Dave Smith & Tom Woods on Voting Trump

[Brian4Liberty]

Dave Smith & Tom Woods on Voting Trump | TWS #2563

What makes the most sense in 2024?

[TheTexan]

2024 is basically a referendum on whether or not you want full-on Marxism.

Do you want full-on Marxism? Yes / No

[PAF]

It's true that the presidency is only a symbol, it is reflective of the People.

Vaccines were no longer mandated not because of a president, but because the people have had enough.

My opinion is, if the country is going to burn, let be at the hands of the Marxists, not via the slow transition of Republicans. Perhaps the Republicans should lose until they get their act together. The "Overton Window" needs to move hard right instead of steadily moving left.

At this rate, Joe Biden could be reincarnated, run as a "R" 10 years from now and "win!". Wait... didn't Trump and Biden just get done playing "My Tariffs Are Better Than Yours!"?

[PAF]

Should Trump win and *we* take whatever little tiny bones he might throw at us in exchange for:

Thus, should Trump be elected, and his tariffs become official policy, we can expect two things to happen: the overall economic effects will be negative, but they will also give Trump a political boost. People will support the policies and blame free markets when they fail.

-and-

...this is not a costless endeavor. The administrative portion itself will require hiring thousands of government agents.

https://mises.org/misesian/great-ret...oking-backward

...among other horrible things?

[TheTexan]

My opinion is, if the country is going to burn, let be at the hands of the Marxists, not via the slow transition of Republicans.

Valid argument. There's a lot of potential upside (e.g., secession) to Harris winning. Pretty much the only reason I want Trump to win, is to just kick this can down the road a bit, but this country has got to go through some hard $#@! eventually for anything to change.

Perhaps the Republicans should lose until they get their act together.

I don't think there's any scenario where Republicans "get their act together" while this country remains intact. We are where we're at now because great Abe made us all slaves, and the resultant Stockholm syndrome keeps everyone in line with the leftist agenda. Secession has to happen first. Secession of course won't guarantee that Republicans will get their act together, but it would at least give them the freedom to so.

The "Overton Window" needs to move hard right instead of steadily moving left.

Maybe a hard left is what this country needs right now, to finally get people pissed off or desperate enough to take the risks that need to be taken.

[Swordsmyth]

It's true that the presidency is only a symbol, it is reflective of the People.

Vaccines were no longer mandated not because of a president, but because the people have had enough.

My opinion is, if the country is going to burn, let be at the hands of the Marxists, not via the slow transition of Republicans. Perhaps the Republicans should lose until they get their act together. The "Overton Window" needs to move hard right instead of steadily moving left.

At this rate, Joe Biden could be reincarnated, run as a "R" 10 years from now and "win!". Wait... didn't Trump and Biden just get done playing "My Tariffs Are Better Than Yours!"?

And the mask comes off.

The country is not going to burn with Trump, and nothing will grow from the ashes of communism Camela will bring.
If Camela wins it's over for a century at least.

Republicans did lose, to MAGA, and MAGA losing will ensure Republicans will never get their act together, both because the establishment in the part ywould win and because we would become a one party communist hellhole.

[PAF]

And the mask comes off.

The country is not going to burn with Trump, and nothing will grow from the ashes of communism Camela will bring.
If Camela wins it's over for a century at least.

Republicans did lose, to MAGA, and MAGA losing will ensure Republicans will never get their act together, both because the establishment in the part ywould win and because we would become a one party communist hellhole.

Desperation... so you're the one who has been junking up my mailbox every single day with that Trump Junk and 3 mail in ballots when I should have only gotten 1 none.

[FineSpeech]

If Kamala wins I hope it's gridlocked. I'm thinking Republicans are overconfident heading into this election, but I don't want the democrats to fully have power either.

[TheTexan]

If Kamala wins I hope it's gridlocked. I'm thinking Republicans are overconfident heading into this election, but I don't want the democrats to fully have power either.

