Clint Russell, Reed Coverdale & Andrew Stern | From Liberty To Lockdowns & Back | OAP #19
Chase Geiser is joined by Clint Russell of Liberty Lockdown, Reed Coverdale of Naturalist Podcast & Andrew Stern.
This conversation covered everything from Liberty and Libertarianism to the Deep State and government overreach during the lockdowns and beyond. We tackled the dollar as the global reserve currency, gold standards, Austrian Economics, and cryptocurrency including conversation ranging from the ideas of Dave Smith, John Schiff, Ron Paul, and many others.
EPISODE LINKS:
Clint's Twitter: https://twitter.com/LibertyLockPod
Reed's Twitter: https://twitter.com/ReedCoverdale
Andrew's Twitter: https://twitter.com/android_stern
Chase's Twitter: https://twitter.com/realchasegeiser
PODCAST LINKS:
Support Us On Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/IAmOneAmerican
Started it a year ago, right as the lockdowns really started to bite viciously and closed my mortgage company and started to scream into a microphone about how pissed I was.
I'm a private money lender, so I have to actually care about the underlying collateral as opposed to a bank who gets all their money from the Federal Reserve.
So I could no longer, you know, in good conscience, be a fiduciary for my investors and lend in that environment.
I had done a like a three best friends, best guy friends shit talking podcast that was just for fun.
And I was always directing it towards political topics, and neither of them were very pro that.
So we ended that a couple years prior to the lockdowns.
And then when lockdowns happened, I was like, well, I know, you know, I have the equipment.
I know how to do it.
So I need an outlet so I don't lose my mind.
And I just hopped on and started to do it.
And I had a very small Twitter following, but because of my threads about the lockdowns and how evil and awful and misguided they were, it's kept going viral.
It started to bring in more listeners and they just kind of snowballed.
Is like have a dinner table, invite my family, and I'll just host the podcast from the end of the table and just listen to what these idiots are talking about, you know, and like push back on them.
Thanksgiving dinner once a week and I'll tell them how dumb their ideas are.
I don't know.
It's just the thing is that our entire family and I guess Chase's in-laws all consume the exact, like the exact subset of information available online and in the media, right?
They watch the same three shows and they get the same chain of emails and stuff.
And so then these conversations wind up just being well, I don't know, I'd hate to talk too much smack about all of them, but you know, like just sort of a you know, a recap of exactly what's going on in the news.
And of course, that week, you and I and Chase reach out.
I'm outside the bubble.
I listen to Tim Cast, but I also listen to some left-wing ones and I get news from everywhere.
And then, you know, you kind of got to pop a hole in it.
But the reality is, is that because cancel culture is largely derived from the left at this period, they aren't allowed to speak to people like you because they can actually get canceled just for talking to someone who has beliefs that are disallowed.
Yeah, I found that I found the same thing on my show.
It's very, it's very challenging to get leftists to come on.
I'm sure, I'm sure that there's yeah, I guess, but I don't think I've maybe I have and I, you know, I probably have and just don't know it, but I don't think I've said anything cancelable.
I've been tweeting a lot of stuff that's antagonistic toward the FBI.
And a lot of my followers are like super MAGA followers because I had like a Tony Schaefer interview that went viral that was critical of the integrity of the election.
So I sort of got the whole like QAnon crowd very spontaneously and in a massive flourish.
And whenever I tweet anything against the FBI, it's like I get a rash of comments like, you know, I used to like what you had to say.
The moment that I remember that was really crazy was right after Trump's first impeachment.
You know, all the Republicans came from the deep state.
And then the fact that you have to say first, well, you know, the Republicans all hated the deep state, but then as soon as we airstrike Solomani and we had a reason to go to war, then they all instantly believed everything that was coming, you know, from that area of the government.
And in fact, I would go so far as to say that I think that they're probably several steps behind most proficient hackers and private defense firms are almost certainly better.
I think that my biggest concern is that it gives a false sense of security.
That's really what it does is that it makes the private enterprise space feel as if they don't have to protect themselves when that's a very good point.
In truth, they ought to be.
I mean, they ought to be taking this extremely seriously.
I mean, every time that we catch this falling industry that fumbled, we never give them the opportunity to really suffer and evolve and become more robust.
It's like every single freaking industry, they fuck up, the government steps in, and they never get any better.
Well, I mean, when the medium, when the median house home, excuse me, when the median home value increases 23 or 25% over the course of a year, and that year was a basically nationwide lockdown, it doesn't really make any sense why prices would go up because it's not like people were making money last year.
Well, no, it does explain a big chunk of it, but it doesn't explain why you wouldn't have collapsing prices in those cities, which to a large extent you do not.
And the real underlying fact of the tie that binds between those two disparate marketplaces is that interest rates are hyper low and you can't find yield anywhere.
So everyone is going to buy real estate because it's a place to store capital.
Well, that's you and about 50 million other people in this country that are all saying, are all having the same thought process to go, stock markets crazy overvalued.
I'm sick of living in this small apartment because I've been locked in it for a year.
I'm going to go buy something to try and try and get my leg on the economic ladder.
I mean, when they get loaded, when they get pumped full of cash from the central bank because of various stimulus packages and they have nowhere to put the money, they're more likely to just give out mortgages because even if the homeowner defaults on the mortgage, if the value of the home is greater, then there's very little low risk.
Unless, of course, the value of the home collapses, right?
So this is why, well, it's even if the value of the home collapses, they get bailed out.
So it's a, it's all the way across the board.
It's a, I mean, it's a like, it's a case study in moral hazard.
You have absolute definitional moral hazard across the board from the banking sector because they are able to borrow money for free, lend it up for little.
And yeah, I mean, this, it's, it's a recipe for disaster, like guaranteed recipe for disaster.
You cannot have starter homes that are at three quarters of a million dollars.
But I think he thinks he's he's he's posted quite a bit about the M1 money supply going through the roof, which it did last year.
And they tried to explain it away by saying it was just liquidation of existing savings.
And that accounts for like maybe a fourth of it, but it's still an astronomical amount of money that was printed last year.
And I think that I think that he's absolutely right.
It's just the thing that's really tricky is that it's, in my opinion, it's easy to get predictions right.
It's just really hard to get the timeline right for when it's going to play out.
So like Shift, for example, has been right for like 20 years, but the longer he's right without it actually happening, the more like a quack he seems, right?
Well, and the thing to consider too, though, the difference, and maybe I'm totally wrong about this.
So Clint, please correct me if I'm off base.
But last time, you know, the major problem was that the banks were lending money to consumers that should never have been given mortgages, right?
They're subprime, right?
Their credit was super low.
