Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitalism

check it out

Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 196,527
Added: 7 years
Runtime: 5:21
Comments: 8133

Tags for this video:  

Find more videos in the: "News"
Uploaded by: mr1001nights
See more videos uploaded by mr1001nights

Related Videos:

Chomsky on market anarchism, Keynesianism & reformism
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 48876
it's about people recognizing the limits of institutions
Vietnam War: What really happened
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 58008
A brief overview of history
Chomsky: "abolishing the state" not a strategy
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 24926
Responding to a question by free-marketeer Roderick Long
Chomsky refutes claims about people wanting wage slavery
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 39141
good stuff
Interviewer gets fucked by Noam Chomsky
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 829078
Part2: Chomsky talks about the secret US foreign policy .
(5/5/09) Ron Paul brings out best in Rachel Maddow
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 260314
Ron Paul discusses the GOP with Rachel Maddow 5 5 09
Noam Chomsky Agrees with Ron Paul ... on Foreign Policy
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 41415
good clip from democracy now
Ron Paul Defines Libertarianism - Charlie Rose Interview (Full)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 80246
Charlie Rose: "Define what libertarianism means to you" - Ron Paul: "The word I best describe it is something not a lot of people use. I call it...
Chomsky: We Shouldn't Ridicule Tea Party Protesters
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 97147
Instead, those on the Left are to blame for letting right-wing ideologues organize and manipulate them. Noam Chomsky interviewed 2 Dec 2009 by...
Noam Chomsky (2014) "Surviving the 21st Century" [FULL SPEECH]
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 150713
Date - May 22, 2014 Chomsky starts at 2:55
Noam Chomsky in defense of Ron Paul
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 128182
Excerpt of discussion with Ken Hildebrandt on September 20, 2011, in relation to Paul's comments about 9-11, for which he was booed by an...
Libertarian Vs. Tea Party
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 125794
An average libertarian learns what an average Tea Partier believes. Obviously, this doesn't reflect everyone's views. But it is based on my own...
Harvard Lecture On Libertarianism Part 1 of 2
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 21164
Watch Part 2 of 2- March 31, 2013 A great lecture on Libertarianism given at Harvard University. One of the key...
Noam Chomsky on Syria, China, Capitalism, and Ferguson | #GRITtv
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 145464
Noam Chomsky discusses the recent climate agreement between the US and China, the rise of ISIL, and the the movement in Ferguson against racism and...
Chomsky: Obama's Imperialist Policies
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 207712
Following a NY Peace Action Benefit viewing of Karen Malpede's new play, Prophesy, Noam Chomsky criticizes Obama's rightwing policies, war making,...
Libertarian vs. Socialist heated debate ensues
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 171842
At a time when the economy is still insecure, why is there an endless debate over capitalism versus socialism and which financial system actually...
Chomsky dispels 9/11 conspiracies with sheer logic
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 807809
Hat tip to And yes, I know I'm about to get an avalanche of angry conspiracy theorists commenting on this video.
Noam Chomsky on "The Federal Reserve" (2013)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 85438
Faculty Forum Online: A Conversation with Noam Chomsky
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 3030
Institute Professor Emeritus Noam Chomsky, a prolific author, political activist, and philosopher, is one of MIT’s greatest scientists. He created...
Noam Chomsky refutes right-libertarianism (part 1)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 4413
Anti-politics/Libertarianism/Capitalism. Part 2: Part 3:
"Freedom" of Speech in France is complete Fakery and Fraud (Angry Chomsky)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 14292
Chomsky on Religion
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 359276
Noam Chomsky discusses religion and terrorism at his MIT office on April 23, 2010.
Why Libertarians Are Idiots.
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 127050
Dusty Smith explains why Libertarianism is an ideology of suffering and death. I was much nicer than I could have been. I did not even attack the...
The Chomsky-Foucault Debate, 1
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 146574
Great debate on power and influences by two great thinkers of our time. More at my blog
Noam Chomsky educates AnCap about Libertarianism
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 2668
Noam Chomsky explains to Stefan Molyneux what libertarianism is really about, and that the ultra right-wing ideology that Stefan subscribes to is...


Author The Critical G (8 months)
So, according, to Comrade Chomsky, libertarianism means "...power ought to
be given into the hands of private, unaccountable tyrannies..."