I'm not sure it matters. Most of the damage they will do to us will be direct from executive branch

[Occam's Banana]

https://x.com/CptAncapistan/status/1852060089253007440

When I was newer to libertarianism and only learned about it from Reason, reddit, and Gary Johnson (I would now refer to what I was at the time as a classical liberal), I had thought of libertarianism as my moral framework. As my replacement for Christianity, which I had fallen out of.

After I found @ComicDaveSmith and @ThomasEWoods and started actually reading the great works on libertarian theory and Austrian economics (and Italian elite theory), over time, it became clearer and clearer that libertarianism was both less and more than I thought it was.

It is simply a legal framework, not a moral or religious framework. But, it's also so much more correct as a legal and political framework than I'd realized too. It's not just another way to skin a cat that I'd prefer over the other options. It is the correct legal framework for a moral and prosperous society, but it can't be the single glue that holds a society together.

Your values should align with libertarianism, but they should also encompass much more than just that. The Non-Aggression Principle is neither all-encompassing nor absolute. It is a guideline, not a commandment.

[Occam's Banana]

https://x.com/ComicDaveSmith/status/1852032462102179973

[Occam's Banana]

https://x.com/ComicDaveSmith/status/1852032462102179973

https://x.com/Rothmus/status/1852172526740279698

[fisharmor]

I think it's all best summed up by one line by Woods in the video:
That's not what time it is right now.

Yeah ok. I get that in any system you have to ignore things that aren't currently relevant in order to get anything done. That's self evident everywhere.
I've been in charge of organizations where I've had to tell people 'ok that's a valid point but we're dealing with this other thing right now and I have to shut down this conversation for the moment in order to get done what we have to get done'.

There's a difference. When you're in a voluntary organization, like a job, or a church, or a nonprofit, and you get told that this thing that's important to you isn't getting dealt with, you can try to bring it up more than once every four years. And you don't have to go gather several thousand people to agree we need to talk about it and then funnel that subject into a representative.
And furthermore, if you're shot down again, after the third or fourth time you can say "ok screw you guys, I'm out" and you can leave, and then the organization doesn't have any more sway in your life. You're out.

In voluntary organizations, someone else is always making the decision about what gets addressed, and there's never an egalitarian process for determining that agenda. It's usually a good old boys club making the decisions about what needs addressing.

There's nothing different about how we get state topics to discuss. There's still a bunch of stuff that it's not time for right now and for which there will literally never be a time. There's never going to be a vote for leaving the concentration camp. I'm surprised Woods used something that meaningful as an example - we can't even get hopelessly retarded subjects like daylight savings time or low flow toilets on the agenda. So there's zero chance repealing the income tax is going to come up.

This is one of the reasons I've mostly checked out. It's not what time it is, and for the last half century, it never has been that time. It's always time to talk about what the good old boys club wants to talk about. It's nice that Trump seems to be making his own good old boys club. Hopeful even.

But one of those good old boys is the current chair of the LP - and if anything serves as a microcosmic example of what awaits this new Trumpian good old boys club, it's the last two years of what happened in the LP. Take the old guard LP's reaction to that change and multiply it literally by a million, and that's what they're going to be up against.

****IF**** Trump even has any intention of following through on any of it.

And lest we forget, this is all ****IF**** our vote even matters. Literally everyone is voting early and remotely - it's worse than 2020 this year. We're all (well except for PAF) tacitly admitting defeat on the whole 'that's not what time it is' point - what happens when there's more hard proof of midnight ballot dumps? What time will it be then? Who is going to be unilaterally deciding whether it's time to pay attention to that problem? What happens when that particular good old boys club inevitably decides it's still not time to deal with that?

[TheTexan]

And lest we forget, this is all ****IF**** our vote even matters. Literally everyone is voting early and remotely - it's worse than 2020 this year. We're all (well except for PAF) tacitly admitting defeat on the whole 'that's not what time it is' point - what happens when there's more hard proof of midnight ballot dumps? What time will it be then? Who is going to be unilaterally deciding whether it's time to pay attention to that problem? What happens when that particular good old boys club inevitably decides it's still not time to deal with that?

