The ‘discussion’ liberty needs is the ‘reconciliation’ between Hoppe and I. In n

The ‘discussion’ liberty needs is the ‘reconciliation’ between Hoppe and I. In no small part because he is the only person with the requisite knowledge to hold such a discussion. I have been a bit of an ass (more than a bit of an ass) because I was so angry with the deception of the cosmopolitans that I let it influence me. But my view is that it would be better for his movement to have an evolution with my restatement in scientific language, than an extinction with his death. I would also radically improve the quality of his ‘Salon’.

I would crucify anyone from the mises institute. No way will they touch me. No one there both intellectually capable and intellectually honest other than Hoppe.

Molyneux has converted from wanna-be-philosohper, to the best critic of common ideas that is working today. And so I would like to help him ‘evolve’ from hopeful ‘liberty’ to acceptance ‘sovereignty’.

Cantwell’s Interesting because his sentiments appear pretty good.

I like Watson but I’m not big on critique, and that’s his schtick.

The think tanks are all burned other than Heritage. And even heritage still practitioners of the ‘hopeful’ folly. I don’t see heritage talking to me any time soon.

My view (and why we need the propertarian institute) is to create a new think tank that isn’t a media outlet, but that literally TRAINS prosecutors (think jesuits / inquisition / templars ).

I thought I had this worked out economically but I’ve got more work to do now. We can do it. And when we do that’s the thing. Training is worth paying for (albeit small amounts) and we do not need to beg for donations, only try to build an endowment.