http://freedomainradio.com/board/forums/thread/122051.aspx

She is declaring her truths...good for her!
and for those of you who do not have access:


I've listened to quite a few podcasts but I'm sure there's a lot I don't know and understand about all of what Stef says. All of his political stuff I've read about before and the thing I like best about this site is that he's now translating all the ideas in libertarian/anarchist minded books into audio and video form. This will help the ideas reach a lot more people because I've learned over the years that lots of folks just don't want to take the time to read like I do. So I guess the only thing that bothers me about this point is that I think it would be good for Stef to refer to the individuals and books that these ideas came from. Then maybe more people will be interested enough to go to those sources and check them out. I thought about this recently when I was looking up something in my dog eared copy of Murray Rothbard's For a New Liberty and I found a place where he was saying 'there is no such thing as the government,' that it's just an abstract concept. I guess my thought around this is that books often have lots of footnotes as to where some ideas and comments originated from and how does one do that with podcasts.

I have mixed feelings on the podcasts about family and parenting. I think there are a lot of individual experiences and variations in our lives and so some of the things Stef proposes just seem too harsh to those of us who did not have similar upbringings. As a matter of fact, the variety in our lives is similar to what freedom loving people believe about the free market, there are many, many paths to figuring out how you want to handle your own family life and there's no right way. And sometimes if you just stick around, you will see some very satisfying and gratifying changes in other people. I have two examples to share. I was spanked a few times as a child and it affected me. I decided not to spank my children and to raise them differently in other ways. I did not feel a need to defoo from my parents, I just feel like they raised us with the information they had and I happened to meet people and read books that shared other ideas that made more sense so I went with those. And here's the interesting part: as I moved through my parenting, it became obvious that we were not using spanking and one day my dad asked me about it. He was curious to learn more and found it interesting. I don't think he really thought it would work but then he saw how it was turning out and became more open minded about it. If I had just left and had no contact with him, that would not have happened. I went through something similar when I decided to homeschool especially with my brother. But when he started to see the evidence of how my kids were turning out, he admitted it was not a bad idea. He even wrote me a letter apologizing for his past comments. I guess my point here is that if it just doesn't feel right to totally defoo, you don't have to, all you need to do is have the confidence to hold your ground on what is right and perhaps you will have similar things happen. So I'm only saying that there are an infinite number of ways this can turn out and it reflects the individual life experiences we all have from the beginning of our lives.

As to the idea that those (the average trapped citizen) who just sticks with our government system being evil, I can't quite grasp that either. Many times it's just pragmatism and self-defense that make people do what they do even though they see the system is just plain wrong and it's not working. And they usually don't want to think about whether it's immoral or not because they can't do a damn thing about it. Many people I've communicated with would love it if the force were gone, but it's not. And none of us knows how to stop it. I do think Stef might be on a good track as he's trying to get the young people to get to a place where they understand all of this before they have kids and then if the kids are raised differently, maybe one day good things will happen to society as a whole.

The last thing that's bothering me relates to my second paragraph and my past personal experiences I guess because it has to do with patience in helping others to change their ways of thinking. I notice that people get banned here or are told to leave when all I see is that they are new and asking questions to try and understand things better. If no one here has the patience to talk to these people and help them stick around so they can learn more, then what's the point? If this is not the point, then should this board be closed to the public and have some sort of process that people would go through before they were accepted? I'm just confused about the forum aspect of this website.

Debbie

she will no doubt be chastised for her honesty ... which will inevitably prove the double standard with regard to Rod's question ..which is about "being honest".

If she holds her ground, and it sounds like she will (and I think she should because I think she's right), then she'll also probably be banned.

Hi folks!

Well, I thought this was an absolutely fascinating post.

The first thing I noticed was that while it took only 40 minutes for Stef to find, read, and reply to the post from (who we think might be) Colleen's dad, Dtomboy's post lingered for over a day before someone acknowledged it at all. Yet it was a powerful critique from an insider. Breaking it down, the message says:

Paragraph 1: Many of Stef's ideas are derivative and he doesn't attribute the actual author.

Paragraph 2: We have a blanket policy of defooing and a theory about the nature of parents/families that is counter to most people's practical experience.

Paragraph 3: People who believe in some form of government may not be evil.

Paragraph 4: If we are going to ban people who ask legitimate questions, then why not close the board to all non-true-believers?

After her post hung out there for about a day, Rodzilla responded with a question that was so weak, it kind of made me feel sorry for him. Dtomboy's post sounded to me like a pretty devastating analysis and I'm surprised it hasn't been deleted. It suggests to me that what I really like about freedomainradio isn't Stef's thinking, but the parts of other people's thinking that he nicely packages in friendly little videos.

I'm not sure.

QuestEon - excellent summary!

This is always the lie.

"All Stef ever says is to be honest with your family! That's not 'harsh' or 'anti-family.' What's wrong with you!"

Rodzilla was right on top of it, so Stef didn't even have to touch it. They are just fucking ridiculous. Where, exactly, is the acceptance of honesty from the parents? There have been attempts and they have all been shot down with the therapy dodge. I mean, here is some real honesty from another person NOT in the family, and they shit right on it. Pretty much, "shut up, these are questions we do not ask here. Dad (er, Stef) is absolutely NOT a cult leader, NO WAY!!!!"

"Ouch" indeed!

Hi Debbie. Glad you stopped in.

- NonE

Welcome back, Debbie. I remember reading a few of your posts on FDR looong ago and admiring your confidence and ability, and wishing you'd come over here. You did, but then disappeared. Thanks, Google, for reminding her of LiMi!

dtomboy wrote:

...I want to keep thinking and learning and pondering and I just don't get that there.

I'm hoping you'll keep thinking and learning and pondering here, and that your ideas will keep me thinking and learning and pondering.

As an Alice Miller fan, I can see how Stef and fanbois would attack this kind of post.

"Gee, nothing was wrong. I had issues with being abused, but just didn't do that with my kids" ---> Um'kay, you have not yet faced the pain of your experience. It must be leaking out (repeating) in other ways: manipulation, passive aggression, something.

In some ways, from a Millerian perspective, Debbie's post is the perfect bait. So it is rather interesting that its not taken up by the FDR gang.

I don't think this is b/c she's too old. Rather, I think her confidence and competence are too high. She's sure of her position, so right or wrong, there is little to work with for a confidence trickster, a psychosocial manipulator, etc... If she's right, then approaching from a Stef/Miller direction will be futile and the truth will out. If she's wrong, then such an approach will still yield nothing, for she's not aggrieved about anything.

You can't press buttons on a sphere.

I would imagine that her post irritated the FDR core, but they rightly avoided it. There is nothing to say. She doesn't really propose anything, nor challenge anything explicitly. She relates the facts, and those are hers, so no traction.

As far as the other comments, r/e referencing sources especially: I think this is a huge flaw in Stef's approach. He readily admits to borrowing ideas from all sorts of people. He's humble when directly talking about himself. But when it comes to doing the dirty work of tracking down one's references, he just skips that part. Hmmmmmmmm.

If he would weave the ideas of others into a mesh that was truly integrated into a history of ideas, his own (if any) would be so much stronger. That he 'doesn't bother' is disconcerting, even for the non-academic.

I would imagine he rationalizes this by claiming that by taking a personal approach he can best involve those distant listeners in a 'conversation'. This is terribly weak, IMO, but I really think this is what he would say, if pressed.

-Alex