I know it seems pointless to support Trump, but it's not.

As far as I see it, there's two options:
1) Completely check out and just let Marxism go entirely unopposed
2) Collaborate in a social manner to try to do something

I get that it looks pretty $#@!ing futile right now and #1 looks pretty tempting. (and for a purely selfish individual, probably the right choice, honestly)

But if we actually want a chance, #2 is pretty much required. And right now, it's less about the results that we can create, and more about building the social structures and organizations that will allow us to put up a meaningful resistance, when such an opportunity presents itself.

Currently as it stands, anyone who is anti-Marxist, is generally rallying on the Trump side of things. So at this point, it's less about supporting Trump himself, and more about supporting the general anti-Marxist cause. (Even if Trump ironically, is in many ways Marxist)

As such, I don't think we have our "Sons of Liberty" yet, but that didn't form overnight either. For effective resistance movements to develop, ineffective resistance movements must first be present.

But I can guarantee one thing, there sure as $#@! won't be a "Sons of Liberty" in our generation, if we all just decide to check out and not get involved at all. If your goal is to improve the future of this country, or sub-countries, it's better to be involved in something, than nothing.

what happens when there's more hard proof of midnight ballot dumps?

As OB likes to say, it's gradual until it's sudden. And an event such as this ^ has the potential to push people over the edge.

If that happens, it's better that we're involved, than if we're not.

[fisharmor]

But I can guarantee one thing, there sure as $#@! won't be a "Sons of Liberty" in our generation

What is "our generation"?
I'm Generation X. I'm the generation that was raised by Fred Rogers and Jim Henson and then the Lord of the Flies that was outside. With parents that got involved when there was a problem, and not really otherwise.
I spent 12 years oscillating between being told how special I am and that the world is a wonderful place, and getting beat up. With a break for a couple hours every Sunday to dress up and pretend to be some other family.
Then I hit adolescence and started getting fed the standard Gen X bait-and-switch message: you're actually not special, nobody gives a $#@! about you, and we're actively disinterested in what you think.
Oh and by the way that church stuff was all bull$#@!, too.

I don't know many people my age who didn't have an identical upbringing.
It's not an accident we were all smoking pot and cigarettes and drinking and screwing. We were bombarded nonstop with negative messages about all of that but we all took the attitude of "well if you don't give a $#@! what I think, I don't give a $#@! what you think."

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it: I'm doing the most important thing to get involved. I'm raising children who know that I give a $#@! what they think.
I'm curating their friends and I'm making sure they only have friends who give a $#@! what they think. And I'm making sure they give a $#@! about what their friends think.
I'm making sure they know and their friends know that the state absolutely does not give a $#@! what they think and is absolutely not concerned with their wellbeing.

I've also said this election is the same $#@! they've been doing for 40 years. We don't give a $#@! what you think, and you're not going to get what you want, just like always. But we're gonna say all sorts of stuff that gets more outlandish and less feasible every 4 years because of the super ultra secret: you have to participate in order to make this work. You CAN'T refuse to participate, because belief is the only thing that keeps this going. They're already saying mind-bogglingly stupid $#@! to scare you into participating. I guess it's nice that one side is also making promises that are less executable than Vermin Supreme's promises were.

The point being - no, this Gen X'er is in charge of his own head. I'm in charge of what's important. I'm fundamentally as not ok with other people determining what we're talking about and ignoring my input as I am about anything else that has happened since my adolescence.

I'm trying to teach that sort of self respect to the generations after me. That's my participation. I might vote for Trump just on the off chance that we do get a pony. But it's not something I'll ever consider "being involved".

[TheTexan]

What is "our generation"?
I'm Generation X. I'm the generation that was raised by Fred Rogers and Jim Henson and then the Lord of the Flies that was outside. With parents that got involved when there was a problem, and not really otherwise.
I spent 12 years oscillating between being told how special I am and that the world is a wonderful place, and getting beat up. With a break for a couple hours every Sunday to dress up and pretend to be some other family.
Then I hit adolescence and started getting fed the standard Gen X bait-and-switch message: you're actually not special, nobody gives a $#@! about you, and we're actively disinterested in what you think.
Oh and by the way that church stuff was all bull$#@!, too.

