Skip to content

Pass it on

This only exists because readers pay for it. No sponsors, no advertisers, nobody I answer to but the people inside. If you want more of it, come inside. 64 charter seats left at $13 a month, locked for life. Become a patron.

I'm writing a book. Join before November 3rd and your name can go in it.

Not ready for that? The writing goes out free by email, nearly every day.

Comments

Coins are how patrons highlight the best comments. Join and you get yours.

  • W
    walkerlllpCharter8Featured

    Pontificating on why many liberals glom on to their worldview... I think a large part of this is that many people just want to BELONG! Academia and MSM continually reinforce the message that conservatives are EVIL. We can all agree that many people are intellectually lazy and just want to belong to what they think is mainstream thought. Little time is spent on truly analyzing what is happening. (not that living your life and keeping your nose to the grindstone and not immersing yourself in politics is necessarily a bad thing). You have to WORK to move outside of the mainstream. Many folks just don't have the emotional/intellectual energy (or the time) to push back. I used to be one of those myself. Go with the flow. Don't reduce the dating pool (lol). But the truth is, you are giving away your values by going with the flow. It sucks that that is where we are now, but I hear my college daughter come home with ideas that are so preposterous and easily debunked with just a smidgen of research and I wonder where I went wrong. She just wants to fit in. I get that. I can only hope age will bring her wisdom.

    3
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Yes. You said it, man. People just want to belong. That's true of everyone, and it's much easier to just kind of go with the flow. The path of least resistance.

    Most people wear political views like fashion... they don't choose the views... they choose a tribe, and the views come with the tribe.

    The outfit says "I'm safe... I'm good... don't attack me." it does not say "this is true". The priority is BELONGING, not truth.

    Somebody upstream sets the season's fashion. Most people just wear what's issued...

    Don't beat yourself up too much about your daughter. She'll come around, as long as you keep setting a good example for her. The pull is strong at her age.

    When I look back at who I was at that age, it's like looking at a totally different person. Wisdom does come with age, and it helps if you have a good father to guide you.

    • T
      TrishFounder37

      I relate to this so much; my husband is distressed that our 28 year old son has become quite radicalized, keeps a Progress flag on his entry wall, and wishes Trump would be assassinated -- plans to buy a cake if it happens rolleyes.

      I'm not that surprised that this happened because he is gay and happily married to another man -- third anniversary in a week. His cohort clearly exerts strong influence on him. He and his spouse are not interested in LGBT activism and want no part of Pride parades, which he thinks have become disgusting displays, and he agrees with us that "queering" of everything has degraded his cohort, especially the exposure of children to lewd content. The pair of them basically just want to be left alone to be happy together, and I can't disagree with that. He's more outspoken about his views with me than with his dad, whose disapproval I think he fears a great deal.

      They're both good people, pay their own way and work hard, don't abuse substances, are very kind and generous to others. We don't have to talk about politics when they visit, which is at least every couple of weeks. I'm just happy to have them close to me and happy that they are healthy and successful in terms of their own goals.

  • C
    CheriFounder35

    There is much here to digest. It will take some time and several readings for me.

    I have described myself as a Constitutional Conservative for the last few decades. Would never have said I was a Libertarian, I always equated them with the Progressive swamp. This has all been a learning experience with a heavy curve.

    What you have written here is akin to a history lesson of the future.

    You are absolutely correct that the Progressive Left is acting on animal instinct. They move as one, like an Amoeba, without thought or conscience.

    Fight, Feed, Fuck or Flee. These are all they have in their pursuit of power.

    The statement that 'we are in a civil war' is, for me, the defining sentence of this piece. We have been in a civil war since we brought all of Europe's Socialist/Communist elites to our institutions of higher learning after WWII. It has been a slow ramp up, but it has been the plan from the beginning. Read Saul Alinsky if you don't think this is true. We are more than 100 years late in combating this disease and if we lose our children's children pay the price, forever.