They were high risk individuals.
And I'm not sure that that's what's going on now in terms of the banks just recklessly lending the money to bad risks.
But the fact that inflation is such a major player.
And if interest rates go up, then yeah, housing values could collapse.
You know, that's, that's a major detriment.
But if people still, if people hoddle and still pay their mortgage, even if the home value is less than what they owe, you know, we're not going to see as much of a collapse as we did the last time.
I mean, they're going to work around this in any way possible.
What is a major, you know, significant difference is that there aren't nearly as many adjustable rate mortgages.
So we actually had like a ticking time bomb that we could watch the last go-around where like you could see, okay, how many of these mortgages are set to reset their rate higher in 12 months, 18 months, 24 months.
You could actually like time it.
That's how Michael Burry and these other guys knew that the implosion was coming.
This time we don't know because we don't have adjustable rate mortgages that are going to blow up the market because adjustable rate mortgages are very rare these days.
So is it more fundamentally based?
Yes, I would say it is.
However, prices are higher than they were in 2007, you know, significantly.
So you also have further away to fall.
So it's like, I don't know.
I mean, ultimately, it's just predicated on low interest rates.
If interest rates stay low, you know, if they stay at one and a half or two percent and you get a 3% mortgage for the next 10 or 15 years, yeah, we could be like Japan where you just have this like this dead market that just fucking kicks around forever.
I just don't believe that's going to happen.
I think that at some point the Federal Reserve will have to hike interest rates or we'll have a hyperinflationary death spiral.
I mean, if you basically what you're seeing right now is monetary velocity is picking up because there's so much money that's being pumped in the system.
So if the interest rates are lower than the inflation rate, then they're still losing money, even if they're gaining the actual unit number of dollars on the list.
But it's, it's really for them, it's not about that.
I mean, they set the rate wherever they want.
I mean, this is only short-term interest rates.
We're talking about long-term interest rates are set by bond buyers and things like that.
But yeah, it's basically as long as inflation kicks up.
I mean, if you have six or seven or eight percent inflation annually, which is what it looks like we have right now, I would say it's arguably significantly higher.
So this is my point is that as people, as consumers start to go, especially people that are on fixed income, like social security people, they go, I go to the grocery store, I go get my drugs, I go do my XYZ and I can't afford my life anymore.
You start to see people in the streets going, hey, fucking, this is a problem.
So that's why they have to hike interest rates because you'll have a populist revolt.
I've been saying, I said last night, you know, if the Federal Reserve, every day the Federal Reserve doesn't hike interest rates is a day closer to a Marxist revolution in this country.
I was just going to say, well, when the average net worth of a 30-year-old is $7,000 in the United States, it doesn't make any sense that they'd be paying $5,000 for an average million-dollar home.
And I don't, like I said, I'm not an economics expert, but I'm very worried about the state of the dollar as the world's reserve currency and how that's going to play out as China starts making moves in terms of the digital, the digital yawn that they're putting together.
And I think it seems to me from just my perspective that they are intentionally doing everything they can to subvert the status of the dollar.
And if we're not the world's reserve currency, we're really, really screwed because we've been sitting pretty for like 50 years, 60, 70 years off of basically the Ponzi scheme that is the dollar.
And it's why we're all rich, even though we don't produce anything that the world uses, right?
And we're just sitting at the top like Bernie Madoff of this scheme.
And it's like, you know, it works as long as GDP grows faster than inflation, but like, that's not going to happen with this, with these lockdowns and the economic pressures that we're having.
I think that we're really, really on the verge of something tragic.
So, I mean, we are, we are existing in stagflation.
We are in the 1970s again.
This is, that's what it is.
So it's just a matter of, you know, is this temporary?
Because that's what the Federal Reserve is claiming.
They're claiming that they could print $7 trillion, put it into existence.
They put 30% of the total monetary supply that's ever been in existence.
They did over the past 12 months.
So is inflation temporary?
I'm going to argue no.
I'm going to argue no.
Fuck no, it's not.
But they are going to say it is.
So we're going to find out who's right.
Clint, the guy who actually predicted the 08 real estate collapse or the Federal Reserve, who's told you that we're never going to have a collapse ever, ever, ever, ever, ever.
unidentified
No, Peter Schiff is the only guy who predicted the 08.
Well, but if you look at Michael Burry and what happened with the big short, he was correct in the timing because I knew when the variable interest rates were going to kick in.
However, he was very alarmed, if the movie's actually accurate to what happened historically or in the book that it's based off of.
There was the behavior in the market did not reflect what he predicted initially.
There was a delay and it was because they were lying and kicking the can too.
So it's very possible that Schiff is actually right in all of his claims and predictions, but the market is just totally fixed in such a way that it doesn't reflect the real environment in a real-time way.
It's just delayed.
And so, I mean, I can explain why he gets it wrong, even though he's right.
But it's important if you're going to be giving people advice that you explain to them that the Federal Reserve and the federal government have the capacity to kick this can a lot longer than you believe.
So maybe you shouldn't be buying gold in 2011.
You know, like that's where he fucks up because you should be clarifying to your listeners who are relying on you for an investment advice to know all of the potential factors that exist.
And it's completely naive of Schiff to have, you know, been advising an imminent collapse for 15 years straight when he knew as well as I did that the Federal Reserve was going to do what they did.
They printed a ton of money and they propped this shit up and they kept lowering interest rates to prop this shit up further.
And it's like, this is not rocket science.
Anybody with an Austrian economics background understands what the problem is, but they should also understand what the Keynesians will do in the meantime.
So I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know why.
I think I unfortunately think that too much of his business model is tied up in this.
Like he has avenues to profit from selling gold and selling all these things.
One thing to consider too is, and I could be, you know, from, I really appreciate Reid and Clint, your perspective on this as libertarians.
And I don't know where you are with this, but typically libertarians are very pro-gold standard, right?
On money.
It makes sense to me that gold would be a great investment in a hyperinflation situation, but it doesn't make sense to me that gold would be a good investment in the case of like a total currency collapse, right?
So like if our currency collapses, especially as the world reserve currency, and we've seen other currency collapses in history, but never as global reserve currencies, we're talking about a situation in which cigarettes, ammo, and canned food are going to be more valuable than gold in my mind.
But if it's just hyperinflation like the 70s, then things are still functioning just in a really inefficient and shitty and desperate way.
Then gold seems like a really good investment.
So do you think if there's going to be a collapse, like kind of shift kind of implies there's going to be a collapse?
It's like, I'm not sure that plugging around a bunch of gold is going to be as helpful as nine millimeter.
