Is Stefan Molyneux a Hypocrite for Using the Government Gun?

Is Stefan Molyneux a Hypocrite for Using the Government Gun?

by Ben Stone

When Ron Paul used the government gun to take down a fan site on the internet, I stood against the atrocity and named Ron Paul as an inconsistent hypocrite. See THIS LINK for my article titled I Accuse Ron Paul. I cannot grant Stefan Molyneux different treatment or I too would be a hypocrite. Unless I am made aware of some new evidence to the contrary, I have to assume Stefan Molyneux is a worse hypocrite than Ron Paul since Molyneux has specifically attacked the concept of “Intellectual Property” whereas some made the excuse for Ron Paul that he was somehow ignorant of the argument or ignorant of the actions of his handlers.

Stefan can feel free to contact me if he wishes to discuss this issue or this article, however if his psychotic followers try to pack this site with crazy nonsense, as is their tendency, I will simply delete their comments.


  • The story at techdirt
  • The story at Reddit
  • The actual videos in question can be found HERE
  • A fun new ad by the Freedom Feens can be found HERE

Please watch this 8:28 video explaining the situation:

The accused:


This note added September 9th, 2014:
Some people were offended at the phrase above; “…if his psychotic followers try to pack this site with crazy nonsense, as is their tendency, I will simply delete their comments.”
Mostly the ones offended were his psychotic followers and they tried to pack this site with nonsense. Mostly I deleted them. To prove my point, consider what Michael Dean suffered at the hands of these people. They have attacked him on various web sites, created videos attacking him, and even threatened him. That’s what Stef’s slaves do.

This entry was posted in All Videos, Brief Articles and Short Notes, Free Society, Property, Voluntaryism and Law, Voluntaryism and Social Interactions, Voluntaryism and the Zero Aggression Principle and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Is Stefan Molyneux a Hypocrite for Using the Government Gun?

  1. Dana Nutter says:

    My second article about the censorship and other problems in FDR.

    Sorry To Interrupt Your Cult Of Hypocrisy
    The Untruth About Freedomain Radio

  2. Ikefeen says:

    Stefan lied to Rogan:

    Lies do it for me, I’m done with him. He does seem to prey on the broken.

    Ikefeen out

    • Bad Quaker says:

      Well said Ike.
      I think Stef’s use of a government order to take down a critic could be explained away as a mistake. But his lack of honesty and his willingness to lie are deal breakers.


  3. someguy says:

    Ive looked at the tru shibes videos that were flagged by youtube (stefan molyneux) for copyright infringement.
    All of those videos contain audio from podcasts Stefan has deleted from his own site.
    The videos contain audio from Stefan’s wife, Christina, she was forced to bring those podcasts down from FDR or else she would lose her job. She was reprimanded for giving advice on the internet.

    One of the videos with audio of Christina

  4. John says:

    Just as Ayn Rand paid into the Social Security system,vwe all pay the costs of the “Intellectual Property” system in terms of higher prices etc. Is it an act of aggression to act within that system to reap a benefit of that system that is promised you?

    • Bad Quaker says:

      We all pay for police “protection” as well. We have no choice. That’s different from calling the police on your neighbor when his kid’s ball rolls into your yard.
      If Stef were telling the truth and if the YouTube channels were “bullying” his callers, which I find laughable, Stef could have filed a private complaint with YouTube and they would have looked into it.
      Stef didn’t do that.
      He basically threatened YouTube with government action unless they deleted the accounts. He chose to go above and beyond what would have stopped any harassment, and he used IP law to threaten YouTube, in order to get his way.
      I don’t see how this situation is confusing.
      Stef used a government threat to stop criticism of his show. It’s very simple. I don’t understand how this confuses people.
      Stef could have used peaceful means that were available, but he chose to use a government threat.


  5. Ben Stone says:

    I am already bored and tired of the Stef-bot posters.
    Just to be clear, you robotic people who blindly follow ANYONE make me sad. To assume Stef is the victim without even looking at the evidence is proof you are a pathetic tool and you should be ashamed of yourself. Grow a spine and set yourself free of your Precious. Stand up on your hind legs and stop depending on someone else!


