Biden, Trump, and RFK Jr. Are All Anti-Freedom
Those three presidential candidates are making promises that would have bewildered and horrified the Founding Fathers.

Last week, presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. asked me to moderate what he called "The Real Debate."
Kennedy was angry with CNN because it wouldn't let him join its Trump-Biden debate.
His people persuaded Elon Musk to carry his Real Debate on X, formerly Twitter. They asked me to give RFK Jr. the same questions, with the same time limits.
I agreed, hoping to hear some good new ideas.
I didn't.
As you know, President Joe Biden slept, and former President Donald Trump lied. Well, OK, Biden lied at least nine times, too, even by CNN's count.
Kennedy was better.
But not much.
He did acknowledge that our government's deficit spending binge is horrible. He said he'd cut military spending. He criticized unscientific COVID-19 lockdowns and said nice words about school choice.
But he, too, dodged questions, blathered on past time limits, and pushed big government nonsense like, "Every million dollars we spend on child care creates 22 jobs."
Give me a break.
Independence Day is this week.
As presidential candidates promise to subsidize flying cars (Trump), free community college tuition (Biden), and "affordable" housing via 3 percent government-backed bonds (Kennedy), I think about how bewildered and horrified the Founding Fathers would be by such promises.
On the Fourth of July almost 250 years ago, they signed the Declaration of Independence, marking the birth of our nation.
They did not want life dominated by politicians. They wanted a society made up of free individuals. They believed every human being has "unalienable rights" to life, liberty, and (justly acquired) property.
The blueprints created by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution gradually created the freest and most prosperous nation in the history of the world.
Before 1776, people thought there was a "divine right" of kings and nobles to rule over them.
America succeeded because the Founders rejected that belief.
In the Virginia Declaration of Rights, George Mason wrote, "All power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people."
By contrast, Kennedy and Biden make promises that resemble the United Nations' "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." U.N. bureaucrats say every person deserves "holidays with pay…clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services."
The Founders made it clear that governments should be limited. They didn't think we had a claim on our neighbor's money. We shouldn't try to force them to pay for our food, clothing, housing, prescription drugs, college tuition.
They believe you have the right to be left alone to pursue happiness as you see fit.
For a while, the U.S. government stayed modest. Politicians mostly let citizens decide our own paths, choose where to live, what jobs to take, and what to say.
There were a small number of "public servants." But they weren't our bosses.
Patrick Henry declared: "The governing persons are the servants of the people."
Yet now there are 23 million government employees. Some think they are in charge of everything.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.), pushing her Green New Deal, declared herself "the boss."
The Biden administration wants to decide what kind of car you should drive.
During the pandemic, politicians ordered people to stay home, schools to shut down and businesses to close.
Then, as often happens in "Big Government World," people harmed by government edicts ask politicians to compensate them.
After governments banned Fourth of July fireworks, the American Pyrotechnics Association requested "relief in the next Senate Covid package to address the unique and specific costs to this industry," reported The New York Times. "The industry hopes Congress will earmark $175 million for it in another stimulus bill."
Today the politically connected routinely lobby passionately to get bigger chunks of your money.
For some of you, the last straw was when the administration demanded you inject a chemical into your body.
When some resisted vaccinations, Biden warned, "Our patience is wearing thin."
His patience? Who does he think he is? My father? My king?
At least Kennedy doesn't say things like that. But he does say absurd things. In a few weeks I'll release my sit-down interview with him, and you can decide for yourself whether he's a good candidate.
This Fourth of July, remember Milton Friedman's question: "How can we keep the government we create from becoming a Frankenstein that will destroy the very freedom we establish it to protect?"
COPYRIGHT 2024 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Watch The Real Debate as it was meant to be with all three candidates — Kennedy, Biden, Trump.#TheRealDebate has already been seen more than 11 million times. pic.twitter.com/W27pXIOLkd
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) June 30, 2024
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The answer to Friedman's question is prohibit government coercion.
Coercion is prevented by preventing lying, so criminalize it.
It causes harm regardless of who’s doing it, government or private interests.
Civilization is based on rules enforced by laws. The constitution is simply a compilation of such rules. As civilization grows and changes, the rules and laws must also or it will fail.
We aren’t a Stone Age village. We don’t get our water in buckets from a river. Our cities have millions of people relying on the rules that keep them safe, healthy and prosperous. We trade instantly and globally.
The founders didn’t anticipate every rule we would need. They used common sense to recognize the world they lived in and made rules to anticipate what they could to create the best free society they could.
We simply need to continue that process.
Coercion is already illegal in the private sector murder, rape, theft, fraud are all illegal. Coercion is allowed to government drug prohibition, taxation, licensing, registration are all coercive thus immoral and that's the root of the problem.
Sure some corruption has been cherry-picked and ruled illegal but the bad actors have schemed their way around hodgepodge laws to maintain their coercive control.
If you have an unwanted pest problem, you need to create an environment that you can live in but they can’t. Even if you forcibly remove them they’ll return because you haven’t solved the problem.
