i'm one of those folks who leans libertarian, but am hesitant about some ideas that seem unrealistic. good example is when she said libertarians are against foreign aggression, and also against sanctions, my thought was: of course that is what everyone wants, but that ignores reality. she is proposing we remove every form of influence both violent and peaceful that we possess. in the real world, if you relinquish your power, other countries will take advantage of you.
Ideological libertarians don't think in those terms. There is no "we", there are individuals, we are not removing peaceful influence we are moving that influence down to the individual, and we are removing violent influence but that wasn't legitimate anyway, if we hold ourselves to that standard our case in holding others to that standard makes sense.
24:54 imo what she's saying is either give aid or just "let all sides talk it out" her foreign policy is basically what China says every time a war or conflict happens = let's talk it out
I don’t know Angela, I think the description of trying to get libertarians to agree on a path forward is like herding cats seems quite accurate. And nothing wrong with being compared to cats
Your point about black ppl voting democrat is what i say the answer is if asked. I would say most black ppl socially are conservative. Their economics are on the left but not socialist. They believe that the governments past has put, not them as an individual but their community at disadvantage, and from coming up through that community the disadvantage rubs off on them. I'm not saying that is 100% correct. Just it's the prevailing thought. When i talk to black ppl about politics i rarely come across a "typical lefty" and if they are it's the college educated young women the vast majority of the time. This goes into another point you made.. about how small groups just galvanize the whole political scene.. In the black community the political news is dominated by typical leftist talking points bc that gets black ppl a seat at the table. It's gotten to the point now where politics have become divided that there is now a larger portion of black ppl firmly on the left. But still not the majority. What you pointed out about black ppl is something conservatives pretend not to know and they push away a voting block just trying to be edgy online.. black ppl only don't vote Republican bc it perceived as the party of ppl who are legitimately racist. And is the party where those ppl do get small victories on the local level and it becomes bigger stories within the black community. What i usually tell white conservatives when they don't get this is imagine the relationship Republicans have with racist. If that same exact amount democrats had with Islamic extremists. They think they see Democrats as the enemy now?! They would do everything in their power to keep them out of office so that the small Islamic terrorist group tagged to them doesn't grow. To the point of calling every person who votes Democrat a jihadist. But the Republicans are so attached to this racist part of their political culture they can't bring themselves to talk with black communities. Last little point.. locally, there are places where black politicians are mostly conservative. They might really be Republicans. But they run as Democrats.. they would have the same political views as Republicans or Democrats but if they run as Republican they would not win. There is a battle of left and right just within the black political discourse that isn't widespread on the national stage.. Only the left political message is deemed as appropriate.. That's a big reason why if you are around and about online you see much more right leaning values in men of color that's simply not represented anywhere very public.
Thank for this interview, Rudyard. This has opened my eyes to the foolishness in the LP. I cannot in good conscience support/join a group of people that do not believe in any war no matter what. It's a childish viewpoint that has no place in serious discussions. No intelligent adult takes such an extreme stance. This woman has no knowledge of history and the effects of isolationism. I could never support a party that believes in letting the world fall to dictators.
@@barrackobama2422 i gathered this assertion of yours by your last line "I could never support a party that believes in letting the world fall to dictators." - ie you want the US to intervene around the world in order to prevent people from ruling themselves in a way you disagree with.
@patrick7842 I believe in intervention around the world to prevent people from being ruled by those they disagree with and to prevent threats from destroying the amazing world we've built. Imperialism is better than Isolationism in almost every way and that's a fact that has been forged in history.
The colonizer argument is a false dialectic for Israel that ignores history The land went to the British because the Ottoman's lost WW1 The Ottoman's only had that land because, the Crusades and Mongols aside, one Caliphate or another had ruled that land since the 600-700's. Before that -- the Romans. Eventually going back to Judea. Jews had always lived there, even before there were Muslims, and even if Jews didn't always rule it (or were not the only ones living there). The British, the latest people to win it in a war, did with it what they wanted. They gave it to the Jews after WW2. There were consequences afterward, where Jews were discriminated against in areas where historically they had been ok. Colonizer dialectic ignores this in favor of a false power dynamic that only exists because Israel wasn't reconquered afterward. I feel for the people there claiming to be Palestinians (and some of their mistreatment needs to addressed - not everything Israel has done has been mistreatment imo), but they need to drop the violence. There are israeli Muslims, it is clearly possible to integrate into society there and have peace. They don't because they can't accept what happened 100 years ago after WW1 and nearly 80 years ago after WW2.
