00:27:01]>> Actually, let's let's end this video here and maybe we'll do another one with some more cuz this has been this has gone on too long.

[00:27:06]>> I'm always I say I'm always happy to ch to talk about this, >> but our channels are not really about >> theism and apologetics and anti-apologetics. It's kind of a distracting, divisive thing. And like I said, and he would agree, like I don't care as long as you're a like a a good anarchist that will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with me against the tyrants of the world that don't, you know, believe that we own ourselves.

[00:27:33]>> Yeah. If do unto others as you would have done unto you, if we're good with that, we're good. The rest doesn't matter. Now, if you're like if you're just a philosophy nerd like I am and really are interested in having apologetics and anti-ap apologetics discussions, join my Discord and we'll have those voice chats. Probably just won't put them on this channel because it's kind of like tangential, >> unnecessary and divisive, but it's fun for people who like to think.

[00:27:57]>> It is fun. It's one of my It's like my hobby philosophy. I do anarchy primarily, but my hobby philosophy is like apologetics. Anyway, all right, cool. We'll end this one there and maybe do another one uh with the rest of these.

[00:28:09]Yee-ha. Yeehaw.