    Keep writing, stay safe.

    Staying close,
    Cheri

    2
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Cheri , this is a wonderful, thoughtful comment. Thank you!

    You saw exactly what I most needed people to see , that the civil war isn't coming, it's here, and they move as one, on instinct. That's the lesson I believe Charlie taught us. This is not debate club anymore. You're reading the long arc of it deeper than most ever will.

    stay close

    Clay

    • V
      VirginiaFounder20

      Thank you for stating what I was trying to put into words. I am going to be rereading and processing
      this for a while!

    • C
      CheriFounder35

      Virginia, I am always humbled when I come into these comment sections, there are so many thoughtful and intelligent comments. I learn something from everyone. Thank you for reading and responding to mine.

  • M
    MichaelFounder3

    Great piece so far. I don’t consider myself a Libertarian, Republican, or Democrat to be honest. I’ve always been conservative because of my relationship with Jesus Christ, and my belief that the Bible is the only infallible book to be written. I say all that to say that I don’t like the political atmosphere in our country. It’s not about choosing sides, because I have done that. If you are truly conservative (I don’t mean you in particular, just anyone in general) then we are aligned. I don’t necessarily agree with everything every conservative says or does, but I still support them, as long as they don’t support progressive policies. I always liked Thomas Massie, but when he started aligning his ideals with the left, I could no longer support him. I am a principled person, but I also know that sometimes we have to vote for the lesser of two evils. The only criticism I have to your piece is the use of f-bombs. I personally don’t think it adds anything to the piece, but that’s a small thing. Keep up the good work! I hope we can remain in the majority in the mid terms. I don’t want to imagine what damage the left will do if they gain control again. Thanks for reading!

    1
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Thank you, Michael. I'm really honored to have a serious man of faith like yourself reading my work. Your political instincts are on point, in my opinion. It took me a long time to catch up to where you are at.

    That's what a lot of my writing is about, really, when I think about it. Admitting I was wrong about some stuff and recalibrating.

    I hear you on the F-bombs. I will consider it.

    Thank you.

  • R
    RichardFounder33

    Civil War. Predator or Prey. Am I/Are we prepared, indifferent, lazy, or deceived? Will I/we be effective in action or simply supposedly self-righteous in principle. Time to know. Thank you Clay for this magnum opus. You have afforded us the opportunity to consider and decide.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Thanks, Richard. Great to have you here!

  • R
    RitaFounder25Hunter

    All I can say is “thank you, Clay.” I will be re-reading this for a while, it has so much to say in deeper levels. Some brought tears to me, but good tears.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    All I can say is thank you right back, Rita. It means a lot. I'm honored that my writing has had such an impact on you.

  • T
    TrishFounder37

    Paul, in your first three paragraphs you arrived at the meaning of "you can't be argued out of a position you haven't been argued into." To wit, if you are talking to someone who hasn't arrived at a position via the tools of critical inquiry, there is nothing there to argue with. "Your dad was full of shite," "That's not an opinion, it's a feeling," and "You're a brainwashed zealot," are not going to change any minds. The position taken sans critical inquiry describes the vast majority of people, period.

    FTR, I have had a LOT of exposure to how the left arrives at and defends their conclusions for the 40+ years I've been thinking politically, by virtue of working (half front line, half laptop class) and making friends in healthcare and academia. Even in Alberta, almost everyone there is either a solid progressive or pretending to be. Some people have found my libertarian views (or maybe just me) tolerable, but no one adopts them.

    Both you and Clay ask why such intolerance for dissent/innate desire to rule over others? My answer would be summed up as: Many are called, but few are chosen. Just like online, only a few "post" their beliefs (lead); many of these people do want power over others. The mass appears to follow, not because they want to wield power, but because they are desperate to belong/not be excluded and sound virtuous, just like online, plus they find independent critical inquiry tiresome. I don't think it has to be any more nefarious than simple groupthink.