I mean, how do we, how does Saudi Arabia switch to supporting China or Russia or whoever ends up taking over instead of us after all the weapons deals we've done with them, all the, you know, stuff we've done against Saudi Arabia, sorry, against Iran for them.
You know, like, I mean, we've done, we're just so far down this tunnel.
I don't see how it just smoothly transitions to them going with something else.
But that being said, so if there's a total collapse and all these countries come together, the United Nations or whatever to try to figure out what to do and China's got all the gold, then it's going to make a hell of a lot of sense for the world to be like, if they trust China, which they may not, right?
But for the world to be like, listen, we're going to make it the yuan because they have all the gold and they're going to back it by gold for real this time because the United States basically lied and didn't after a number of years.
And so I'm thinking that that's probably what we would see happen in the event of a dollar collapse.
But that's just my speculation as a layman who's read a lot of Wikipedia pages.
Oh, we're the, I mean, I think we're the number one consumer for sure.
So, um, but we also produce a decent amount too.
So like it's not as if we're, you know, a dead economy.
Like we, we do exist and we do produce value.
And, um, but to answer your question, no, the US dollar would certainly not be the reserve currency given how, you know, profligate we've been with our spending.
I mean, anybody who's trying to maintain purchasing power with their reserves wouldn't put it in the U.S. dollar with them inflating it like they are.
But, you know, historically, buying U.S. bonds has been a very good investment.
It's been very secure.
So I think that that, like, there's something about trends, like the longer they persist, the harder they are to break.
So, but when they break, they break viciously.
So that's, that's how I envision it.
It's like everyone has relied on the U.S. dollar and U.S. treasuries to maintain their purchasing value of their assets for, you know, decades and decades and decades.
So it's very, they're very slow to adapt.
But the smarter countries, the ones that see this trend starting to become tenuous, they are, they are positioning themselves, as you said, like China with Yuan and other nations, Russia as well, to try and fill that void when we collapse.
I personally don't think it's going to be a snap from one to the other.
I think that it's more likely that we'll have a bulkanization where we have a polarized globe where you have XYZ countries that are afraid of us.
We're giving them military support.
They still trade in the dollar because they're our bitch, just putting it bluntly.
And then you have all these other nations that will use the yuan and maybe the ruble or whatever.
unidentified
So, I mean, that's kind of how I see it going too.
But yeah, I mean, it's the, there's just a ton of rare earth minerals that are used in technological development.
So I think that like you could, like, I don't think it's a bad idea to diversify into a portfolio that would hold, you know, seven or eight of them and just kind of bank on one of them being, you know, the primary driver behind that new technological innovation.
Like if you had some capacity for cold fusion, but it needed, you know, so much cobalt.
Like if you owned a shitload of cobalt, you'd be like, dope.
So yeah, that's, that's kind of how I hedge against this stuff because I'm not enough of a technological expert to know what's going to win out, but I agree with you that there will be other assets.
So first of all, first of all, I want to talk about the legitimacy or potential of crypto, but also I'm interested to hear your thoughts on Bitcoin versus other cryptocurrencies because there are a lot of options and a lot of technological advantages and disadvantages, depending on where you want to invest.
Yeah, I mean, I'm again, since I'm not a technological specialist, like I don't, I don't read code.
So I can't, I like, I have to read about these different coins from other experts that do understand the underlying programming because I simply can't do it for myself.
But I believe that there are many, you know, alternatives that hold additional properties that have tremendous value.
You know, Monero and these other ones that are privacy coins, I think are very intriguing.
I like Bitcoin a lot just because it's the one that, like I said, with trends, it's hard for people to break out of it.
So if people believe that Bitcoin is going to be the replacement for gold for a store of value, it's going to be really hard to get people off that.
When I first got into crypto, yeah, I think there's a fundamental question here.
And I think it's why is gold valuable?
Because if gold is valuable because it's very difficult to duplicate, it's very hard to inflate the market with gold by mining a bunch of it.
If that's the reason that gold is valuable and not some other reason that we ascribe to it, some social construct of, oh, it's shiny or pretty or good jewelry, then Bitcoin, you can make an argument that Bitcoin is just or potentially just as valuable as gold because it maxes out at 20 million units or whatever it is that it's at the max out.
So it is an anti-inflationary currency.
It's not a fiat in that sense that it can just keep bringing it.
So if you think that gold is valuable because it is like this fixed, precious, limited asset in a way that nothing else really was a better substitute throughout all of history, then you can make a case for Bitcoin being just as valuable.
But if that's not the reason, then you have to be cautious too.
Chase is effectively saying, how long have we just been relying on the social contract around gold and not really relying on any of its underlying utility?
And so you can't say that you could just make Clintcoin.
There is no social contract that has sort of built from the ground up in Clintcoin, but it has luckily built in Bitcoin.
There is a social contract, but there are competitors.
There's a lot of mining infrastructure for it, too.
So just get, you know, and I think that 25% of the world's silver or something like that is in landfills, just thrown away with little computers and shit.
Do you think Elon Musk sees everything that you just said and a lot of his behavior surrounding Dogecoin and sort of the, I don't know, just the general irreverence towards how serious the Bitcoin maxis take it has been to sort of inoculate everybody to this kind of shitty behavior.
We can't say that he's he's a genius and that was an accident or like you have to you have to ascribe really bad intentions.
If you believe that he understands Bitcoin as well as I would assume he does and he and he understands why Dogecoin is such a fucking obvious pump and dump scam.
I don't understand how he like all of this paired together paints him as a really bad actor.
I've got mixed feelings about it because I thought it was very bizarre that they came out and said that they were going to temporarily halt receiving Bitcoin in exchange for Teslas due to environmental concerns, given that I don't think fiat is really any better for the environment.
And I don't think that not using Bitcoin is going to keep China from mining a ton of it like it is.
And I'll also their electric cars that they're making right now are primarily, I believe, I could be wrong, at least substantially fueled by electricity generated with fossil fuels, right?
And the U.S. military, the U.S. military is responsible for the most carbon production.
The petrodollar is the reason that we've been such a fucking dominant force militarily.
If Elon can't connect these dots and say, like, okay, maybe getting away from fiat, no matter the electricity consumption it requires to go to switch over to a Bitcoin service, like that's weird.
He's trying to get us off the planet because he thinks it's going to burn up and he's trying to make electric cars to keep it from burning up.
I think he's a true believer in that.