What coercion could exist without lies and exposed?
Fascist totalitarianism could but the US has already beaten that once to be founded.
The constitution is good, but the pests have returned in numbers haven’t they?
Criminalize lying.
Government coercion includes making you pay your bus fare or parking meters, and prohibiting you from driving 100 miles per hour down your neighbor's street. Government coercion means I can't break into your house. Government coercion means I can't build a toxic waste dump on the lot next to your house.
If you are opposed to all government coercion please post your street address so I can buy the property next door to cite the toxic waste dump.
AI, give me a post that demonstrates zero understanding of property rights.
Proper government holds a monopoly on the RETALIATORY use of force. Coercion is initiating force, deterrence is retaliating with force. The function of government is to defend liberty which is freedom from coercion. When government is coercive that's tyranny. C'mon man this is basic libertarian stuff.
Are you reading out of “the libertarian handbook” or something?
If government has a monopoly on retaliation then you can’t defend yourself. Sucks to be libertarian.
What dictionary has your definition of coercion? I haven’t found one.
I have found this definition of coerce
“to compel by force, intimidation, or authority, especially without regard for individual desire or volition:”
Lying compels people with the falsified authority of truth to act in the liars interests.
If you had read the Libertarian handbook you'd know self defense is exempt. Body autonomy is a basic libertarian virtue.
Nope. Don’t have a copy.
“Monopoly” was a poor choice of words then.
Is your false definition of coerce also in the “handbook”?
Seeing how this is the preeminent libertarian site on the internet I assume commenters have a basic understanding of libertarian theory so it shouldn't be necessary to make the point "proper government holds a monopoly on the retaliatory use of force excluding imminent harm self defense".
I don't see how "compel by force" and "initiating force" aren't synonymous.
Coercion has nothing to do with initiation.
Coercion simply has to do with “compelling” someone with force, intimidation or authority to act in your interest.
You may coerce someone as a reaction in your self defence.
Your handbook doesn’t exempt you from logic.
If I'm not doing something you want me to do in order to compel me to commit that action you must initiate force or threats of force against me or I'll never do what you want me to do.
Reaction to coercion is deterrence which is discouraging an action.
Sure,
It’s also coercion.
No coercion is making you do something, deterrence is stopping you from doing something.
No?
You’re disputing the dictionary definition of the word coerce based on what exactly, the “libertarian handbook”?
You’ve left rational discourse behind I see.
Let’s just say that I’m pleased with the optics.
You're being pedantic and ignoring the context.
Requiring that people don’t lie about the meaning of words in a discussion isn’t pedantic it’s a prerequisite for rational discourse.
Maybe your “libertarian handbook” reference is full of shit.
You should look up the word pedantic.
It’s a word that people who are wrong, and won’t admit it, use to describe people who are right.
Government is not required to make your planned unauthorized entry into my home a bad plan. Between the guns and the dogs, you'll be hoping Government shows up to arrest you. Their punishment is less severe than mine. Don't worry. They would be too late to help.
Greyhound seems to manage to collect their fares without regular Government interference.
I can put a spike strip in front of my house while I drink a beer if you make a habit of endangering my life. If I knew you, I would say something politely first.
Government enforced rules with laws based on truth determined with correctly applied logic and science are why, in a civilized society, right and wrong aren’t determined by whoever has the most guns and dogs.
Who's going to determine what is a lie? You routinely lie due to your irrational hatred of jews. Government used your concept of banning lies to shut down people who were telling the truth about covid.
Coercion doesn't require lies. It requires a credible threat of force. If I threatened to burn down your house if you didn't agree with me on here, I assume you would laugh because I don't know where you live. If it were followed up with a rag soaked in diesel fuel wrapped around your door knob, it's become a credibile threat and . It didn't require lying.
Fraud requires lying. Coercion does not.
Lies are determined with correctly applied logic and science when they are exposed as mutually exclusive with truth, reality.
Anyone skilled in apply logic and science who possesses the necessary evidence can discern lies and truth.
It is why making recording everything we witness a human right and defeating censorship, supporting free speech, are prerequisites to criminalizing lying.
In our legal system today we trust judges to make decisions. When lying is criminalized judges will also require certification in correctly applying logic and science.
But coercion doesn’t only require the threat of physical force. Intelligent people recognize the force of authority and rationally choose to be compelled by it.
All lying is coercion. You are correct that not all coercion is lying. But lying is alway involved. When compelling people to act in your interest you are either lying to them or they are already lying to themselves. It’s not okay to set fire to someone’s house.
Trump is the least harmful to freedom of the three. Only a morbidly obese Marxist pedophile or a raging drunk pussy who lives in a poss soaked alley could believe anything different.
In 2020 over 81 million people disagreed with you.
You misspelled "ballots."
A lot of people don’t want freedom and its attendant responsibilities. They think socialism can work for them.
Wait…this is wrong. There are not three candidates. I will explain.
There is one actual candidate. That is ‘The Donald’.