    0
    • P
      Paul HempelFounder45

      I really can't disagree with anything you said here. It does leave one question unanswered, though... unless my perception is simply flawed. It seems to me that even the rank and file tend toward reflexive - sometimes violent - attack against those who express dissenting views. (Have you ever witnessed a more respectful - dare I say "winsome"? - debater than Charlie Kirk? And he got killed for it.)

      I understand the groupthink aspect. I don't understand anger/hatred toward those who dare to think independently. That seems like something more. Threat of violence, or even mere ostracization, *is* an exertion of control. What I'm saying is that, while the rank and file are *under* control, they also participate in exerting the group's control.

      We are Borg. You will be assimilated.

    • T
      TrishFounder37

      @PaulHempel Sorry I took so long to reply to your thoughtful post; I have thought a lot about the anger/violence aspect since reading it, because I truly don't have a useful frame for it and tend to just avoid the discomfort of giving it a good hard look. I do think about the Borg a lot, though: my spouse and I call it "being of the body," not in the religious sense but also in reference to Star Trek.

      One consideration that keeps coming back to me is the 2013 finding that 1% of people commit 63% of crime, and this is consistent across time and nations; what has changed is clearly that we as a society have stopped expecting effective deterrence or punishment. Consider that our Canadian senate brought forward a proposal this week to squelch any "residential school denialism" (i.e. questioning of the mass graves hoax) by up to two years prison time. That we can even entertain such ideas in any serious way tells me how far we have gone in the acceptability of oppressing wrongthink by any means necessary.

      My spouse reminds me that after enough of this evil, historically good people tend to rise up (often violently themselves). That's not really comforting to me, but he's not wrong. When will this happen? One way of keeping it from happening, I suppose, would be to prevent even the mildest dissension or examination. I'm ashamed to say that I did not confront an old friend on an anti-Semitic remark the other day. I need to do better. I hope this community will help me.

  • W
    walkerlllpCharter8

    Clay,
    I pray that you don't succumb to the "monetize" craze. You have danced around this when you brought the knives out. Money can make us all do things counter to our character. For now, I gladly subscribe to what you are cooking. I understand sometimes there are bills to pay and that the green grass of popularity or fame can pay those bills. Stay true to yourself and your beliefs. That is how you sleep at night. Maybe a bit hungry for steak and lobster, but it is the sleep of the righteous.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Walker, thank you for this.

    This is something I have thought about a lot. This is why I have built the project with my total independence in mind from the start.

    I have no intention of ever taking on advertisers or anything like that. I'd rather quit, shut this whole thing down, and go back to software engineering instead, if it came down to it.

    Either this project survives on reader subscriptions and donations, or it just wasn't meant to happen. That's the way I'm looking at it.

    So far, it's off to a great start, thanks to people like you, Walker. Your membership means a lot to me.

    ~ Clay

  • D
    DarrenFounder100(edited)

    Damn! Knives out. With class. I gotta tell you, Clay, the civil war reference is spot on. I can’t tell you how many times I try to tell people that and they tell me I’m an alarmist. The progressive civil war started, in my opinion, with Obama. A smooth operator who smiled while sticking a knife between your ribs patting you on the back. I’ve never followed any of the men you mentioned, but I know the type. Very well. Act 6 really brought it home. Wrapped it up in a nice bow. Woods, Russell and Smith have sold out. The losers that they are can’t play nice in the sandbox, so now they have to blow it up. They, like Massie, refuse to compromise. Refusal to compromise in politics is a death sentence. They keep voting on PRINCIPLE…and keep losing. Strong principle is a nice quality for a man to have. Yes, you too ladies! But in politics, as I’ve seen many times, can be a losing proposition if you don’t bend, at all. A friend of mine always votes for “alternative” candidates in national elections. I have tried to reason with him. He’s playing into the hands of progressives, being the useful lap dog. His argument is extremely principled. “If everyone voted based on their principles, we’d actually have a legitimate third party.” He’d rather win in principle and lose the election rather than compromise and work on policy change incrementally. It’s sad to watch that they don’t see what lap dogs for the far left they truly are. Fantastic ending act! Deleted original comment to post this!