But I do think that some of the Tesla dumping Bitcoin was motivated by kind of getting out ahead of the news cycle.
think he probably saw what was coming down the pike and they were saying you know bitcoin is bad for the environment it uses more energy than entire countries and he's like i can't be seen to be the fucking tesla guy and supporting this thing that's using more energy than countries i'm going to get out ahead of this and say we're going to stop accepting it for right now i would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that three months prior he was the guy who said i'm going to accept bitcoin yeah i don't know man did he did he discover the electric consumption over those 90 days did he buy billions dollars of bitcoin and
not know about the electric like this there's no my point was simply that he might have been making a pr move to get out ahead of that news cycle right yeah he he very well might have but i'm just saying if he knew that that was going to be like he didn't know it three months prior it's just it's just weird i don't know i don't know it is very weird it's been very entertaining i wonder what happened with facebook and their token remember they made the libra coin and then it never went to market after they got interrogated basically by uh congress and um some uh um hearing
hopefully oh yeah i remember i would imagine that the uh the federal reserve said hey you know how we're financing your entire operation you know and the cia came to him and they're like hey you know how how we pay you trillions of dollars so that we can spy on all your users uh that ends that ends if you create some maybe that happened to musk maybe they're like listen you know environmental contracts you're getting from the federal government for tesla it's like if you keep pushing this bitcoin thing those are all going to go away it's a distinct possibility and that's one i do not overlook at all
moment of silence yeah for for doge all right doge coin investors i bought a little bit of it i think it's cool it's fun it's just fun don't don't worry i'm not an idiot as long as it's just fun as long as i want to hear a reed story because reed i don't know i don't know much about you other than you have an awesome mustache that's all you need to know but
well um all i can say clint is get ready for freedom fest you're it's weird you're gonna be a celebrity i was a celebrity at work fest it was strange like uh i i went up there with my dad because he lives in new hampshire and i said hey dad you know they might there might be some people who know who i am here they're like they're over 200 people came up and shook my hand and wanted pictures wanted autographs and it was it was weird so bring merchandise you know be ready but awesome how many shirts should i bring
man i mean freedom fest is bigger right aren't there gonna be tons of people there or there it will be but it won't be so mises caucus centric so like i don't more like right wing in general right and it's kind of a right let's not even know what freedom fest is will you guys enlighten me yeah freedom fest is just like the big annual kind of quasi libertarian slash libertarian conservative uh convention christy noem and dr drew and uh you know dave smith tom woods a bunch of people will be there talking it's like a four or
five day thing so yeah uh reading the last couple of months was there was there a was there a last couple of weeks was there some big news about some leadership shifts oh yeah crazy reed can recap that if you want yeah what happened reed well i answer your original question i've been on the scene for like i started my podcast actually the same month clint did i think it was may of last year um and then we both kind of started rising at the same time it's all been kind of funny watching um right around the beginning of this year is when i really started taking off
um and uh dave kind of brought me to the spotlight uh he i ended up becoming friends with him and he gave me a big uh big platform and here i am and i'm uh i'm a truck driver libertarian i do most of my shows in my truck it's kind of my shtick i don't think anyone else really does that at least live streaming on youtube um and i'm just trying to get people to open their minds talk to each other stop thinking so dogmatically and try to work together where we have uh areas of agreement but
um yeah and the party um so basically what happened is in march i think it was the new hampshire libertarian party had their elections and they over and they over they more than doubled in size, and they had a ton of new people come in from what's called the Mises caucus.
And they decided they were going to elect a chair who wasn't from the Mises caucus just to show crossover and good faith and everything.
And she seemed kind of chill with them.
So they made her the chair of the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire.
And everything seemed to be going fine.
And then there's a guy who was working on the social media team and he put out a few tweets.
One, and one was, what was it?
John McCain's brain tumor saved more lives than Anthony Fauci.
Another one was about child labor.
He put out like four or five of them, and they were all very hard in the paint.
And I guess the chair of New Hampshire freaked out about this.
And so she decided she was just going to try to start a new New Hampshire Libertarian Party and just disaffiliate all the old members and then bring all the data from that party over to her party without any due process.
And then she reached out to the chair of the National Party and he said he was going to recognize the new Libertarian Party that she was creating as the official Libertarian Party of New Hampshire.
A bunch of people from his area of the party resigned.
The pragmatist caucus dissolved.
It was just crazy.
Like, I mean, it was the best case scenario because the New Hampshire Libertarian Party got all their members back and all their data back.
And then the pragmatist caucus disappeared.
And all of these are all these bad actors just left.
And so, I mean, it was actually the greatest thing that could have happened because everyone got exposed.
Everyone showed their hand.
And then, you know, like Spike Cohen and Justin Amash, who are not specifically Mises caucus members, they even came out and said, Hey, you guys can't do this.
You know, this is, we have a process for this.
You can't just disaffiliate a party because you don't like how they're speaking.
So, in my, you know, a lot, a lot of people were saying, like, oh, the Libertarian Party's done.
We're never going to be able to unite again.
And in my opinion, that was great.
Like, you got rid of all the, you know, all the backstabbing losers.
And then everyone who had principles kind of united and said, nope, you can't do this.
I don't know what, honestly, because I'm so deep in it now.
Like, I feel like I went from an orbiter of the libertarian space to kind of like a part of it that I can't, I can't sense if more people are paying attention to the Libertarian Party than they used to or not.
I had two, I had two of Dave's biggest detractors on my show for episode 100, and they went really vicious against him and I fucking despised it.
But nonetheless, the reason I bring it up is like people were, I mean, outraged.
Like there was, there was major, major pushback against these guys.
So I think that that showed to me that, you know, even on, you know, Dave wasn't on my show.
It was just other guys, one of them being Vin Armani or formerly Vin Armani, now Cyprian, which you may or may not know, and Matt Erickson.
And they were just launching into Dave.
And it's like that, even that can go viral.
So it's like, Dave is that big of a figure that a conversation about him from some detractors can now become kind of a viral community discussion thing.
So it's, it's getting, it's getting intense.
I am a personal, you know, total believer in Dave's character.
And I think that he can do great things.
And I think that we need a Ron Paul 2.0.
I think he can do it.
I've said this a thousand times, but I just want to re-emphasize that for my listeners that thought I didn't push back against Vin and Matt hard enough.
Well, and I think part of what's going on too is that there are a tremendous amount of people in the United States that are Republicans because they perceive the Republican Party as the party of freedom.
But that becomes increasingly obvious that it's not the case.
And the more and more obvious that becomes, the more appealing libertarianism becomes because where else is everybody supposed to go?
And I'm not a libertarian in the sense that, you know, I believe there's a place for a central, central government.
I'm like, I'm a John Locke guy.
I just, I, I, I buy that argument.
And so libertarian isn't like a perfect fit for me, but damn, it's a hell of a lot better than what we're doing now in the direction that we're going.
And I think there's way more common ground between what I believe and what libertarians believe than there are differences.
