All Episodes
Previous Next
July 8, 2022 - The Matt Walsh Show
11:20
The Battle of the Libs: Libertarians vs Jamie Raines

Matt Walsh revisits his YouTube beef with some libertarian youtubers and Jamie Raines. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Here we are once again, fighting a sea of tears for me to wade through.
This time, I thought we should change it up a bit, and instead of reviewing just the smug, self-satisfied liberals who hate me, I thought we should see a pair of smug, self-satisfied libertarians who hate me.
This is Brad and Hannah, as they're known to the five people who follow them and watch them.
They had a lot to say, so let's take a look.
Now, on the complete opposite end of the spectrum are arranged marriages.
Instead of a boundless, never-ending buffet of options, a young person in a culture that practices arranged marriages will be assigned just one, and they don't even make the choice.
Their families just pair them up and say, here you go.
There's far less freedom and far less autonomy in a system of that sort, but it is without a doubt superior to our system.
We would be happier.
Every person in the dating scene right now would be happier if they were just matched up with someone against their will.
Against their will?
That's a new dating app, right?
Here you go, you're assigned this person, go make babies.
What the heck is wrong with them?
How is it conservative to be like, yeah, it would have a lot less freedom and individual rights, but it'd be better.
That's like, That's not what conservatism in America has ever been about.
How bad is your marriage, is what I want to know.
That you think people should just be, like, assigned people like a lottery system, like, here you go, and that would be just as good as whatever you found.
It's a little rapey, to be honest.
The vibes of, like, yeah, women should be assigned to me as my wife.
No, they should not, sir.
They should not.
This seems like it comes from a very incel kind of mindset of like, I can't get women on my own, they never pick me.
He was married!
I know, but he speaks for that crowd.
Yeah, I guess.
Just a quick tip for any future Libertarians React videos.
I would dial down the music, but also the shrillness and smugness by about 8 or 9 points.
Because right now you're at a full 10 on the smarmy dork scale, and it's frankly a bit overwhelming.
As mentioned, libertarians in general have a serious problem with smugness, but here I think we've met like the libertarian smug super spreaders.
These are our patient zeros of libertarian smugness.
They also have zero in the way of arguments, rebuttals, or clever comebacks.
They are, of course, being wildly dishonest about my argument.
I never said that arranged marriages are ideal.
I also never said that women should be assigned to me to be married.
I also never mentioned that women should be the only ones subjected to it.
I said that arranged marriages are better than our current approach to dating, and that's simply because our current approach couldn't possibly be any worse.
But is there at least some wisdom to the arranged marriage model?
Yes, there is.
And before you continue scoffing and gasping at the very idea that there could be anything redeeming in it, consider that many cultures around the world, especially non-Western cultures, have had and still have such a system.
Are they all just a bunch of idiot troglodytes, Brad and Hannah?
Are you sure you want to make that argument?
If that's the broad brush you want to use to paint billions of people and dozens of cultures across the world and throughout history, Go for it, I guess.
Fits with the whole smug theme, I guess.
As for me, my preferred system is essentially the one we had in this country before the modern dating scene began to form, and certainly before hookup culture and dating apps took hold.
I favor courtship, where the dating phase is understood by all parties concerned to be the path to marriage.
Typically, in a courtship culture, families may not choose your spouse, but they are heavily involved in selecting potential matches.
This is far superior to our current arrangement, where a legion of confused, lethargic, hapless single people scroll endlessly through avatars on their phones, randomly selecting one after another for fleeting temporary flings, where emotion, infatuation, and physical attraction are the only driving forces, the only litmus test.
One time my dad tried to set me up with somebody and I was aghast at who he thought I would like.
I was actually insulted.
I was like, Dad, you know I'm cute, right?
Like, you know, like I don't have a problem pulling men, right?
Like, no, absolutely not.
But at least that was a suggestion.
It wasn't a...
It was just what he would like me to be with, which was like this super Christian guy who was in his church and who like was slightly balding, but like he thought was a good option for me.
So he was like a really good guy.
And I was like, yeah, I'm gonna need a really good guy who's not balding.
Like, and also who doesn't live in Anderson, South Carolina, because I'm pretty sure as hell not.
And like, you know, those kinds of things.
So all I'm saying is I would never, I love my parents dearly, but I would never want them to pick my mate.
They would, they would have no clue how to begin to pick who I would actually want.
Yeah, no, it's just creepy.
And it's, Really crazy, and I just can't relate to that one at all.
Can someone make a video attacking me that puts some effort into it?
I'm looking for a good challenge here.
This is just... So your dad set you up with someone who you admit is a really good guy, but he's losing his hair, so you had no interest in him.
And you say that you're too attractive to be wasting your time with men who have the audacity to possess physical flaws.
Now, look, I wouldn't usually say what I'm about to say, but Speaking to the girl now.
You earlier felt comfortable commenting on my marriage, inaccurately of course, so you've opened yourself up to some harsh truths.
And here it is, Cupcake.
You may be slightly overestimating yourself.
You seem to have erroneously given yourself a couple of extra points on the 1 to 10 physical attractiveness scale.
Just a tip.