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Darren, this is exactly the kind of comment that makes me glad I built this room.

    You're not an alarmist, you're just early. The people who tell you it hasn't gotten that bad yet are the same people the piece is about. They can't see the war because they're not the ones being shot at. They're still enjoying netflix, and going about their daily life like normal.

    For me, and many others, the day we say Charlie get publicly assassinated, everything changed. Everything became clear to me in that moment, and I've been wrestling with it ever since.

    That is really what so much of my writing comes down to... the changed that happened in me when I witnessed Charlie's murder.

    You've been seeing it clearly and getting called crazy for it. You're not crazy, and you're not alone in here.

  • C
    ColinFounder32

    What Michael Founder 3 said...worth a re-read.

    He has my coin today.

    The grace is going well, if the f-bombs are dropped. I say this not as a Christian loser, but as an effectiveness issue. You want decent people to recognise your decency and be loyal to it.

    Emotional incontinence is what you are pointing out as the enemy, so don't join them. It's part of your power to differentiate from this, to have anger but without losing yourself, your decency, your point, your message, your audience. Show the difference.

    You also agree the main point is as Michael says, "I am a principled person, but I also know that sometimes we have to vote for the lesser of two evils."

    Beautifully and simply put, Michael. It's what I call the "Heaven and Earth" problem. Thomas Sowell recognised the attraction of thinking and parading ourselves in the Unconstrained way. But we don't live in an Unconstrained world. Economics and politics is about scarcity. And so we get one vote only, in a two-party system. Which path leads towards more liberty for all, including for those more vulnerable whom we care about, in practice? That's the point to get across to losertarians.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Colin, this is a sharp comment, and you're putting your finger on something real. I don't entirely disagree with you.

    But the thing is, the piece is written and recorded now... and this is my voice. It isn't perfect, and I've made my peace with that. I'm a little rough around the edges... I come from the world of offensive comedy, and I can be an emotional writer at times. I was emotional through a lot of this one, and I think you can feel it in the words. That emotion is part of why the work lands the way it does, even when it costs me a little polish.

    And here's the thing, I actually wrestle with exactly what you're naming inside the piece itself, the anger, the prey instinct, the question of whether I'm losing myself in it. So you're not wrong that it's a tension. It's one I live with on purpose, with my eyes open.

    You're not wrong... but it's just who I am. So it stays.

    Maybe as time goes on, I'll have the cleaner discipline you're describing, the anger without the incontinence. I will evolve... but for now, the f-bombs stay because they are true to myself and how I felt when I was writing this.

    And thank you for spending your coin, I love watching people actually use it. Michael earned that one.

  • T
    TrishFounder37

    The one part that took me out of the narrative was proclaiming that rank and file progressives don't have actual views, just instincts and vibes born of a will to power. "Their entire political view is a rationalization for their desire to rule over others. To show you that they are your superior in the moral hierarchy, and you need their guidance."

    To me this reads like lacking theory of mind and oversimplifying the opponent's position. I don't believe that this is true any more than I believe that the right is driven by Israel and AIPAC to cast its votes, so it's even ironic that you go on to shred the latter supposition.

    I always tell my students (during the part of my intro lecture where I explain that it is not my business to influence them politically in any way) that my observation has been that people come as adults to the views that they hold based on their own experience, and that the beliefs they hold perform some sort of service for them. Some of their views, like religion, are often hereditary in that they get them from their parents and families.