Further, when asked a question about Islam and the Middle East, the guest's response started with "I am not a Muslim..." Doesn't matter You don't have to be You either read about the topic or not If you have not, that is okay It is okay to not know about a subject It is also okay to not have an opinion However, if the reason for lacking an opion is stated as the guest did, that smacks of buying into leftwing constructions and epistemology Perhaps she falsely associates this with technocracy (she will defer to those she considers experts) I bring this up because I am skeptical of how libertarian she is if she has bought into certain progressive frameworks
From a libertarian perspective, I'd like to make a point about foreign policy, that Angela didn't get to. Sure...there are nations and ideologies that have baked into them the idea of domination. But that doesn't work in practice. The US has had an empire mentality for the better of 70 years, and none of us would call it a success and benefit to our nation. What has that done? I think we would all agree, as you said, it is collapsing our own country from within. The only reason the US has lasted as long doing this is because it has a corrupted Federal Reserve/ Central Banking system. The idea that any of these other countries, based on even more flawed systems, will not collapse if they attempt such imperialisms is flawed. To quote John Quincy Adams: America "goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy . . . She might become the dictatress of the world: but she would be no longer the ruler of her own soul."
27:56 actually agree with her on this though, now that Taliban has retaken Afghanistan, a lot of Muslims in western countries feel regret 31:09 i think Muslims in the west would start questioning their religion if that happened?? 53:45 yeah, i honestly wouldn't mind homeschooling my kid especially in secondary school... but the 2040s, the concept and prestige of university would be in decline and learning stuff like biology, chemistry and physics is worthless compared to coding
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
i'm one of those folks who leans libertarian, but am hesitant about some ideas that seem unrealistic. good example is when she said libertarians are against foreign aggression, and also against sanctions, my thought was: of course that is what everyone wants, but that ignores reality. she is proposing we remove every form of influence both violent and peaceful that we possess. in the real world, if you relinquish your power, other countries will take advantage of you.
Ideological libertarians don't think in those terms. There is no "we", there are individuals, we are not removing peaceful influence we are moving that influence down to the individual, and we are removing violent influence but that wasn't legitimate anyway, if we hold ourselves to that standard our case in holding others to that standard makes sense.
Do a debate/discussion about Europe with Kraut
Basically, less mainstream version of Shapiro/Destiny debate
@@chbert1373 it'd be Shapiro/Destiny except both of the people debating have an IQ above 80
lol, or don't 😅
24:54 imo what she's saying is either give aid or just "let all sides talk it out"
her foreign policy is basically what China says every time a war or conflict happens = let's talk it out
That's not what China says
I mean, sounds reasonable
I thought the microphone next to the boomer's head was him self deleting
I don’t know Angela, I think the description of trying to get libertarians to agree on a path forward is like herding cats seems quite accurate. And nothing wrong with being compared to cats
would really like to see you guys have your episodes longer than an hour
Your point about black ppl voting democrat is what i say the answer is if asked.
I would say most black ppl socially are conservative. Their economics are on the left but not socialist. They believe that the governments past has put, not them as an individual but their community at disadvantage, and from coming up through that community the disadvantage rubs off on them.
I'm not saying that is 100% correct. Just it's the prevailing thought. When i talk to black ppl about politics i rarely come across a "typical lefty" and if they are it's the college educated young women the vast majority of the time.
This goes into another point you made.. about how small groups just galvanize the whole political scene..
In the black community the political news is dominated by typical leftist talking points bc that gets black ppl a seat at the table.
It's gotten to the point now where politics have become divided that there is now a larger portion of black ppl firmly on the left. But still not the majority.
What you pointed out about black ppl is something conservatives pretend not to know and they push away a voting block just trying to be edgy online.. black ppl only don't vote Republican bc it perceived as the party of ppl who are legitimately racist. And is the party where those ppl do get small victories on the local level and it becomes bigger stories within the black community.
What i usually tell white conservatives when they don't get this is imagine the relationship Republicans have with racist. If that same exact amount democrats had with Islamic extremists.
They think they see Democrats as the enemy now?! They would do everything in their power to keep them out of office so that the small Islamic terrorist group tagged to them doesn't grow. To the point of calling every person who votes Democrat a jihadist.
But the Republicans are so attached to this racist part of their political culture they can't bring themselves to talk with black communities.
Last little point.. locally, there are places where black politicians are mostly conservative. They might really be Republicans. But they run as Democrats.. they would have the same political views as Republicans or Democrats but if they run as Republican they would not win.
There is a battle of left and right just within the black political discourse that isn't widespread on the national stage.. Only the left political message is deemed as appropriate..
That's a big reason why if you are around and about online you see much more right leaning values in men of color that's simply not represented anywhere very public.
Black America is the perfect embodiment of Libertarianism.