And, you know, I just, I would like to see even if the, even if the Libertarian Party wasn't elected for major positions, I still think there's a tremendous amount of power in the Libertarian Party to pull conservatives back to liberty.
And since you guys aren't in the libertarian space, I want to ask you, do you think that it's a false dichotomy to think that you have to either be mellow enough to appeal to people?
Or let me see.
How should I frame this?
Like, I'll just say, I think the best way to get votes is to be extremely principled and loud about what you believe.
And I think you can do that without being autistic.
Do you remember that viral clip from 2016 where Gary Johnson and Austin Peterson and all the libertarians are on stage and they get asked about driver's licenses and people are flipping out about driver's licenses and Gary Johnson goes, well, you know, I think people ought to have some sort of licensing to drive and everyone just was like, boo, boo.
So contrast that with Ron Paul, who was not at all moderate about what he believed.
He didn't water down anything, but he knew how to present the message.
He knew which parts would resonate with people without sacrificing any of his beliefs.
So do you guys think if someone can do that, if they can be extremely principled, but smart about their message, that they're also going to be more successful as a candidate than someone who kind of just comes in and is like, well, you know, we might tweak this and we'll do this.
I've owned an advertising business for almost over five years now.
And I've read all the advertising books.
I've studied all the advertising gurus.
I've went back to Confessions of an Advertising Man by Ogilvy from the 50s.
I mean, I am entrenched in advertising.
I fucking love advertising.
All right.
And one of the primary principles of advertising, which I don't think the Republicans apply to politics in the same way that the Democrats do, which is why the Democrats win, is that people make buying decisions emotionally and they justify later logically.
Right.
And our problem is our problem is we are so focused, libertarians and conservatives alike are so focused on having the best argument that we just totally disregard the emotional side of the debate.
So like I see like Elizabeth Warren and some of these other Democratic candidates and they say the dumbest shit ever, but it's way more emotionally appealing, right?
Like, you know, billionaire Jeff Bezos, his wealth increased 300% last year.
Meanwhile, you know, the average American spent 25% of their income on taxes.
Like that makes an emotional case, but it's obviously it's more complicated than that, right?
So, so the it depends on what the zeitgeist did.
This is why it's so hard.
It's not a fixed problem with one solution.
It depends on what the spirit of the times is, right?
So when Hitler came to power in the late 20s, 30s, we're seeing 30% unemployment in Germany.
And everybody, even though they're wrong, all the native Germans think it was the Jews' fault that they lost World War I. And that dude came up there and without any sort of actual logical argument was so appealing emotionally because he resonated so well with the Zeitgeist that he was able to become a dictator within just a few years of having sort of a minority office in government, right?
And we saw the same thing with Obama, for example, right?
He never really even said anything.
It was just hope and change, right?
People just wanted hope and change after 2008.
And with Trump, for example, you know, he had his own brand.
He brought his own brand to the presidential election.
People didn't vote for him because he was a Republican.
They voted for him because he was Donald fucking Trump.
And so I think if libertarians want to see success, they're going to have to have a candidate, like maybe like a Dave Smith, right?
The reason he's so badass is because his brand is awesome.
He was on Joe Rogan.
He didn't sound like a dumbass.
He was cool.
He looked good.
He looks like a celebrity.
And he's not bought by anybody.
He's not full of shit in the same way that all these politicians are.
So I think we need to focus on, we need to focus on understanding what the zeitgeist says, what the spirit of the times is, and then how can we brand candidates or make candidates very conscious of that and aware of that?
And every single thing they utter, publish, produce, do has to be with that in mind in order for it to work.
Oh, I was just going to say, additionally, the reason that I got involved, the reason my show was called Liberty Lockdown is because there was no politician that was railing against the lockdowns like they should have been.
Dave Smith has been doing that since day one, and he will do that on the campaign trail.
He will assure no lockdowns will ever happen again.
Now, will that make him alienated to the left?
Sure, some of them, some of the more deluded ones.
But my hope is that as you get further and further away from COVID and the lockdowns, that we will have more and more analysis of what we did to ourselves in that period.
And even those that were horrified and believed wholeheartedly that the lockdowns were necessary, some of them will start to question those assumptions.
And I think that he can play off of that and even grab some from the left to add to his base.
So all the way around, I agree with your entire analysis, Chase.
Yeah, I think what Bernie has done, though, is proven that he's just a complete fraud.
I mean, he's not, he's not a socialist.
He's a corporatist.
He's a warmonger.
I mean, all his rhetoric is just rhetoric.
If you look at his voting record and who he urges all his supporters to vote for, I mean, he's his endorsements alone should have made him just be pilloried by his supporters.
Donald Trump is more anti-establishment than Bernie and he was the president.
You know, that's pretty bad.
But yeah, I mean, I think those hardcore fans are sick of being lied to.
They're sick of having someone who talks the talk and then at every turn doesn't walk the walk and just, you know, bends over and does whatever the establishment wants.
And, you know, that goes for Trump supporters too, a lot of Trump supporters that really believed in Trump.
That stimulus bill right before Christmas last year, where he looked like he was going to veto it and he stood up and then he ended up just caving and signing it.
And then he didn't do anything about Julian Assange or Edward Snowden.
You know, he lost a lot of people there too.
So people are sick of people.
They're sick of leaders who tell them one thing and then do another.
So someone like Dave, who has a record of always saying what he thinks all the time, you know, I've been in lots of private messages with him.
Whatever he says to me privately, he ends up saying later in public.
That means a lot.
I mean, because it's easy to talk to your friends and be like, oh, man, this is how I think.
And then you go out there and say something completely different.
He doesn't do that.
So I'm with Clint.
Like I think, I think Dave's the man.
You know, I used to be kind of sympathetic toward Amosh and I like Amosh.
He's okay, but he's not a zeitgeist at all.
And, you know, it's just like trying to force a shoe that doesn't fit.
Dave actually gets it.
He gets how people feel and he tells the truth all the time.
And I think the one thing that he's going to have to do is he's going to have to understand and realize, and maybe he already does, that there's half the country that is passionate about freedom and there's the other half of the country that's passionate about safety.
And so the challenge with the Libertarian Party as a whole, which has been a challenge historically, and Dave is going to have to face if he runs as a serious candidate, is that we have to figure out a way to frame freedom as not antithetical to compassion.
So there's this idea, this feeling that libertarians are like, I don't give a fuck about you.
I'm just doing my thing and I got my guns and I'm going to protect my property and my family.
And if you're disabled, then you can go to hell.
Right.
And so we, I don't know what the solution is, but we have to figure out a way to make the opposition see that freedom is actually more just, see that freedom is actually safer.