    Last, my spouse and I remind each other than you can't be argued out of a position that you haven't been argued into. If you're unwilling to recognize that a large swath of your prey came by their views via perfectly legitimate means like those described in my previous paragraph, I have difficulty understanding how you would reach them effectively, and Civil War or no, I also can't imagine you just writing them off.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Trish,

    Thank you for this. This is something I want to take seriously and explore further with you...

    I'm not writing to progressives. I'm not speaking their language at all. You've caught onto that. If a sincere progressive reads my work, it's probably not going to be persuasive. My work, at least so far, is speaking to well-read conservatives and libertarians.

    If I were writing to young liberals, which I assume many of your students are, I would take on a totally different approach. That's something I need to think more about for sure.

    Furthermore, the real point you made is about accuracy... That's the one that requires the most careful thought.

    So let me start with where I think you're dead right: they're sincere. There's no doubt about that in my mind. I know many of them personally. I don't think progressives are cartoon villains sitting around plotting how to rule. They believe what they believe, and most of them came to it honestly, through their own lives, their experiences, the people around them. Same as anyone.

    I concede every single point on that front. However... sincerity was never my point. A man can be completely sincere and yet still be moved by something he can't see. Think about the Libertarians in my article. Dave and Clint. There's no doubt in my mind that they are sincere... I think they're motivated by forces they don't quite see... the metaphorical leash around their necks.

    Here's the question I can't get past, and I'd genuinely love your read on it. If these views are arrived at honestly, through each person's own experience... why do they land in the same place so reliably? Why does all that independent, hard-won, sincere experience , across millions of different people, different lives, different cities , keep producing the exact same conclusion: that they're the enlightened ones, and we need their guidance? Honest, independent experience should scatter.

    Why do they tend to sound like AOC instead of Thomas Sowell?

    • Z
      ZakFounder48

      @Trish, I surely didn’t inherit my family’s politics or world view. By all intents I should have become a socialist or communist. I’m 74, I thought that the “Hippies” were idiots. I could have easily become a member of the Weather Underground or have run away to San Francisco. Curiously I didn’t. My parents were entrepreneurs, as were both sets of my grandparents, that’s what I inherited.
      I was in Mr. Demetri’s class in the 4th and 5th grade. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, he gave a lecture on why Egalitarianism went against human nature and using force to make everyone equal wouldn’t work because every individual has different talents, capacities, ambition, and motivations. He didn’t mention Castro, Marx, or any name. I could see my own family in the example.
      When I was about 10 or 11 years old, I brought home a small poster:
      You Have Two Cows
      SOCIALISM
      You have two cows.
      The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.
      COMMUNISM
      You have two cows.
      The government takes both and gives you some milk.
      FASCISM
      You have two cows.
      The government takes both and sells you the milk.
      NAZISM
      You have two cows.
      The government takes both and shoots you.
      CAPITALISM
      You have two cows.
      You sell one and buy a bull.
      I mounted it on the wall next to my desk in my bedroom. My mom was very upset, informing me that she was a Socialist and that her father had run for Congress the same year that Eugene V. Debs had run for President. Socialism is the creed of Envy for the prey.

    • P
      Paul HempelFounder45

      I have to disagree with you on this. In fact, you seem to support Clay's assertion when you say, "you can't be argued out of a position that you haven't been argued into." Maybe, I'm just not understanding what you mean by that.

      We're talking about people who refuse to engage in "argument". Personal insults, perhaps; but not argument. How often do you hear/read progressives rationally explaining how/why they have arrived at their views? Tell a demonstrator that Trump is not a king, and the response is that he *acts* like a king. Ask for examples, and you get a word salad runaround.

      Perhaps, you would say that those are not the rank and file. Fine. Are the rank and file the ones who remain loyal to the Democratic Party as a matter of family tradition, even though the values of the Democratic Party of old have long since found a better home within the Republican Party? Where is the rationality in that?