When was the last time a Starbucks employee held a gun to your head and
ordered that you buy coffee?

"...even worse than state tyrannies, because there the public has some kind
of rule..."

Excellent, I'm sure that the FDA considers itself very accountable to
citizens who write letters, as do the Federal Reserve, the enforcers of
federal anti-drug laws in States that legalised marijuana, etc.

Why do people listen to this guy?

Author eyeseethroughyou (8 months)
Gotta love all the right wing proprietarians trolling Chomsky videos. Why
aren't you pseudo-intellectuals off watching Molyneux and Schiff videos,
wanking off any time one of them mentions "FREE MARKETS" and "LIBERTY" ?

Author c4p0ne (1 month)
As of the year 2008, civilization has been armed with an economic tool
which has the potential to be so potent, so powerful as to, for the first
time in the history of our species, actually *allow* for the creation of
the conditions Smith talked about, and that professor Chomsky agreed "could
be possible but just isn't in the cards". Well, there's a fresh new deck,
it's called *Bitcoin.* The only showstopper: People need to wake up out of
their propagandized, consumer comas and recognize the enormous scope &
scale of Bitcoin's potential, and start learning and using it.

Could *Bitcoin* finally transform the fantasy of Laissez-faire into reality?

*BTC: 1PADNHhze28JLnXkvhKa6PjMVzspAnwgkH*

Author Nebojsa Galic (1 month)
Anarchy=/=Society without government
Anarchy=Society with no HIERARCHY

Or, to elaborate:
You see the Greek word anarchy, would literally translate to English as
``Non-above-ness``Meaning no human beings are to be ``above`` others in any
way. If it was for society with no rulers or no-one being ruled it would be
called something like ``Ancracy`` or ``Anacracy`` Because the Greek word
for the verb ``to rule`` is ``kratein`` The very word which gave us the
word ``Democracy`` which means ``rule of the people``

And does n`t capitalism have quite a bit of hierarchy? How can you have
Anarchy, which means Non-Archy with so much hierARCHY??!?!!How can you have
a Non-Archy with so much Archy in it?

Author Gufberg (11 months)
Its truely comedic to see half-assed idiots, who can barely type out a
grammatically correct sentence, talk about how "stupid" this guy is or how
"he is just and old man who doesn't know what he is a talking about".
He is one of the most renowned and respected Professors in the world. His
ideas have sent reverberations through the fields of History, Economics,
Philosophy and ofcourse linguistics. He is daily invited to University
Symposiums all across the world ... What about you? What are you doing that
gives you the authority to call this guy an idiot? Get out of here.

Author sam little (14 days)
Chomsky's a little contradictory here. On the one hand, he says third world
capitalism is free market capitalism, but that the powerful wouldn't let
that happen here. Well, why not? Wouldn't the wealthy have more power,
according to Chomsky's view, if the system was completely unregulated? Or
is he making some weird argument that the powerful are actually altruistic?
It would probably be more accurate to describe what we in the US call
libertarianism as classical liberalism. But then what does Chomsky think
about that? Is classical liberalism tyranny? Of course, now people call
classical liberalism neoliberalism, to hide the fact that classical liberal
thought is a rich part of the enlightenment tradition that Chomsky claims
to respect.

I say claims because on many occasions Chomsky has said the enlightenment
tradition was about promoting bogus western cultural centrism/imperialism
and not a genuine improvement in the way that socialism/communism and later
movements were (this even puts him at odds with Marx). He has also said the
American war for Independence was basically bullshit, while at the same
time here, claiming to respect Thomas Jefferson. So basically, Chomsky will
claim the enlightenment when it suits him, to make himself look like the
reasonable man and claim that others have perverted and co-opted the
philosophy which he readily tosses aside much of the time. Gotta love the
guy. Having it three ways and asserting everything and nothing all at the
same time.

Oh, and by the way, just remember this guy who hates rich capitalists who
hide their money in tax free offshore accounts does the same thing with his
money to avoid being taxed. But of course, that's the left for you. If you
resist a tax because the coercive government messes with people's lives and
the economy, then you're a crony. But if you resist a tax because the same
corrupt government is involved in a ridiculous and unjust war, well then
that's heroic. What an asshole.