See that freedom is actually going to help those who are most vulnerable more than these other government entities or programs that we've been trying to push for the past 50 years.
Because all I'm going to say is the Democrats have been in power for a hell of a long time and things seem to keep getting worse for the most vulnerable among us and better for the wealthiest among us.
And it's not because of capitalism and it's not because there's too damn much freedom in this country.
Well, this is exactly why the black vote increased for Donald Trump.
It's because people are starting to realize that they've been lied to for so many decades.
And they're like, wait a second, you know, the guy that you've been telling us is a racist Hitler reincarnate is doing more for the black community than all of these leftists that promised us shit for the past 50 years.
Yeah, that's the truth.
And what you're really describing is that we're going to have to break the monopoly on emotional appeals that the left holds.
And I think that Dave can do that because he speaks with passion and fire and concern for the nation and for the people.
And that will cross over.
Like people will feel that.
And I think that it's really important because, you know, I think that's why Ron was actually really successful too, is that like, yeah, you're right.
He didn't come across as a dangerous person.
He didn't come across as, you know, probably vicious as Dave can be at times.
But his passion for liberty and his belief in the beauty of it and the, you know, just the beneficial nature of it for everyone involved shine through to anybody.
I mean, it reached Dave.
Dave exists because of Ron Paul.
Dave was a leftist before Ron Paul.
So like this is this is what can happen again.
And I really, I believe it's going to happen.
Like we are on the precipice of this happening and I am fucking thrilled because we literally don't have a minute to spare.
I really hope Dave spends as much time as possible lifting up more podcasters because from my perspective, the biggest roadblock.
Yeah, it's true.
My perspective, the biggest roadblock for most ordinary people that are not in the liberty movement and just sort of been watching from the outside, the biggest roadblock from them is not any particular candidate, but just sort of not knowing what exactly the liberty movement stands for.
What are the principles?
They don't understand the benefits of it.
So they do, it just comes across as I don't give a shit if somebody hits you with their car.
They don't need a driver's license and we should have open borders.
We're not at the level where outsiders are hearing us, but give us time.
I mean, I am like dedicated to becoming the Tim Kess, the JRE experience of the libertarian space.
Like we need it.
We have to have a bigger umbrella that allows more people to fucking know what we actually believe in.
And most importantly, we have to allow them to understand that the blue-pilled libertarians that actually exist in power don't represent the libertarian movement.
They really don't.
Like no disrespect to Amash, but his whole thing with Trump and the impeachment was a fucking disaster because it demonstrated that he didn't identify that the deep state was against that presidency and that they were trying to sink him.
And I think that was a huge mistake because you had this opportunity with 75 million people that are now, you know, disenchanted with democracy.
Now, now you have, you want to have Justin Amash represent the Libertarian Party, the guy who pushed for impeachment of Trump.
No, thank you.
That's not going to fucking work.
Whereas Dave spent a full year and a half demonstrating definitively how corrupt that investigation was.
But, but, you know, it was like the rage against the machine in me, you know, like the, like the 16-year-old in me that was like, fuck you.
I won't do what you tell me.
I was like rocking that back in my mind.
But then like I thought about it.
I'm like, man, like this is really, really going to come back to hurt the conservative movement.
And then on the third hand, what really pissed me off was how everybody, all the leaders that were going to object to the certification of the election, you know, it's a symbolic gesture, but they were going to do it out of concerns for election integrity.
They all buckled because of January 6th as if January 6th had anything to do post facto with what happened in November.
And so I just, it just became very clear to me that both parties, the leadership of both parties, they're just sellouts and they pander and they do what's politically convenient, not really based on principle at all.
And so, you know, I think that it was inappropriate the way that people behaved on the 6th.
And I think that, you know, there were some Antifa instigators.
I think the FBI was involved as well.
I think there were some Trump supporters that crossed the line, but it was by no means an insurrection.
Well, let me let me make the only pro argument for one six since no one else has here.
Um, I think that it's it's a big mistake for the conservatives to look at that as a negative because ultimately the the left dominated all you know civil uh disobedience over the those 12 months.
That was the only time you guys did.
And what did it show you?
It showed you that the left will have charges dropped against them and you guys will have the book thrown against you.
You know, I mean, Hay Rock was some spirit of 1776 on that one.
And I respected the hell out of it.
So now, now, can you have a pragmatic argument as to whether or not it's efficacious?
Sure, you can.
But I really think that anyone that believes that Biden and company weren't going to roll out an anti-domestic terrorism bill, regardless of what happened that day.
I mean, there was no one that died that day other than Ashley Babbitt.
I think it does a little bit because, you know, they were going to do vaccine passports anyways, but there was just so much social pushback against it that they didn't do it.
So, I mean, the social acceptance of these things does matter to a point.
I know we are not the government, but we sort of allow the government to become what it becomes.
Like, it's, it's, I always make this point that everybody imagines that the first thing that will happen if they try and put down the insurrection is that the actual U.S. army will roll down the streets in tanks.
But if you look around at how things progress towards tyranny over time, it doesn't, it's not just soldiers that come in.
It's your neighbor starts tyrannizing you first and ratting you out to the cops.
You need your, I hate to say this.
I'm not going to shoot my neighbor, everybody.
Jack, I'm not shooting my neighbor, but you need your, you need your AR-15 for your damn neighbor and the mob of people that live in your neighborhood that are going to start, you know, that try and send you off to the gulag.
That's why, that's why no totalitarian government can do it with military force alone.
They have to have, they all they have to sow division within the people.
If there's no division within the people, they go away.
If there's division of the people, we go away.
So they have to find some way to come together and realize that we aren't each other's enemies just because we believe in different economic models or whatever the fuck else.
The people that have the power, the people that have the printing press are the actual enemy.
Those are the people that you need to be scaring the shit out of.
Stop yelling at your neighbor because they're not woke enough, you pussy.
They will just create very lucrative buyback programs and they'll make it very difficult to get new guns.
So I think that what they're going to, in my opinion, what they're probably going to try to do is just get it so that it's so enticing for a majority of gun orders to just sell it back to the state.
If you, instead of declawing a tiger, if you just put him in a cage or a big cage where he feels like he's still in charge, you're not going to go in with flyers to declaw him, you know, like why?
This is why Reed and I, I think, agreed that Trump's presidency was kind of a disaster during the lockdowns because he pacified the tiger.
The tiger was the conservatives that had, had it been Hillary Clinton that said, hey, all you conservatives that believe in liberty, you have to stay home for a year and close your business and go bankrupt.
Imagine they would have been like, oh, fuck you, bitch.