      Do you take issue with the characterization that they desire to rule over others? Then, why the intolerance for dissent? Why the insistence of implementing every policy at the national level, rather than letting states and localities determine their own "fits"? Why the assertion of unnatural rights - i.e., "rights" that require others to give up something? How can these not be manifestations of a desire to rule over others?

  • B
    BobFounder12

    As always you have educated me. The civil war reference is unfortunately spot on. The first problem we have is most conservative people or anyone not happy with the progressive agenda don't believe it. I didn't either until you saying it and Cheri quoting the history of it. I'm late posting because I had to research her comments and think about your creation. I'm old. Never have listened to the people you speak about.I have watched what is happening but do nothing but share things I like. I'm useless to a big degree. I have decided to share your stuff seriously. To the conservative media. Radio , TV, and anyplace else I think of that has a HUGE audience.I have a small amount of human psychology knowledge. I had an interesting job in the military. I learned a lot about people. I have used that my entire life. Sometimes good sometimes not. Your piece is EXCELLENT. Yes I sometimes pick it apart poorly. I'll stop doing it poorly. If I have anything important to say I'll do like you. Back it up with facts. Lol. I think the most important thing is this. You reach millions of people. Why? Because we need to build the army. We need to find the generals. Without that we all lose. Now I know my purpose. We together have to build the army. The generals like Charlie will appear. Just a matter of percentages. You need to provide a short piece for the masses. Trust me on that. Armies are mostly regulars. Regulars don't read long stuff. Thank you Clay for opening my eyes.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Bob, this means a lot, and you're far from useless. You just found your purpose.

    Yes, share it. Everywhere. Conservative media, radio, all of it. I'd love the help building the army.

    And you're right about the short pieces. Regulars don't read 11,000 words... I'm already on it. You nailed it. I might start jumping into the whole youtube thing too.

    Thank you for being here, Bob. You are the best!

    ~ Clay

    • A
      AliceMSFounder31

      Amen, Bob, on the "short stuff". Several generations have been trained to intake "Thought-bites". Start there, then move to helping us learn to think!
      ,

    • B
      BobFounder12

      Thank you Alice. I feel it's important to get as many as possible educated as I am becoming. Clay does also or he would not be willing to work so hard to do so. I am the same in trying to write short. I struggle so so very much to do that. I'm a true perfectionist so the details matter to me. But the masses don't care about all the details. They need something they can grab and run with. I love your "thought bites" analog. Everyone is different and yet everyone is the same. We need numbers. For several reasons but I'm mostly concerned with new leaders appearing that are predators not prey like it's been for decades. Very possibly a century. I can manipulate statistics to say what I want or need them to say. Percentages are rock solid. So we need a million members to find a couple top notch Clay and Charlie Kirks. Very possibly more but I'm thinking we might get a few captains in that amount also. And of course mostly regulars like myself who need direction from those captains and generals like Clay is and Charlie was. I don't want to lose my long excellent articles and education pieces but I also want millions of us so we can win.

  • G
    GeoffCharter7

    Clay, the knives did come out!

    And...I love it.

    Podcasters can't drain the swamp, through podcasting alone. You cant just be a spectator. Otherwise your just a contentful slave. They have to play the game and be good at it. They played the game in 2024. Enough to get Ross out. Image if they spent the same amount of energy getting through to politicians or Trump than debating low IQ people on Piers Morgan. But losertarian habit die hard. They are becoming the wimpy libertarian version of Rush Limbaugh. Meanwhile Trump and his team are the only ones making things happen, whether they are good for the country or not.

    P.S. Maybe not this article but somewhere down the line it would be nice to compare the strategy of of these guys Murray Rothbard's strategy and how we can implement that in our daily lives.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Well said, Geoff!

    And that Rothbard idea is a great one for down the road. The irony is Rothbard was a far better strategist than most of the people who quote him.

    Thanks for the feedback. Means a lot, brother.