Author calfor1991 (27 days)
Right libertarianism and anarcho capitalism are truly despostic ideals that
only wants "freedom" and "liberty" for the privileged and corporations. 

Author Philippe James (1 month)
'Anarcho-capitalism' is a serious personality disorder characterised by
constant, pathological lying on the part of the sufferer. People who suffer
from this disorder also tend to manifest a greatly reduced capacity for
logical thought and human empathy. This is a very damaging personality
disorder which has ruined many lives and families. We need to take this
problem seriously, and should stop mistaking this disorder for a 'political
ideology'. People suffering from this disorder need our help. They need
professional psychological therapy and support, and above all they need

Please donate now to the charity Curing Anarcho-Capitalism. They are doing
great work to help mend the shattered lives ruined by this terrible medical
problem. Thank you. 

Author Matthew Hayden (1 month)
What Chomsky quotes at roughly 4:00 would come to pass in a free (ancap)
society anyway. Productivity increases would eventually reduce all prices
to the point where there poorest people in the world would be living like
the American upper middle class.

Upper middle class in 2014 = 100k - 300k per year household income.

The reasons would be complex but ultimately boil down to unimpeded division
of labour, everybody actually enjoying the fruits of increasing
productivity over decade-plus timescales due to the absence of inflation,
and the constant process of invention, innovation, and opportunity
discovery as, day by day, people discover more and better ways to provide
each other with goods and services in ways which are mutually beneficial.

Since the questioner asked about Chomsky's self-identification as a
'libertarian' I feel the good professor missed a trick by explaining that
anyone who prizes liberty above authority is a libertarian. I mean it just
means one who is 'into' liberty.

I refer to myself usually as a voluntarist / voluntaryist / ancap /
austro-libertarian / austro-liberal / palaeo-liberal / liberal. The word
liberal, in American usage, is bent out of shape as well. I am an economist
by knowledge and skill base and tend to think of my approach as
palaeo-austrian to mean I use the Austrian method in the Austrian way to
divine everything I dare to divine about human behaviour and interaction.
It's served me far better than the methods I learned in my Econ BSc.

I've always liked Chomsky's reading of history and of characters from the
past, and I think he gets Jefferson in ways my own tribe (the saucy saucy
ancaps) perhaps doesn't. Jefferson did indeed despair of the division of
labour, but since division of labour saves me having to grow my own food,
and is the reason for all progress ever, I feel I can treat Jefferson, like
anyone I have read, with an open mind, but not obsequious adulation.

Author Charles Brown (1 month)
here libertarian means something different... Americans define words to
suit themselves

Author ryan neitzel (1 month)
free market capitalism is the most oxy-moronic term i've ever heard.
there's nothing free about it, and it's designed to circumvent and destroy

Author Jacob Zolt (2 months)
Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitali…:

Author Simon Željko (3 months)
Anarcho-capitalism stands on one false assumption - it assumes that only
states can be the aggressors and only states can abuse their powers and
strong-arm citizens into submission. I don't know what it the basis for
this belief, but I have yet to see an anarcho-capitalist justify it. But
belief in that is greater than any religious belief, greater even than
belief in afterlife of suicide bombers. Chomsky is right, it's
totalitarianism in it's purest. No other ideology is more fundamentally
anti-democratic. Every single libertarian focuses solely on real or
imagined state atrocities, only the power of governments is illegitimate
everything else is perfectly acceptable just because it isn't committed by
the government.

What is incredibly transparent to everybody except anarcho-capitalists (at
least those that actually believe it, not the overwhelming majority of
cynics and sociopaths) is that it's actually based in fundamental rejection
of accountability. Accountability is "violence" for anarcho-capitalists. A
feudalist monarch as a ruler and owner of all land and to some extent even
all the people is perfectly compatible with anarcho-capitalist views. There
were no states back then so it's basically an anarcho-capitalist utopia,
given that they literally don't care about about anything else. Owner has a
right to dispose of his property as he pleases after all. It was only after
the evil revolutionaries stole the land from the owners that the awful
states were founded. These states of course brought accountability, and as
little as that might be or even as feigned, corrupted and imperfect as it
may be, it's universally despised by anarcho-capitalists.