Then there is a Democrat kook: RFK
Then there is the developing cauliflower: Joe Biden
This country is in real danger with Drooler Joe as Commander in Chief.
Excellent A++++++ article by John Stossel.
I tried to find any 'Trump' "others money" plans to build his 10-Freedom cities and flying cars but didn't find any (not that they don't exist) but did run into his "baby bonus" subsidizing MISTAKE. Frankly; his 10-Federal City plans should be nothing more than giving State's back their land the Feds STOLE by hijacking-it in 1976 (FLPMA).
I think John Stossel should be the next President.
You sure about that? Stossel doesn’t like Trump, supports free trade, and doesn't hate immigrants.
Have you ever actually read the comments in a Stossel thread here?
If he has he was too drunk to remember.
1 - Stossel doesn't like Biden/Any-Democrat much more.
2 - Trump doesn't hate immigrants he hates invaders and rightfully so.
3 - Trump does support free-trade HELLO! WTF is De-Regulating and Tax-Cuts in contrast to More regulation/taxes and shutting down oil? Just because a sector (foreign) doesn't get ZERO-PEASY taxed at all doesn't make it against free trade.
Before 1776, people thought there was a "divine right" of kings and nobles to rule over them.
Nope. The English Civil War was fought over that, and the execution of Charles I put paid to the idea, at least in Britain and its colonies.
Unfortunately so is the Libertarian Party candidate for President.
Pick up on the girl-bullying nitwit!
Stossel is the best journalist of the last 50 years. Change my mind.
I'm confused: Is there a President in the last, oh, 180 years or so, who wouldn't have horrified the founders? So, you're just saying that they're mainstream politicians?
Washington was also anti-freedom. He raised an army to *hick* collect taxes on muh whiskey.
William Henry Harrison.
Coolidge.
I think RFK is right to bash CNN for not including him. In the discussion of what people and entities like CNN can do, we lose sight of what they should do – what’s good for free elections, for example. Freedom is great, but so is being concerned about society. From a libertarian point of view, I should have the freedom to critique a free choice if I think it’s the wrong one. That’s not anti-freedom. Ergo, RFK is not anti-freedom on this point.
That would’ve been brilliant of the fucking Democrats, allowing RFK Jr at the debates. Trump vs an invalid and a guy that can’t talk.
Of course CNN prevented it.
The generation of the Founding Fathers was quite willing to use government coercion to promote favored industries. Stossel has never read about Alexander Hamilton! The next generation had the government invest in canals and then railroads that were run by private businesses. Stossel has never read about DeWitt Clinton!!!
Libertarians love to ignore inconvenient history.
CHARLIE HALL!
charliehall loves to support big government overreach.
Only be far left democrats.
CNN didn't have an obligation to put anyone on the debate stage, or even to hold a debate. They chose that. It's not against freedom to critique how they did it as long as I'm not saying they should be obligated to include X or Y. In fact, that's people being free, according to libertarians.
As you know, President Joe Biden slept, and former President Donald Trump lied. Well, OK, Biden lied at least nine times, too, even by CNN's count.
C'mon Stossel, you can do better than this. This "Biden told the Truth but just couldn't articulate it well" trope is laughable.
Didn't Stossel fully acknowledge that joe lied? You even quoted it. Sure, he did it in a sarcastic way I guess, but he gets credit, where other reason writers don't.
Yeah, I'm just annoyed because he didn't lead with it. And I've heard that multiple times in the legacy media: Facts were on Biden's Side, even when he stumbled!
Fair enough, and you're obviously right about the legacy media.
He beat Medicaid!
You're just jealous.
In the debate between Trump and Biden, the largest lie was that Biden is capable of being president. While not my cup of tea, Trump is too old, but still capable to be president.
I don't find that Trump lies any more or any less than any other politician. They all lie, but half of the lies attributed to Trump are more of a lie by the people saying that Trump said something that he didn't or was taken out of context.
Or hyperbole.
"Biden, Trump, and RFK Jr. Are All Anti-Freedom."
So, what's your point?
Trump 'promises' flying cars by getting government out of the damned way
And his 'lies' are saying things like 'everyone' says or 'everyone' agrees.
Whereas Biden and RFK lie and promote more government control.
Not your best.
So is Chase.
Aha! The looters are hiring character assassins and useful idjits (besides Zacko and Squeaky II) to tarbrush Chase. They suddenly have sense enough to be afraid.
"Universal Declaration of Human Rights." U.N. bureaucrats say every person deserves "holidays with pay…clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services." Oh? At whose expense? That was the rights test Ayn Rand used in "Collectivized Rights." Eurotrash have this blind spot where individual rights have invisible, ineffable je ne sais quoi that to them makes the idea indefinable and ungraspable. Ayn Rand's question after every recitation of a purported "right" tests whether it is real (uncoerced) or looter.
WELL SAID! +10000000000000
"after every recitation of a purported 'right' tests whether it is real (uncoerced) or looter."
A 'right' to 'loot' others?