  • Z
    ZakFounder48

    I love the way the entire article flows. Act 6 is a masterpiece; Acts 1 & 6 can stand on their own. The only thing missing is analyzing why the Libertarians have a problem with Israel and not with the Islamic countries?! I've read extensively about Eastern Europe from the 1930s to the present day. I'm saddened and shocked that this is going down. I've supported Israel since the 1967 Six-Day War. The Iranian Diaspora wants the Islamic State to fall, as do I.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Thank you, Zak , "masterpiece" means a lot.

    The part that you said was missing is really a whole other article altogether, honestly. You're right that I didn't dig deep into the Israel question itself, and that was on purpose.

    This piece isn't about whether the libertarians are right or wrong about Israel, it's about how they can't take responsibility for their own losses, and always have to blame someone else. That someone else happens to be Israel right now, but they always have someone to blame.

    Appreciate you reading so closely.

  • J
    JonathanFounder1Hunter

    Clay. You're a born storyteller. Such a good job of making facts relevant and understandable. Helping us to care about the actors and the methods by drawing the curtains back - just enough to give the casual observer an idea that there is much more going on here than we thought before. You're giving words to feelings a lot of us have had. A lot of us losertarians who have been shattered by the assassination of Charlie. Those of us who have watched Trump with distaste, but also admiration. Damn. I wish we could win like that... And you come along. Steeped in the words of some of the most important Americans of our time. Thomas Sowell, Scott Adams, Charlie Kirk. People who won, all in different ways but won in their arenas. Bigly.

    You've said before you feel called by God to do this. I think you're right. You have a gift. And you're using it well. Can't wait to read the whole work together. Can't wait to see the reaction of the Alliance and the losertarians. They won't be able to help but expose themselves, which is what we want. Not so that we can gloat but so that we can help them see something they won't be able to see themselves without distance. Hopefully get them to slow their roll long enough for some self reflection. We all need that grace, you're giving it.

    Your writing is too on the nose here. This isn't a time for whining and crying. This is a time for war. War is ugly, war is hell. And I'd rather we brought the hell than the other side.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Jonathan, thanks man. This means a lot. You nailed exactly what I was going for.

    I can't wait to hear what you think of Act 6.

  • M
    Mary J.Founder10

    Great! Love the way it flows, your writing style is easy to read and keeps me interested in continuing. The information is presented like we're having a conversation. Just an easy chat, and it has already informed me of a lot I hadn't discovered yet. And makes me want more. I've long been a Libertarian in beliefs, but never registered as one as I've always known that would get me nowhere. No political power, no numbers great enough to win or enact 'our' policies. I've stayed Republican. BUT... I've also always said the Rep's need a really good P.R. Firm! They can't figure out how to own their message and get it out there - great history, policies that made myriad improvements in America. On and on... Stumble bums... It isn't that hard to think in terms of owning, showing pride in, and SELLING a good message. Too many lawyers in Congress and not enough business people? They need MARKETING! What's the saying - "the perfect is the enemy of the good"... We can't get close to perfect if we can't even enact more than a little 'good'. Massie is too idealistic and rigid. Not all bad, but it doesn't work. We have to be more strategic, more aggressive, more LOUD, but target the messages better. Like the DJT admin should have re-named ICE to NICE long before sending agents into the streets. Protestors with signs saying 'we hate NICE'. Doesn't work. Who missed that?! It's since come out, but really, Rep's must do WAY better. Your insight will help lead us there...

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Mary , thank you, this means a lot.

    You figured out instinctively what Massie never could, you stayed where you could actually win instead of being pure and powerless. That's the operator's instinct, and it's exactly right.

    Grateful you read so closely. Stay close.

  • T
    TamiFounder72

    New to the club, started following you after seeing your Thomas Sowell (I'm a huge fan) Quotes page on Facebook. I really enjoying your writing as it speaks volumes to me. Thank you, looking forward to Act 6.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Thank you Tami! I'm honored to have you here, reading.

    I'm working on Act 6 right now, as we speak. I look forward to hearing what you think of it, soon.