Author Vuk11 (10 months)
2:40 he is saying unsubsidised capitalism has existed as if that is a claim
that a free market has existed. Africa being the continent with the highest
regulation I don't know how we can say that it's an example of a free

Places like "muh Somalia" were failed states instantly taken over by
warlords. To an Ancap, Statism = Violent Coercive monopoly, which is
exactly what a Warlord it. We do not advocate revolt, as that does leave it
open for Warlords and outside states, we advocate gradual
multi-generational change, towards a more morally based society, one based
on principle and free association. 

Author Travis Collier (1 year)
This analysis is spot on. In fact the first person to call himself a
libertarian was the anarcho-communist DeJacque who criticized the free
market religion triumphed by a-cap loons. Libertarian ideals in the most
simple sense are the antithesis of authoritarianism.

Author Jorg Ancrath (10 months)
Coming from someone who tried to downplay the Cambodian genocide to talk up
the potential for collective farming in the region I am little and less

Author esmifrado (1 year)
Why is this guy so respected? I never heard him saying anything sensefull
or based in real facts...

Author Johny Diala (6 months)
Libertarians have this nutty delusion that there is some sort of "free
contract" between a potentate and his poor workers. This is largely due to
the fact that they are white, upper-middle class males who have never
endured real poverty. I'd suggest these people try going without food for a
week and see how "free" they are to say no to it once it is offered to
them, even if the person offering them the food is forcing them to do
egregious labour. Capitalism is simply a form of structural coercion; it
exploits the dire situation people are in. It's the farthest thing from
"voluntary"; it's like saying if somone put a gun to your head to try and
mug you, you would be "free" to not give him the money.

Author Rich Beer (5 months)
Assumptions about libertarians in this thread are among the most laughable
I've read. Statetheism is strong here. Regardless decentralization on a
massive scale is just around the corner. Decentalization of the internet
(ala MaidSafe), decentralization of the marketplace (ala Open Bazzar),
decentralization of currencies (ala cryptocoins), decentralization of
government (ala Sea Steading Institute) ... but who will build the roads?
You are absolutely right, scratch everything I said, we as a species could
never get along without a coercive central planning agency. How foolish of

Author exbronco1980 (4 months)
people who live in a pure capitalist nation (libertarian according to the
american definition) would have some choice. they could choose what
products to buy, some people could also choose where they work. one
example, let's say you hate mcdonalds- don't ever go to mcdonalds. example
2, you think movie tickets cost too much- don't go to the movies. i know
sometimes it's really hard to avoid products from a company one might not
like, but usually one has some kind of choice. you don't always have to do
what some corporation wants you to do.

Author Cipher Veri (10 months)
Let me guess, Stefan Molyneux Fanboys flooded the comment section of an
outstanding clip of chomsky refuting Anarcho-Capitalism and proceeded to
demonstrate how little they actually know about the definitions of words.

Author Svelt Man (1 month)
it really doesn't matter what you call private property rights and the
absence of a state coersion. call it bongoism if it makes you happy.
'conditions of perfect equality' entails private property and voluntarism
at the very least as adam smith knew. chomsky's reading of adam smith is
evasive and spurious. i encourage anyone who really wants to know about
this to read Adam Smith and see if you think Chomsky is representing him
fairly here. 

Author Blake Seener (3 months)
Check out "The state is too dangerous to tolerate" by Robert Higgs.
Organized evil individuals who would otherwise have the same amount of
power and designated authority over anyone else during anarchism, wreacks
the ultimate havoc as they wield state power. Would you rather have
voluntary actions with other individuals and the right to that liberty, or
have a state with a monopoly over violence that steals, kills, and robs
people to maintain its power, get involved and force one group or
individual to preside over another. I would much rather live under a
society where individuals were responsible for their own future, and not
have this factually extremely violent entity get involved claiming to have
some legitimate authority under the guise of keeping everyone safe. 

Author powergirl901 (1 month)
Your Doctor Chomsky, the original economic Tummler...

Author 9thchild (11 months)
So because we can't reach perfect liberty (in his opinion), then we
shouldn't even bother to try for more liberty than we have? And because
capitalism can't work without perfect liberty we shouldn't bother with that
either? Very hard to follow his logic. I know he's famous and all, but
sometimes people are just wrong. 