I don't know many people my age who didn't have an identical upbringing.
It's not an accident we were all smoking pot and cigarettes and drinking and screwing. We were bombarded nonstop with negative messages about all of that but we all took the attitude of "well if you don't give a $#@! what I think, I don't give a $#@! what you think."

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it: I'm doing the most important thing to get involved. I'm raising children who know that I give a $#@! what they think.
I'm curating their friends and I'm making sure they only have friends who give a $#@! what they think. And I'm making sure they give a $#@! about what their friends think.
I'm making sure they know and their friends know that the state absolutely does not give a $#@! what they think and is absolutely not concerned with their wellbeing.

I've also said this election is the same $#@! they've been doing for 40 years. We don't give a $#@! what you think, and you're not going to get what you want, just like always. But we're gonna say all sorts of stuff that gets more outlandish and less feasible every 4 years because of the super ultra secret: you have to participate in order to make this work. You CAN'T refuse to participate, because belief is the only thing that keeps this going. They're already saying mind-bogglingly stupid $#@! to scare you into participating. I guess it's nice that one side is also making promises that are less executable than Vermin Supreme's promises were.

The point being - no, this Gen X'er is in charge of his own head. I'm in charge of what's important. I'm fundamentally as not ok with other people determining what we're talking about and ignoring my input as I am about anything else that has happened since my adolescence.

You've chosen option #1 -- the selfish route, got it, that's all you needed to say. Not judging, because I've chosen the same thing. But you can't fault me for trying to guilt trip other people into participating. (And yes, I am a huge hypocrite and fine with that.)

I'm trying to teach that sort of self respect to the generations after me. That's my participation. I might vote for Trump just on the off chance that we do get a pony. But it's not something I'll ever consider "being involved".

That's fine, as long as you're aware we're basically pushing making the hard choices onto our children and their children. I'm fine with that because I'm a selfish $#@! and I admit it. I suppose you're fine with it too.

[fisharmor]

You've chosen option #1 -- the selfish route, got it, that's all you needed to say. Not judging, because I've chosen the same thing. But you can't fault me for trying to guilt trip into other people into participating. (And yes, I am a huge hypocrite and fine with that.)



That's fine, as long as you're aware we're basically pushing making the hard choices onto our children and their children. I'm fine with that because I'm a selfish $#@! and I admit it. I suppose you're fine with it too.

I agree: refusing to continue to play 3 card monte after the fourth or fifth loss is inherently selfish.

[TheTexan]

I agree: refusing to continue to play 3 card monte after the fourth or fifth loss is inherently selfish.

Doesn't matter if you play or not, the guy on the other side is still taking your money and you are flat out letting him do it without any opposition whatsoever.

I'm not saying you should keep playing his game. Don't play his game. Throw over the table. Yell rape and get him arrested by the authorities. Put laxatives in his soda. Do something.

But doing nothing, because it is easier, is 1000% the selfish choice. You're leaving your children a legacy of slavery, and you can't even tell them that you tried to oppose it. (Except perhaps, with your strongly worded posts of disagreement on RPF)

[Snowball]

If Kamala wins I hope it's gridlocked. I'm thinking Republicans are overconfident heading into this election, but I don't want the democrats to fully have power either.

highly likely both houses GOP even if Kommala wins

[CaptUSA]

Valid argument. There's a lot of potential upside (e.g., secession) to Harris winning. Pretty much the only reason I want Trump to win, is to just kick this can down the road a bit, but this country has got to go through some hard $#@! eventually for anything to change.

I don't think there's any scenario where Republicans "get their act together" while this country remains intact....

Just watched this podcast.

I think that's a valid thought process depending on your situation.