  • T
    teriFounder19

    Thank you for the grace, FIRST. Can’t wait for the rest. GREAT job.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Thank you, Teri. I am writing Act 6 as we speak. I look forward to getting your feedback on it.

  • Z
    ZakFounder48

    1. Trump doesn't know when to turn off is Ego.
    2. The Libertarian Party is making the same disastrous mistake that the Republican Party made after 1932. They became the permanent loser party. FDR simply followed Hoover and more so. The Progressives then owned both political parties. Nothing ever changed; America just drifted into the collectivist moras. Robert Taft was cheated out of the nomination at least once, if not twice. Goldwater got the nomination and was roasted alive in the Progressive media. Ronald Reagan won and was nearly assassinated. But The State continued to grow, moving America to where we are now.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    That's some good history there Zak, thank you.

    Yes, the LP has become a professional loser party. That's the whole model. Principled losing.

  • G
    GeoffCharter7

    1. I love that you are putting this in a narrative form that takes me on a ride about the loseratians faulty hubris. The symptoms you pointed out are spot on. Although there are so many reasons the libertarian fail, it is responsible to go after the big dogs.

    2. How tell this story. I am captivated by it because it my stroy, too! Although I am GenZ and was introduced to liberatianism through high school. Still, i listen to these guys all day everyday. I love these guys and thank you for not using the knives too soon. But I am looking forward to the take down.

    3. Yes! Ben Settle. Thought I recognized the writing style. Very Gary Halbertian.

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Geoff,

    Great feedback man, thank you.

    1. & 2 Yes... I have to go after them, because I listen to them regularly, see their posts regularly and I just can't stand what they're doing. This whole piece is basically my story of how I'm trying to reconcile with that... with what they're saying vs. what I'm seeing.

    3. Yup. There's just something about Ben Settles style that caught me right away. I've heard of Gary, but honestly never really looked into him much. I love to read Ben and listen to him whenever he does a podcast. So much great insight for developing your voice and speaking TO people rather than AT them. I try really hard to apply those lessons.

    I really appreciate your feedback man, and I'm glad you're here.

    And yeah, the knives are coming, but the grace had to come first. Glad you felt that.

  • C
    ClaireFounder9

    Bullet points first: Good flow. Compelling arguments. Facts presented with receipts. Each Act clearly leads to the next. Information easy to digest and verify. Now for the subjective: I read a lot. Few non-fiction writers grip my attention the way you do. There’s raw truth in the words and a humility behind them that is palpable. I don’t feel like I’m reading articles. I feel like you’re having a conversation with me. Sometimes I comment out loud when you ask a question. Every Act of this piece has me nodding in agreement. Especially the part about libertarians being pets of the regime. Chihuahuas indeed! Absolute perfection there. You give reprimand where deserved and grace always. That’s an uncommon quality. Charlie would approve.
    Staying close,
    ~Claire

    0
    C
    ClayAuthor

    Claire, I can't tell you how much this comment meant to me when I read it.

    I've been really hard on myself writing this. Re-writing entire sections constantly, convincing myself it's never good enough. Constantly tearing myself and my work apart...

    Your comment is the first real feedback I've gotten from someone who read it, other than myself... and you say it landed. You said it in a way that moved me. Thank you.

    And yes... chihuahuas. I knew that one was going to hit as I put it down. Glad it landed for you.

    Stay close,

    ~ Clay

The comments are for patrons.

Reading is free for everyone. The room behind the work is where patrons talk, and where I talk back.

Clay, founder of Stop Being Prey

About the writer

Clay

Clay is the author of Stop Being Prey. Software engineer by trade. Writer by necessity. Twenty years inside libertarianism, out for good. Hosts the largest Thomas Sowell page on Facebook. Now writing the right's missing strategic playbook.

Audio Edition

Reader-supported. Add your name to the Wall.

Read this next