  6. James says:

    Seems like the entire existence of this person is to attack Molyneux on everything he says or puts up. So if someone dedicates their life to discredit you is that not a violation of the NAP? When someone initiates force on you is not not ok to use every means at your disposal to get rid of them, including obscure copy right laws? I understand what you are saying in this article, but Molyneux defending himself against a person like this seems fine to me. All his content is still free on his website, he used this loophole to go after someone that goes after him first so whats the problem?

    • Bad Quaker says:

      James, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
      Clearly you misunderstand the “NAP” if you think someone using your own words to show you don’t live what you teach is the same as violence. Even if everything a person posts about you is false and they say horrible nasty things about you, it’s not violence. It’s just words. Someone who lies and tries to discredit you is not using violence and it does NOT justify using government as your muscle to force YouTube to do your bidding.
      In other words, if someone says you are an ugly liar you can’t use the NAP to justify calling the cops.
      If Stef doesn’t like a person’s content all he has to do is counter the charges. Using government thuggery is not a moral option, according to everything Stef has taught over the years.


  7. The guy who ran TruShibes has mirrored every video that got taken down, and has issued a challenge: find a video he posted that gives out personal info on the callers (Stefan’s alleged reason for the takedown) and he’ll take everything down and apologize to Stefan:

  8. Kyle Duca says:

    That was more vitriol than I was expecting. Why would you say that the folk that enjoy Stefan’s work are “psychotic” and bent on filling your site with “crazy nonsense?” You can’t redact that latter on, because the character of Stefan’s audience is not dependent on this event.

    Regardless of Stefan’s actions, which I don’t find that inappropriate, if you have fault with Stefan’s work of late I would enjoy seeing you critic it.

    • Bad Quaker says:

      Kyle, I didn’t say anything against Stef’s “audience”. I addressed his followers. There is a difference. For your own good, I suggest you open your eyes and see the difference. Stef’s followers are legendary on the internet.
      BTW, I have no desire to go point by point to debunk Stef’s claims, like the one that women are the source of evil in the world, or any of his other crazy rants. There are plenty of people covering that. This post was about his use of the government gun, which he has both condemned and then used to his advantage.
      Kyle, did you follow the links and investigate or did you just assume Stef was the victim? Can you show any evidence that there was “bullying” as Stef says? Or is Stef a liar as well as a hypocrite?


      • dishumbleabode says:

        Yo, you could have made that distinction a bit clearer. Would be more effective for your message I think.

        • Bad Quaker says:

          You aren’t being clear who you are talking to or what your topic is in reference to. I almost deleted your post as Span until I noticed you didn’t link to any web sites.
          (you are here)Pot ====>> Kettle


          • dishumbleabode says:

            “Kyle, I didn’t say anything against Stef’s “audience”. I addressed his followers. There is a difference. For your own good, I suggest you open your eyes and see the difference. Sref’s followers are legendary on the internet.”

          • Bad Quaker says:

            I say what I mean and I mean what I say. I said followers because I meant followers, not listeners.


      • Kamil says:

        “BTW, I have no desire to go point by point to debunk Stef’s claims, like the one that women are the source of evil in the world, or any of his other crazy rants.

        No, no, no.. he hasn’t said anything like that. I believe you misunderstood him. If I recall this show correctly of course, but I’m not perfectly sure he hasn’t said that. It’s my strong intuition.

        • Bad Quaker says:

          Yes, yes, yes, he said that. I don’t care what your strong intuition tells you, if you follow the above links you can find it for yourself.


          • Dana Nutter says:

            I think the examples of their behavior answer the very question about cultism. When freedomaniacs won’t bother even looking to see the hard evidence, and some even go as far as to deny it when it’s right there in their face.