Author AcePL S. (4 months)
Chomsky is full of it. First example: corporations exist BECAUSE of state.
They feed each other. Same monopoly: unless forced by state, wouldn't exist
for long. Look what robber barons tried without state to back them up:
hired mercenaries, who more often than not were beaten back by ordinary
Also: he can have socialism. But WHY I HAVE TO PAY FOR IT? F**k off!! My
property is mine. What he proposes is robbery. Plain and simple. Another
reason ANYTHING ELSE THAN FREE MARKET is immoral, wrong and simply put
Communism is form of socialism. Don't kid yourself otherwise. Also fascism.
And anything else that demands from one person to give to another, in the
Chomsky feeds his bullshit because it's politically in demand and he lives
off it.

Author G. Gibson (2 months)
Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitali…:

Author To Hell With Our Orders (6 months)
Private, unaccountable tyranny.... sounds more like the NSA than best buy

Author Urbestestbuddy (1 year)
Libertarian Party is an oxymoron. Libertarianism opposes the initiation of
force and political parties aim to control and participate in a monopoly of

Author Alfonso Gutierrez (10 months)
Libertarianism is full of shit...its premises are simply delusional and
idiotic like their gods Ayn Rand, Adam Smith and the worst of these clowns,
the crazed old man Ron Paul.

Author Joey Clavette (1 year)
It cuts off at the good part. Where is the rest?

Author wungabunga (6 months)
Chomsky owning you 'freedom!' drones. haha. Loving the shamefaced anger in
the comments section from undergraduate know it alls. 

Author darrellray1964 (1 year)
He is a socialist, plain and simple. Anarchy means no government. As much
as you left-wing nuts like to think socialism is all about the workers
controlling the means of production, it isn't. Socialism will always need
government to force people into slave labor. If you think it is anything
other than that, then you are an idiot. There is no incentive in socialism
and therefore, for socialism to exist, it will need a police state to force
people into it. Because there is no incentive, there will be no innovation
and no economic growth unless people are force to produce. A system like
that isn't sustainable. Most countries today have mixed economies that are
partly state run and capitalism. They will all collapse without
capitalism. The left blame capitalism for things that government have
caused. Think about the housing bubble, that started because of low
interest rates. The low interest rates created speculative investment
which created malinvestment. In a free market, the interest rates would
have been at equilibrium. In a free market, we wouldn't be experiencing
boom and bust markets. In a free market, competition will keep prices
down. Prices go up when government gets involved in markets. And then you
can add inflation. Government creates inflation through monetary policy.
Inflation is getting out of control because government is printing too
much currency to pay for interest on their debt. Therefore, the purchasing
power of the U.S. Dollar diminishes.

Author Israel R (7 months)
propaganda. can't those socialist stop distorting everything?

Author Why (7 months)
Governments are solely responsible for every evil known to man from the
plastic soup we call oceans to hemorrhoids. In fact, if it wasn't for the
dedicated efforts of the Koch brothers and a plucky band of oil companies
we would all be victims of the U.N. plot to bring the world to it's knees
with a carbon tax and ultimately take our guns away because, let's face it,
American citizens with their guns are the only thing preventing world wide

I just don't understand why Chomsky doesn't realize that the best way to
fix all problems is to allow corporations to do business as they see fit,
unfettered by nefarious concepts like the environment and social justice. I
mean really, what does he know? He's just some guy in youtube videos
whereas I've read Rothbard.

Author To Hell With Our Orders (6 months)
Ok wow so in a video titled "Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"-
capitalism" He endorses a quote from Adam Smith "Under conditions of
perfect liberty, markets will lead to perfect equality." First of all let's
forget the word perfect as we are dealing with reality and there are no
"perfect circles" and abstract concepts. If you abolish the state
completely and interactions between individuals could be completely
voluntary (which is about as close to perfect liberty as you can get), that
would lead to the highest level of equality. Chomsky follows by saying, "If
that were possible maybe so." - GREAT! "But it's not in the cards" - Why
not? "oh nevermind the argument probably doesn't work, its fallacious." -
Ok, go ahead and don't show why... and don't explain why your personal
belief of "a free society will never be possible" is more likely than not.

