Skip to content

Debate: Adam Kokesh vs. Larken Rose on the Effectiveness of the Political Process

This is a debate between an “anarchist” candidate for U.S. President, Adam Kokesh, and another anarchist, Larken Rose, moderated by “Anarchast” host Jeff Berwick. Larken Rose says that the whole political process is illegitimate and that an anarchist running for President legitimizes an illegitimate system of coercion and force.

Now, I’m not an “anarchist,” I’m a voluntaryist. In my view, all relationships, contracts, associations, transactions and trades must be voluntary in a civilized society. No coercion. If coercion or compulsion is used by someone against another, that’s criminal. Of course, between parents and their children, coercion might be necessary at times. However, as Murray Rothbard noted in Ethics of Liberty, if the child wants out, that is his right. Most people don’t agree with that. But that is not what this video is all about.

Toward the beginning of the debate, they praise Ron Paul and say that while Dr. Paul is not an “anarchist,” he has nevertheless advanced the cause of liberty while in Congress by being “Dr. No.” And they seemed to agree that Dr. Paul didn’t vote for anything that violated the non-aggression principle. However, Dr. Paul did vote to take the U.S. military into Afghanistan. Terrible. Maybe these two debaters forgot that. But whatever.

I disagree with Jeff Berwick who said that Adam Kokesh will definitely get the Libertarian Party nomination for President, when the closest candidate to Kokesh’s point of view in 2016 Darryl Perry couldn’t get the nomination, and lost it to … Gary the Pothead! Kokesh praised other candidates, far-right statist Austin Peterson and the confused John McAfee, but didn’t even mention the actual principled voluntaryist, Darryl Perry. Shameful!

I don’t really support Kokesh’s run for President, given his history of self-destructive and counter-productive confrontations with the agents of the State. And I do recommend Larken Rose’s book The Most Dangerous Superstition, which discusses how a whole population’s faithfully believing in government as their “authority” is an extremely dangerous superstition.

But the debate is a good discussion for those who are genuinely interested in the ideas of freedom, non-aggression, voluntaryism, etc.

Published inUncategorized