“That Guy’s” Response to Robert Kiyosaki of Rich Dad/Poor Dad on Anarcho-Capitalism

by Jeff Berwick, The Dollar Vigilante: I recently ran into Robert Kiyosaki, author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad, and had heard him say many anarchist sounding things so thought I would ask him if he was an anarchist.

I detailed what happened next here, “Is Robert Kiyosaki of Rich Dad/Poor Dad MK Ultra Mind Controlled or Just Having a Nervous Breakdown?

Yesterday, he responded to what happened with, “Why I Flipped Out on the Guy Who Called Me an Anarchist.

He never actually referred to me by name. Only calling me “that guy” who is a “semi-celebrity”. But, his response begins,

"During the event, I was approached by a stranger who asked me if I was an anarchist. I informed him I wasn’t, but he kept pressing the issue, eventually pushing me to the point of extreme irritation.

Turns out the man is a semi-celebrity in the anarchy circles and a self-described anarcho-capitalist. Not taking my answers at face value, he continued to try and fit me into a label, and I did not appreciate it. Nor did he appreciate my getting angry with him.

In all honesty, it’s not worth responding but I did consider this a good opportunity to clarify further my beliefs about government and politics."

He then states, “I’m not political at all.” Which is what an anarchist would say.

And said, “In the end, the only person that can save you is you.” Which is what an anarchist would say.

He then went on to say that smart people find ways to not pay taxes. Which is what an anarchist would say.

Given this and many of his other anti-government statements anyone can see why the question needed to be asked, “Are you an anarchist?”

I asked if he was an anarchist and he said no. I then asked if he believed in government and he said no. So, I said that if he doesn’t believe in government it makes him an anarchist.

That is, after all, the definition of anarchy. No rulers. No government.

According to him, these three questions meant I was “pressing the issue” which eventually pushed him to the point of “extreme irritation.”

In his response he said, “I don’t believe that government can solve our problems, but I don’t believe that anarchy can either. I don’t believe that any system can.”

And this, I believe, is where we have the confusion.

Anarchy is not a “system”. Anarchy is a belief that humans should not be enslaved.

I asked him if he was an anarchist but I could have also asked, “Do you believe humans should be enslaved?”

It is the same question. This is the point I believe he is missing.

If you are not an anarchist you believe humans should be enslaved.

So, my question was no small one. It is perhaps one of the most important questions that can be asked about the beliefs of another.

He avoided that question and said he does not like to be “labelled”. But, at the same time, he constantly labels himself as a capitalist. So, he obviously doesn’t mind some labels.

So, then, let me ask you this one question, Robert. Do you believe humans should be enslaved or do you not?

You can answer that question without putting any labels on yourself if you so choose.

Do you believe a child born in a certain geographic region where a criminal entity has a monopoly on violence should be deemed subservient to this criminal entity, should take on their debts, which is over $250,000 today in the US and have to pay a certain percentage of all their earnings to this entity for life with or without their consent?

If you believe that is just and good then you are a statist and believe in slavery. If you believe that is unjust and immoral then you are against slavery… and are an anarchist.

If you don’t like the word anarchist, for whatever reason, there are other words that have effectively the same meaning. One is “voluntaryist”.

A voluntaryist believes that all interaction between humans should be voluntary. They should not be forced, or coerced, with violence or threats of violence.

You can again avoid the label if you so choose, Robert, but do you believe interaction between humans should be voluntary? Or do you think using violence against others to get your way is fine?

Robert concludes in his response:

"I have spent my life learning the rules of money and putting them to use to get rich, and I have done so under both Republicans and Democrats.

And this brings to sharp view how you are the only one that can save you. Take for instance the tax system. You can spend all your time and energy moaning and complaining about the tax system and how unfair it is—like many anarchists (and others) do—or you can learn how to put it to use for your financial well-being. As a capitalist, that is what I have done. I am not lobbying, complaining, or even trying to change the system. I am learning it and how to use it to my advantage."

He’s made it clear that what is most important to him is money. He doesn’t care nor want to change a system no matter how immoral it is.

I’m an anarcho-capitalist so I don’t denounce his desire to produce wealth. But it sounds a bit like if Robert were living in Cambodia during Pol Pot’s regime he’d be happy cutting deals to bury the bodies at a pretty penny.

Perhaps this is what angered Robert so much. Maybe he knows that he is profiting in many respects from an immoral system and has decided to turn a blind eye to it and just focus on making profits.

Perhaps after decades this is really taking a toll on his conscience. Not to mention how he had murdered people in Vietnam decades ago while not questioning or trying to change the system.

If this is the case I’d recommend Robert look seriously into some therapies. Ayahuasca is just one that works very well for PTSD. That may help you come to terms with what you did in Vietnam.

Read More @ TheDollarVigilante.com