      • Kyle Duca says:

        Hello Ben,

        Honestly, I was much too lazy to research this issue thoroughly beyond watching the video you posted and contrasting it with Stefan’s statements on the Joe Rogan show. Stefan’s story seemed consistent so I moved on. The cost-to-benefit ratio was too low for me to go farther than that. I’m not invested in seeing him as a messiah, I realize he is a simple human and subject to mistakes.

        All human beings are flawed, in the process of a person maximizing their impact on the world their flaws become exaggerated to cartoonish levels. This is inevitable because we are not “divine,” however this doesn’t mean shouldn’t be happy with their strivings. We can recognize these “great men” as merely human and navigate by the light they cast rather then become blind by it. Case and point: Ann Rand. Stefan’s neither a devil or a messiah, he’s just some guy on the internet that is trying to do some good in his own way.

        I haven’t even been convinced that Stefan’s narrative on this whole thing is false. I frankly think that his venture into the gender wars could be much more telling about his blind spots and I’m keeping an eye on it to see if it is more then unrefinement.


        • Bad Quaker says:

          Kyle, you said;
          “Honestly, I was much too lazy to research this issue thoroughly beyond watching the video you posted and contrasting it with Stefan’s statements on the Joe Rogan show. Stefan’s story seemed consistent so I moved on.”
          That’s not true. You didn’t just “move on.” You logged into this site and shot your mouth off about something you failed to research. Now you are back-peddling to save face, while still holding the view that Stef is the victim.
          Shame on you Kyle!


          • Kyle Duca says:

            Remember how you just did a podcast about the rationality of chemtrails? How those people wouldn’t show the definite proof first, just some blurry pictures of trails in the sky and do a lot of emotive blathering? This comes off the same way.

            Your word holds weight for me and others. The people you are redirecting us to do not.

            You could single handedly use your position to cull Stefan’s support base to a fraction of it’s current size if you committed to a concise breakdown, point by point, of Stefan’s lying. Just how you researched the patent number on that tank in the airplane and found it was just a fire extinguishing system.

            Your taking a half measure. By not putting Stefan’s feet to the fire you come off as insincere, diminishing your credibility.

            I will personally bail on Stefan if you can do this and I will give the money that I was using to support him to others more deserving.

          • Bad Quaker says:

            For some reason the built in Spam filter on this site is trying to block you. I am playing with the settings to make it leave your posts alone.

            To your topic;
            Think about it, in something like 400 shows I did exactly 1 dedicated to chemtrails. In that show I let someone else talk for about half the show. Googling a patent number took a few seconds.
            Including emails and phone calls, I have spent more time in the last 3 days answering questions about Stef than I have spent on my last 6 podcasts including the chemtrail one.
            I don’t really have the time or inclination to spend countless hours debunking someone who has thousands of half-crazed followers who will do anything to protect their Great Leader. Be that Stef, the Zeitgeist nuts, the chemtrail believers, or any other fanatical faith based group.
            If you want to “bail” on Stef do it because you want to. Not because someone holds your hand and walks you through it.

          • Kyle Duca says:

            Bear with me.

            I was the walking dead. If the USA had gone tits up back in 2009 I would be dead right now. I’ve told my parents recently that I wanted to kill myself when I was in my teens several times now, only to get responses of: “that was the past” leading to “you only care about yourself” and “do you have any ambitions in life.”

            When I was in my early/mid teens I was constantly verbally abused and I went insane, this later fact has only become apparent to me now. Back then I spent months crying myself to sleep thinking that the only reason I would not kill myself was because it would make my sister sad. I would also occasionally have fantasies of wrath where I would think of shredding people to pieces and making a throne out of parts. I cringe when I see people like Elliot Rodger in the news because it brings back old wounds. I’m in my early 20’s and I’m only realizing how horrifying this is now, I honestly considered this particular facet of my life as mundane and not worthy of thought till last year.

            I’m one of Stefan’s “followers.” As I have listened to his shows and I’ve heard people who have been raped and beaten, one after another, asking for help. Many of these people have had it magnitudes worse then me and I have no idea how they are still alive. These people also love freedom and share the majority of the principles you do, but they are the ones that have been the most hurt by the world we live in.