Methinks Angela wanted Rudyard to take some liberties with her XD
Get Nick Fuentes on ❤
Based
Is Nick Fuentes interesting?
@@hereticalgames3695 More than just interesting, I believe he is this country’s only shot. He leads a movement, America First.
@@ClubPenguinFan106 lol he's controlled op
@@tuckerbugeater ok wignat
she seems like a perfectly reasonable person, but we will need to start worshiping reasonableness if we want to compete 😅
Thank for this interview, Rudyard. This has opened my eyes to the foolishness in the LP. I cannot in good conscience support/join a group of people that do not believe in any war no matter what. It's a childish viewpoint that has no place in serious discussions. No intelligent adult takes such an extreme stance. This woman has no knowledge of history and the effects of isolationism. I could never support a party that believes in letting the world fall to dictators.
"I'm scared to let you rule yourself, because you might rule yourself in a way i don't like"
@patrick7842 how does that apply at all? If the LP gets in power, they'll rule over me too. I'm allowed to be concerned over which person we choose.
@@barrackobama2422
i gathered this assertion of yours by your last line "I could never support a party that believes in letting the world fall to dictators." - ie you want the US to intervene around the world in order to prevent people from ruling themselves in a way you disagree with.
@patrick7842 I believe in intervention around the world to prevent people from being ruled by those they disagree with and to prevent threats from destroying the amazing world we've built. Imperialism is better than Isolationism in almost every way and that's a fact that has been forged in history.
The colonizer argument is a false dialectic for Israel that ignores history
The land went to the British because the Ottoman's lost WW1
The Ottoman's only had that land because, the Crusades and Mongols aside, one Caliphate or another had ruled that land since the 600-700's. Before that -- the Romans.
Eventually going back to Judea.
Jews had always lived there, even before there were Muslims, and even if Jews didn't always rule it (or were not the only ones living there).
The British, the latest people to win it in a war, did with it what they wanted. They gave it to the Jews after WW2.
There were consequences afterward, where Jews were discriminated against in areas where historically they had been ok.
Colonizer dialectic ignores this in favor of a false power dynamic that only exists because Israel wasn't reconquered afterward.
I feel for the people there claiming to be Palestinians (and some of their mistreatment needs to addressed - not everything Israel has done has been mistreatment imo), but they need to drop the violence. There are israeli Muslims, it is clearly possible to integrate into society there and have peace. They don't because they can't accept what happened 100 years ago after WW1 and nearly 80 years ago after WW2.
Further, when asked a question about Islam and the Middle East, the guest's response started with "I am not a Muslim..."
Doesn't matter
You don't have to be
You either read about the topic or not
If you have not, that is okay
It is okay to not know about a subject
It is also okay to not have an opinion
However, if the reason for lacking an opion is stated as the guest did, that smacks of buying into leftwing constructions and epistemology
Perhaps she falsely associates this with technocracy (she will defer to those she considers experts)
I bring this up because I am skeptical of how libertarian she is if she has bought into certain progressive frameworks
You know nothing and you are irrelevant
This the most historically illiterate dogshit I've ever seen 😂
This lady doesn’t get it
And you do? Angela mad the Libertarian party relevant
Where is the podcast of this?
From a libertarian perspective, I'd like to make a point about foreign policy, that Angela didn't get to.
Sure...there are nations and ideologies that have baked into them the idea of domination. But that doesn't work in practice.
The US has had an empire mentality for the better of 70 years, and none of us would call it a success and benefit to our nation. What has that done? I think we would all agree, as you said, it is collapsing our own country from within. The only reason the US has lasted as long doing this is because it has a corrupted Federal Reserve/ Central Banking system.
The idea that any of these other countries, based on even more flawed systems, will not collapse if they attempt such imperialisms is flawed.
To quote John Quincy Adams: America "goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy . . . She might become the dictatress of the world: but she would be no longer the ruler of her own soul."
Rudyard is quite insecure and it shows
Wow
Linsey Graham and Mitch Mcconnell’s districts are their entire states. The Scots-Irish Diaspora was more right than wrong with KY and 2nd district TX.
Get redeemed zoomer on please
Yeeeesssss
Get Caleb Maupin on
27:56 actually agree with her on this though, now that Taliban has retaken Afghanistan, a lot of Muslims in western countries feel regret
31:09 i think Muslims in the west would start questioning their religion if that happened??
53:45 yeah, i honestly wouldn't mind homeschooling my kid especially in secondary school... but the 2040s, the concept and prestige of university would be in decline and learning stuff like biology, chemistry and physics is worthless compared to coding
lol regret? they where overjoyed happy that the US got kicked out.
and 98% of muslims support Sharia law so no they dont question their religion.
26:49 the most based position