Had he not allowed the lockdowns, I don't think we have what we saw over the summer.
So he holds the responsibility for putting Fauci in power and listening to that fucking liar and letting us have all of our liberties stripped away.
And then you have all of these people who are now getting government stipends to stay home and not work that are like, oh, someone got killed and I saw it on the internet.
And now there's people on the street and I have nothing to do.
I don't think this should even get to that point if it weren't for the lockdown.
So I think that that was his by far.
If that, if he had not locked down this country, I think he'd still be president.
Yeah, plus the federal, you know, addition to the unemployment so that made it so that it was like more profitable to not work for a huge amount of young people.
And those that huge amount of young people all of a sudden hire anybody.
I mean, this is all a product of the Federal Reserve.
But Trump, in his position of power, had the capacity to really put the brakes on it.
Or at least, and I've said this from the jump, like even if you believe that the president is toothless, which I think largely they are, he could have gone out every like, you know how you remember during the summer when he was doing those daily press briefings with Fauci by his side?
He could have gone out every day saying any governor that locks down, like especially after he realized it was bullshit, because I think he realized it was bullshit like three months in.
If he had just gone out and said, any governor that persists with these lockdowns unnecessarily, I am going to remove federal funding from your state.
Like he could have, or he could have threatened it, or he could have just gone out there and said every day he has a press conference and he says, this isn't the American way.
This isn't what we do here.
And if he just kept going out there and saying that, he would have had my vote and he didn't get my vote.
And I know there's a lot of people that were fucking furious about the lockdowns that would have voted for him, even though I hated a bunch of things about him if he had just, you know, strongly advocated against it.
And the thing that bothers me so much about the lockdowns is, you know, on one hand, it makes sense from a pragmatic standpoint that, you know, if there's a, if there's a viral crisis, you know, lockdowns make sense.
But on the second hand, on the other hand, it's like, if there was, if people were really afraid of this pandemic, you wouldn't have to mandate them to lock down.
Like, if my brother or if Andrew died of COVID, I would have stayed home.
You know, we're the same age, we're the same guy, basically, right?
I would have been like, I'm not going anywhere regardless of whether or not there was a mandate.
And I think the reason that the lockdowns were so controversial is because this pandemic was so vanilla in terms of its like danger and risk.
And it was so obvious early on who was actually at risk and who wasn't in terms of like old, obese, whatever, that it was just stupid that we were locked down at all.
I mean, you're telling me that I can't go to church and I have like a less than half a percent of chance of dying if I get COVID and I may not even get it.
Not to mention the states that didn't have lockdowns early on, we saw the exact same numbers when it came to like foot traffic and vehicle traffic.
People were already taking the precautions necessary before the government came in and said, hey, take these precautions because we were scared to death.
Well, I was here in Florida during spring break and the 20-something year olds were out on the boats just raging and pouring beer down each other's throats and spreading COVID like that's the thing.
But we didn't know.
You got to remember back at that time, no one really had any idea whether or not this thing was going to be so bad that it overwhelmed the hospital system.
So a major argument wasn't that everyone's going to die.
It's that there's actually some critical capacity to the hospitals.
And if we reach that, then you're going to die of cancer because all the beds are going to be taken.
But if you actually look at the states that didn't lock down versus those that did, you still had very comparable infection rates as well as fatality rates.
It's just, it's just nonsense.
The states that locked down the hardest actually had worse fatality rates, including New York, which was like a fucking death, the epicenter of death.
And then that was largely because it was centrally planned, because you had the governor orchestrating having the elderly housed with COVID patients.
It was, it was psychotic.
And like, all you had to do was allow people to make their own decisions.
They would have made much better decisions.
This is the, this is the power of the free market.
This is why we believe in capitalism, because we believe that having decentralized decision-making creates the best outcome.
And why would we not believe that during a pandemic?
It makes no sense.
It's counter to what we believe fundamentally.
So it's just, I mean, the evidence demonstrated it too.
And if you allow people to make their own decisions, then it eliminates the culpability of any central government.
It's like you get sick.
It's not my fault.
But now there were so many regulations that whenever anybody dies, people are pointing fingers at leaders and politicians.
It's like, you know, if we would have just been hands-off, then all the deaths would have been whoever, you know, whatever decision they made or just, you know, natural tragedy, but not actual bureaucratic culpability.
Whenever there's a social rift, when something like this is going on, I always have my eyes open looking for, you know, some ulterior motive.
So if you look at all of the money that has been spent throughout the last year, like going to giant corporations, going to overseas governments, going to pet projects, most people were not talking about that at all.
We were talking about masks.
And I felt like they knew masks were bullshit earlier than, you know, I mean, super early on, but they realized the social rift that was causing.
And I'm not saying masks don't matter.
Like I don't like masks and I think it's had an effect on young children that's been bad.
But compared to all the upward transfer of wealth that's been going on, the masks are kind of a dumb thing that I felt like they really wanted to distract us with.
And they saw that conservatives hated them, liberals loved them.
So I feel like they really pushed the mask thing just to get us to fight about that instead of, you know, bailouts that what they were able to do was they were able to brand the mask as a political statement.
And this is, this is what the Democrats do that's so smart and they do it all the time.
And so when you're out in public and you see everyone wearing a mask, there's just kind of this undertone that, you know, maybe they're voting for Biden.
Right.
And I think that it was a political, I think it was a campaign move, if nothing else.
I think at first, you know, there was like, hey, we don't know enough about this virus.
Just wear a fucking mask.
And then it became so political that the Democrats just rode with it.
And then they started having people wear two masks, even though there's no reason behind it.
And it was just to show it was like walking around with a campaign sign.
I mean, towards the end there, you might as well have been wearing a Biden t-shirt if you were wearing a mask.
Yeah, I mean, but now like we're getting to the point where mask mandates are ending.
People aren't wearing masks anymore.
And so then everyone's like, yay, everything's back to normal.
And it's like, no, I mean, the masks weren't the worst thing that has happened over the last year.
There's been way more damage.
It's going to take forever to recover from.
So it's almost like it was just, hey, why don't you guys squabble about this?
And then we're going to, you know, facilitate all this crazy wealth transfer and you guys are going to forget about it and you're not even going to remember it after it's over.
Like they, cause if you read Fauci's emails, or if you just listen to the motherfucker back in April, he said, you don't need a mask.
It's not going to save you because he understands, you know, how this stuff works, you know, like, and then, and then all of a sudden he changes his tune and then it's one mess and it's two masks and it's three, four, whatever.
And then he shifts back to like, okay, well, you know, as soon as he's being skewered by Rand Paul, he's like, well, of course a mask isn't going to protect everybody.