For me, I'm feeling the Tom/Dave argument. I see hope on the horizon. I don't think the old "republicans" will ever get their act together, but there may be a new blood taking over the brand. And we can expect a generation of politicians from here on out that will have to talk to podcasters and have long-form discussions. That could foster a whole new brand of libertarian populism. I also see the threat of censoring speech and what effect that will have on the politicians we get in the future.

There are two reasons I don't want to go out backwards like in the card game 500. First, is because I recognize the hardship on my children and grandchildren and would like to avoid that, if possible. Second, is because we have no assurances of what may emerge on the other side.

At least Trump buys us time. AND... whether or not I like it, the machine takes him as a repudiation.

[PAF]

Doesn't matter if you play or not, the guy on the other side is still taking your money and you are flat out letting him do it without any opposition whatsoever.

I'm not saying you should keep playing his game. Don't play his game. Throw over the table. Yell rape and get him arrested by the authorities. Put laxatives in his soda. Do something.

But doing nothing, because it is easier, is 1000% the selfish choice. You're leaving your children a legacy of slavery, and you can't even tell them that you tried to oppose it. (Except perhaps, with your strongly worded posts of disagreement on RPF)

Sleeping with a clear conscience is important to me. Sometimes doing nothing because "it is easier" is not the selfish choice. For example:

After Six Years of Tariffs, Small-Business Owners Aren't Eager for More

I’ll take some cost increase if I know that the tariffs are being used to advance America first. Trump uses tariffs as a tool. I support that.

Democracy: allowing people who don't have a single clue about running a small/medium business vote on small/medium business owners behalf for their own uninformed/politically-motivated selfish reason(s).

[TheTexan]

Sleeping with a clear conscience is important to me. Sometimes doing nothing because "it is easier" is not the selfish choice. For example:

I'm not able to parse the meaning of your point from your example.

[PAF]

I'm not able to parse the meaning of your point from your example.

Kick back, take a load off and think about it for a while ;-)

[TheTexan]

For me, I'm feeling the Tom/Dave argument. I see hope on the horizon. I don't think the old "republicans" will ever get their act together, but there may be a new blood taking over the brand.

Yea there's definitely a coalition forming. I'm not gonna call it this era's "Sons of Liberty", but who knows, it may be a precursor to that.

But yea, the coalition for sure is worth supporting, even if Trump isn't.

[PAF]

Yea there's definitely a coalition forming. I'm not gonna call it this era's "Sons of Liberty", but who knows, it may be a precursor to that.

But yea, the coalition for sure is worth supporting, even if Trump isn't.

Not for me it isn't. That "coalition" doesn't know the first thing about liberty. For the most part, all they see is a letter of the alphabet and a "win". The first mention about the Bill of Rights and spending gets chucked right out the door.

[TheTexan]

Not for me it isn't. That "coalition" doesn't know the first thing about liberty. For the most part, all they see is a letter of the alphabet and a "win". The first mention about the Bill of Rights and spending gets chucked right out the door.

Dave Smith, Tom Woods, Angela McArdle, don't know the first thing about liberty?

[CaptUSA]

Dave Smith, Tom Woods, Angela McArdle, don't know the first thing about liberty?

Michael Heise, Thomas Massie, Vivek?

[PAF]

Dave Smith, Tom Woods, Angela McArdle, don't know the first thing about liberty?

Dave Smith I have no use for.

Tom Woods, he's without a doubt a good one, and I do listen to him to hear his views. But even he's not a God.

Angela, it's best I keep my mouth shut.

I think and choose for myself and don't require a "leader".

[CaptUSA]

Not for me it isn't. That "coalition" doesn't know the first thing about liberty. For the most part, all they see is a letter of the alphabet and a "win". The first mention about the Bill of Rights and spending gets chucked right out the door.

You REALLY need to watch that episode. And try to at least understand it - even if you don't agree with it. Because I think we're talking about two different things.

[PAF]

Michael Heise, Thomas Massie, Vivek?

Tom and I get along very well. I don't know Heise. Vivek is another billionaire opportunist like Trump/Elon. F&ck Vivek.

I watched the entire episode. I don't comment on anything unless/until I read/listen to its entirety.