And even if you hadn't, if you're single and making your decisions based on hairlines, you're either going to be lonely and miserable, as you are right now, for the rest of your life, or eventually you're going to be frivolously marrying some scumbag who isn't a good guy but at least still has all his hair, and a short time later you're going to file for divorce and try to make yourself into the victim of your failed marriage when it's your own vanity and stupidity that put you in that position.
One of those two results are your destiny, unless you learn to look a little deeper in your search for a mate.
The fact that you can't look deeper right now and that your father seems to have a better view of who would be a good match for you than you do only proves my point.
You yourself specifically would be better off with an arranged marriage.
Now, I'm not sure I could say the same for the poor sap who ends up with you on the altar, but you would actually be better off with that.
Usually I like to give credit to libertarians for having a little bit of intellect.
I mean, just really a little, little bit, but a little bit.
Not a lot.
You can find a crumb of wisdom in their babbling every once in a while.
Unfortunately, Brad and Hannah disproved that point.
Roe v. Wade has been overturned, and this battle is now finally leaving D.C.
and going to the grassroots.
No group in America is better positioned than 40 Days for Life to fight this battle.
Their one million volunteers hold peaceful vigils outside of abortion facilities in a thousand different cities.
And in fact, most of their volunteers are located in blue states, which is good because that's where they're going to be most needed.
Now, of course, many former abortion facility directors say that these vigils can cause the abortion no-show rate
to increase to as high as 75%, which is a major blow to the abortion business
and also means that you're saving lives.
These peaceful vigils have even led to many closures of abortion facilities in America,
nearly half of which were in cities like San Francisco, Chicago, and Seattle, hardly pro-life areas.
40 Days for Life is effectively changing hearts and minds in the grassroots to end abortion.
Check out their locations, their podcasts, and their free magazine at 40daysforlife.com.
Again, for more information on 40 Days for Life, simply head to 40daysforlife.com.
So let's move on to Jamie Raines, who's a trans YouTuber who, let's just say, she has a whole other set of problems.
Listen.
From the Daily Wire, which I think I've heard of, made by somebody or involving heavily somebody called Matt Walsh, What is a woman?
Immediately, is he wearing a sandwich board that says "What is a woman?"
Okay.
Can you tell me that?
[laughter]
Well, you're at the Women's March, you must have some idea.
Please, if one person can tell me what a woman is.
You are not here for women!
We ask you to leave!
What is that?
What is that?
Oh, wow.
So, a dude going to a women's march and going up to women and asking them to define what a woman is.
And probably acting like it's some big gotcha moment.
Yeah, that's interesting.
Oh, let's not forget the sandwich board.
I mean, what definition was he looking for?
One based off of genitals and reproductive organs?
That's a little bit very narrow and not exactly great to boil people down to their parts.
Okay, well, first of all, Jamie, how do you know I'm a dude?
I don't, I didn't tell you that.
That was not, that was not said.
So where'd you get that from?
And yeah, it is a gotcha moment.
In fact, if people are marching in a women's march and holding signs and chanting slogans claiming that women are under attack and being oppressed, and yet they have absolutely no idea what a woman is and can't begin to define the term, then yes, that's a gotcha moment, as it reveals the inherent absurdity and incoherence of their worldview.
But it's not a gotcha moment that I engineer, okay?
I'm not backing anybody into a corner.
All I did was walk up to them and ask them what the words they're using mean.
That's a fair question.
In fact, that's the fairest question you can ever ask anyone, is when they're using words to say, well, what do you mean by that?
How could that be an unfair question?
If it becomes a gotcha moment for you that only shows just how totally vapid and ridiculous your ideology is.
As for what kind of definition I'm looking for, well, to start with, I'd like a definition.
Some kind of definition.
Let's just get a definition on the table first, and then we can debate whether it's the right or wrong one.
But you guys won't put any definition at all on the table.
You act like the word has no meaning at all, like it's just a bunch of arbitrary gibberish, and yet you continue to use the word, and you expect us all to know what it means, or to know what you mean when you use it.
So, again, is it a gotcha?
Yes, it certainly is.
But I didn't get you.
You got yourself.
That medically transitioned to appear like a male.
I will never be a man.
Oh.
No.
Abs- no.
Do not agree with that.
99.9999999% of trans men will very strongly disagree with that statement.
I don't know if that person actually identifies as a trans man.
By the sounds of it, they were assigned female at birth and transitioned in the sense of taking testosterone and living within society as a man.
But yes, sure, for the purposes of your seemingly transphobic documentary, go and find one of the very, very few trans people who holds these kind of gender-critical, transphobic-y views on trans people and include them.
Ignore the many thousands and the vast, vast majority of trans people who will very strongly disagree with this very, very small number of trans people who will say things like this.
But who cares if Scott Nugent's views are in the minority among trans people?
Trans people are in the minority among the general population.
If you can dismiss Scott for being in the minority, then can't I dismiss you for being in the minority?
Also, I did not ignore other trans people.
We talked to lots of trans people in the film, some of whom you've already seen in the trailer, despite claiming that we ignored them.
We tried to speak to many more trans people, but they refused to speak to us.
And this is a pretty common phenomenon, right?
Trans activists claim that, nobody will talk to us!
Oh, why don't you talk to us?
And yet, when I try to talk to them, they literally run away.
▲
Export Selection