            However you seem to have contempt for them, to put it generously. Why? If I had to guess it would be that you do not see them as your brothers and sisters in arms, even if “mislead,” but as a more dangerous threat to you then the statists. Your contempt is disproportionate to their virtue. You seem to have invested your ego in being a pinnacle source of Truth in the liberty movement. This is what I’m guessing the source of the vitriol in your post on Stefan, it’s not about helping what you should see as the wounded/mislead or seeking truth and virtue as standard, but attacking a threat to your ego. This is why I’m guessing I have not seen the least bit of tacit or empathy to those who have been so brutalized. You say that Stefan is egotistical, however you act as if ignoring the plight of those he helps, his “half-crazed” followers, while you attack him is anything but.

            That being said, I still respect you and think that you are a great man. I hope to someday impact the world as much as you have and I am fully expecting to fumble along the way. If you believe that Stefan is a cult-leading liar then many of the most vulnerable people in the liberty movement are in danger. You would be up to the task of revealing this. Some of Stefan’s audience will die when things get bad, there is time for the market to fill the void that Stefan leaves. People who are better suited to healing the wounded will no longer be crowed out of the market.

            As for your concerns, I’m slowly working my way though the material on the event (Freedom Feens and Free Talk Live on Stefan Molyneux – youtube). However, I’m still not seeing any smoking guns that alienates me from Stefan. I’m going to default to waiting to see what happens and go about my life in the mean time.

            Thanks talking for with me Ben, I appreciate the chance to discuss my concerns with you.

          • Bad Quaker says:

            If I seem cold, it’s because I am cold. It’s a self defense mechanism. I am cold because, as touching as your story is, I have a story that I don’t dare tell in public. I have a relationship with pain that few can understand.
            That said, when I see someone who uses the pain of others to line his pockets while convincing those same victims to give him undeserved god-like glory, I can’t sit by and say nothing. The fact that he has created and surrounded himself with very aggressive and dangerous people doesn’t mean I should ignore those damaged people and pretend they are not the danger that they are. As an example, Hitler was a monster who fooled people into believing he was good. That doesn’t mean we should overlook the evil his followers did in his name.
            A dedicated follower of Stef is a victim. But they are still responsible for their actions. And Stefs followers can be mean, ruthless, and dangerous. Giving them sympathy because their mommy was mean to them is something I am incapable of doing.
            I feel sorry for anyone who had a troubled life. That doesn’t give anyone a valid reason to adopt a Great Man and follow his every command, while overlooking his obvious evil.


          • Kyle Duca says:


            At the very least I’m glad you have surrounded yourself with people in private that you can talk to about your troubles, purging demons is a massive relief.

            I understand history well enough.

            Many of the Marxist leaders of communism had “higher intelligences” then me. Many of the slave owning USA southerners had devotions to their “religious virtues” outshining any of my own. Many of Hitler’s compatriots had such “regards for life” that they were stanch vegetarians and passed laws that would make PETA blush.

            I am a skeptic and confident in my ability to live without falling prey to deception for long or completely. My track record speaks for it’s self. I’ll keep an eye on Stefan, but I will judge him on my own terms. I don’t think he is evil, I think he is a good person with ambitions and quirks. My assessment of him, along with all things, is on-going.

            Thank you for sharing.
            Thank you for talking with me.

            If I see you at any event I’ll make sure to introduce myself and shake your hand. However there is not much left to say. Whatever is the case with any of this, time will sort it out.


          • Bad Quaker says:

            Thank you Kyle
            Keep in mind, Stef openly lied. This is easy to prove. Stef used government force to take down the site of a critic, when non-government options were available. Again, this is not a blind accusation. It’s admitted by Stef.
            What exactly do you need to see?


  9. Nicely said, Ben. Keep up the great work.

    He screwed up and he should make his victims whole. If he wants to keep his integrity intact, he has a few more moves to make as well.

Comments are closed.