I mean, no one ever said that.
I never lied about that.
And it's like, the guy's been on every side of this topic.
So you can no longer pin him down.
So to me, what it adds up to is obvious political gamesmanship.
And I don't, I don't know, you know, like the exact intention.
I think you're right that it was certainly a distraction.
But it was it was a good one to use because it was important.
I mean, it was for anyone that values freedom, it felt like you were being muzzled.
And I completely understood it.
Like I was viscerally upset all year because I live in California.
I didn't think it was, I didn't think it would, but it really did get to me psychologically toward the end there.
Yeah.
It's subtle how it kind of creeps on you, but there's like this sort of like drudgery sort of depression that just kind of creeps up after you don't see people for a year or look at their face and you have all these rules.
Like definitely there was a psychological impact.
And I'm not, you know, convinced that it was necessarily intentional, but it was definitely a symptom of the policy decisions that were made.
The fact that it was persistent, the fact that they continued with it, that's where I get to the point of like, okay, this is, this is a decision that you're making consciously because you now have it.
I would totally agree with you, but this sort of like conspiratorial mind that they, it was, it was run of the mail everyday Democrats down the street from me that were pumping it.
It wasn't just Fauci.
They believed they were, it was the social taboo of taking it off because my neighbors don't like it.
It takes one guy who's been given the authority to tell everybody what to do.
And the left loves authority figures and he was the top guy.
So when he said it, that's all that's all that was required.
I don't think it's like a grand conspiracy.
I think you could have five people in the political sphere that sit down and they say, hey, we can do XYZ and we're going to have half the country is going to do this gleefully.
And they will talk shit to anybody who goes who gets out of line with it.
So in 1984, it's like this oppressive government that just controls every single thing you do every day is always spying on you, always monitoring you, where Brave New World, they're more hands off.
They're just like, if you give people what they want, then they won't give a shit about anything and you can take their rights away and they won't even notice.
I'm always way more weary when the government tries the Brave New World stuff because the 1984 stuff just doesn't last.
Like people get sick of it after a while.
They're like, fuck this.
I'm not doing this anymore.
If they can convince you that they're there to help you, which was like the $600 stimulus payments or, you know, if they can make a like a fake enemy that they're scaring you with and telling you that they're protecting you from it, that is always way more effective than trying to subjugate you through a boot on your neck.
So like the mask thing, I don't know.
I mean, I didn't like it at all, but it just never, even though it bothered me, I was like, this just isn't going to last.
People are going to, they're going to shuffle it off eventually.
They're not going to take it.
It's the, it's the stuff where they can convince you that they are, that they are helping you or they're making your life better that type of stuff always the most galling one going on lately is joe biden opening up the economy and giving us back this booming economy thank you yeah so much job creation yeah it's amazing yeah yeah well it's it's that it's also mmt it's making people feel like they have you know wealth that's imaginary um you also have critical race theory which i
has become this hot topic that uh there's a huge amount of disagreement as to how serious it is i think it's very serious i think if you're teaching children that like there are enemies all around you that's a fucking terrible uh principle for for a young child to here's the deal critical race theory itself is in my opinion a fad but installing the psychological thought process of oppressor versus oppressed that's permanent and
the problem that the republicans are the the issue the mistake the republicans are making is that they're just attacking critical race theory from a race standpoint by saying it's racist and what they're doing is they're just saying look your teachers are oppressing you by lying to you so it's actually still marxist it's just the inverse marxism in the argument and so and so in my opinion it's like we need to be attacking oppressed versus oppressor and installing individual responsibility and
freedom in the minds i don't think not so much i don't think you give them enough credit i think a lot of parents are aware of what they're pushing back at those pta meetings i've heard the i've heard marxism tossed tossed around quite a lot i actually think critical race theory is one of the best things not critical race theory itself but it's one of the best things that's happened to conservatives and and libertarians in quite a while because the left so massively overplayed their hand that it woke up all the bombs i mean it's been a slow march through the institution for a long time now and parents just going to those pta meetings and
not paying attention to anything that's going on and then they went and they fuck with their kids and they put a bunch of crazy people in charge of these people's kids and now all the moms are awake to it and yeah they're not getting the word critical race theory quite right we're having this stupid parsing of what critical race theory actually stands for but it doesn't really matter all the moms saw the curriculum everyone's seen the stupid videos of the kids getting you know harassed by their teachers and it's woken everybody up to it and we have all this legislation some of it's good some of it's not going to be that good but it doesn't really matter really it's the first victory we've had in a while because
the left like severely overplayed their hand not to me that's a positive i think that's a compelling there's a compelling argument there i'm just saying that i'm not i'm concerned that it's too late that you've already gotten too many of the the young people because i mean this is not new like they may be for like formalizing and giving it uh yeah a term that a brand that people identify but you have had for a decade now people coming out of ivy league colleges that are fucking deeply immersed in this ideology so so
those people are now in corporate america they're responsible for hr the reason our advertising is fucking telling me that i'm evil for being white and straight like this is the reason that this all is gay yeah you see that one today yeah yeah so like all all the way across the board it's just it's a trend i like i agree with you i'm fucking grateful that it's happened now and people have caught on but this has been a trend that has persisted for quite some time and it's like i'm just concerned that that it may be too late that this is like this will be the dominant um ideology
moving forward i pray to god not because i will absolutely leave this country if this is what i have to live with for the rest of my life i think we're gonna we're in for a rough ride but i do have a lot of faith in americans i've seen some incredibly based people on twitter that do not give a fuck about this stuff you know it's hardening it's hardening to see people that are just not you can't cow them you call them a racist and a homophobe and they go fuck you and you're like oh yeah thank god you know those people get it for sure yo i i have not eaten since noon i am dying i gotta run um thank you guys we can call it a night we can call it a night this might be a good uh stopping
point it was awesome having you guys on it was super fun yeah i was a blast sometime i could do this for three hours honest to god but i am so hungry i'm about to fall over go eat something bro okay all right all right all right Clay, nice meeting you.
Yeah, great to meet you.
And thank you guys for having me on.
If you want to follow me, go to Liberty Lockdown on YouTube, iTunes, Spotify, everywhere else, and at Liberty Lockpod on Twitter.
I started this podcast because it occurred to me that there was a concerted effort to shame America and what it means to be American.
When I asked myself, what can I do about this?
It's really hard because I'm not a political action committee.
I don't have a tremendous amount of followers.
I certainly didn't when I started.
I am one American.
One American podcast reinforces the values and ideals of America.
It reinforces Americanism by having conversations with key influencers of all sorts of different backgrounds, beliefs, but with one thing in common, the belief in America and that America is inherently good.