Meanwhile, the assertion that the highest level of liberty possible would
likely lead to the greatest amount of equality possible goes un-refuted.
Thank you, you've done some good work proving the ancap argument in this
video that you probably just named wrong.

Author Jm Mac (6 months)
Libertarianism /capitalism is non-stop shape shifting /derailing
/misdirection to break "Socratic Questions" [++]. Specifically Soc Quests
to make them see how capi /libert uniquely creates and defends the
liberalism /feminism it bemoans. [++ Pop-corn trails of questions that try
to get the target to have epiphanies about the error(s) of their thinking.]

And if it dies, most things western culture hold dear will too...

Author Tippersnore (4 months)
Chimpsky Rothabrd/Mises smack-down?

Author 03Blackbeard (1 year)
Good speech.

Author Marcus Porcius Cato TheYounger (1 year)
Chomsky is a linguist (SP?) What can he possibly know.
He does not criticise Economics. He criticized some simple minded straw men
and makes up Historical Facts. He does not even understand what Economics
is about. Example:Are you both better off when you trade? If prices go up,
does demand OR quantity demand fall? Ceteris Paribus? Is Aggregate Demand a
real demand curve?
Chomsky is only listened to by college Marxist liberals who want the USA to
be Socialized either in the European sense or the Classical sense. In
short, he is a prophet for Sociology, Anthropology, Pol. Sci…..etc. None of
these are Sciences. If you think the afore mentioned are sciences,tell me
where is their Laboratory were they prove causality. In Economics the
Laboratories are Game theory and Microeconomics Models. Economists laugh at
these Chomsky followers. They are simple not worth the effort to take them
seriously. So why does anyone listen to Him or Zinn or any Humanity or Arts
or Literature Professors? It is baffling ?

Author muledunn (8 months)
What a crock of shit, was hoping for something challenging. Libertarian
ideas such as not locking ppl up for smoking weed is tyrannical ? Noam
Chomsky is the dumbest intellectual's intellectual 


Author Michael Giove (9 months)
Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitalism

Author theElasticJesuz . (1 year)
Feudalism - sorry I mean't capitalism (as it's spelt in St Louis) - in a

1. I conquer your land.
2. I force you to pay rent for the land I stole from you.
3. I force you to produce my food of which, if you work hard enough, I'll
allow you 1 turnip as reward.
4. You start to breed since there's little else to relieve the tedium of
your slavery (*sorry I meant freedom* ) BUT YOUR incessant breeding gives
me a headache.
5. Some of my clever mates invent something called machinery and a
light-bulb starts to flash.
6. Machine makes items that the brats WILL need only they don't know it yet
since I haven't yet built the 17th century version of Saatchi and Saatchi.
7. Brats work in factories. Brats make products that they WILL need - OR


C'mon!!! Keep up. It's not that difficult. I went to Oxford, you know!!! ]

7 cont... Brats get paid just enough to stop them revolting but not enough
to make them fat and lazy.
8. I win. They lose. I make plenty of profit and Saatchi and Saatchi get a
nice reward for convincing the plebs they're free to leave anytime they
want so long as they have the ticket fare to the non-Capitalsed Moon.

Three cheers for William the Bastard, as they sing down in Eton...and
Harvard...and Yale...and........... 

Author version191 (10 months)
he is right libertarian and anarcho capitalists are absolute fucktard

Author Ian G (7 months)
Fooking commie spook. Time to go bye-bye already, no? Gei in dreard

Author Lars Hallberg (2 months)

Author AyaxTelemonio (1 year)
I respect this guy as an anti-establishment intellectual but really, who
listens to him? Only marxist, socialist collectivists. I´ve never heard
about anarco-socialists excepting him, because he never convinced anyone in
the socialist ivy league. he is an anti-statist worshiped by statists.

Author Awesome Believer (8 months)
Chomsky is a boring yet attention seeking idiot who probably would not
survive a day trying to earn a living outside of the failed and highly
corrupted socialist welfare like system of academia today. 

Author Alfonso Gutierrez (10 months)
Anarcho capitalism= The tyranny of the elites.

Embed Video:


Search Video

Top Videos

Top 100 >>>


Analyse website