President Trump - One Year In

Olivia's picture
Submitted by Olivia on Thu, 2017-11-09 05:38

By Olivia Pierson
http://www.oliviapierson.org/b...

When Trump took office at the beginning of this year, there were five main agendas that I considered monumentally important in judging the strength of his efficacy as Leader of the Free World:

1. The US economy
2. Combatting ISIS
3. Stemming immigration through the Southern border
4. The ongoing menace of Iran going nuclear
5. Dealing with a nuclear armed North Korea

While the usual media outlets like to mundanely mimic the unduly negative narrative that President Trump’s first year in office has yielded very little, nothing could be further from the actual truth.

President Trump has accomplished in his first year of governing what his predecessors, Bush and Obama couldn’t do in both their two-terms combined: rebooting the American economy. This has been achieved largely by Trump’s commitment to his campaign promise of slashing regulations and increasing manufacturing. For every new regulation imposed, two existing ones have to be cut.

GDP has increased from 1% growth to 3.1%. Over a million new jobs have been created and unemployment is now down to 4.1%, the lowest it’s been since 2001. The stock market has set new record high after high throughout 2017. All this has taken place before tax cuts have even made it through to legislation.

In altering the terms of engagement by giving more decision-making power to his competent generals on the battlefield instead of to bureaucrats micromanaging like grannies from the Whitehouse, President Trump has swiftly advanced the defeat of ISIS. The terror group has lost all its territory in Iraq and Syria, and hundreds of thousands of jihadist murderers have been killed. Strictly speaking, they are not completely over, it is expected that they’ll morph into guerrilla units wherever they can, but after a year of intense focus on obliteration instead of “containment,” their hope of a caliphate has been blown back to hell, whence it came. The biggest threat from ISIS now comes via muslims living in Western countries who carry out attacks in their name. This remains a problem for each sovereign country to deal with, but all countries share intelligence with each other to help mitigate this ongoing threat.

Since we have mentioned Syria, it is also worth noting that President Trump is the only leader in the world who had the balls to punish Assad for his use of chemical weapons on civilians in April of this year. UN war crimes investigators confirmed in June 2017 that it was indeed Assad who committed this crime, not the rebel groups he tried to blame.

This criminal action of Assad flew in the face of the Geneva Convention, measures which ought to be enforced by all United Nations member states, but only President Trump enforced it by launching 59 cruise missiles at the al Sharyat airbase. After developing a troubling habit of using chemical weapons on his own people, Assad has not resorted to this tactic since. Fancy that.

After Trump won the election and by the time he was inaugurated, the number of illegal immigrants crossing the Southern border dropped by 40% due to his rhetoric alone. Since then border crossings are now down by 71%, the lowest level since the year 2000. This is due to enforcing existing laws alone, without even building ‘the wall.’ Prototypes are now being erected which means the wall is still very much on the agenda. When this does actually go up, illegal immigration through that border will be a thing of the past. Washington politicians on both sides of the aisle have been running their yaps about how to stem illegal immigration through this border for thirty years. President Trump has made unprecedented improvements on this issue in less than one year of his administration. Unbelievable.

For many years, Iran has been under sanctions/restrictions by the UN over its ability to develop ballistic and nuclear weapons technology. Most of these restrictions were rescinded when Obama cut the new Iran deal. Unfortunately, the new deal is almost unenforceable due to its weasel wording and as a result, Iran continues to violate the deal by continuing to openly test and develop ballistic weapons (while Iranians genocide bait on Quds Day this year; "Death to America! Death to Israel! Death to the house of Saud! Death to the UK!")

The wording of the previous UN resolution was this:
“Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using ballistic missile technology, and that States shall take all necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or technical assistance to Iran related to such activities.”

This is the wording under the new Iran Deal:
“Iran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology, until the date eight years after the [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] Adoption Day or until the date on which the [International Atomic Energy Agency] submits a report confirming the Broader Conclusion,* whichever is earlier.”

(*the Broader Conclusion being that Iran only intends their nuclear plans for peaceful purposes)

Well, it has not been eight years since the signing of the deal, nor has the IAEA submitted a report confirming the Broader Conclusion, yet Iran constantly tests ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads. The latest test was in September 2017. All Iran has to do is wait out eight years then they’re allowed to do whatever they want, but they have not even had the decency to wait thanks to the piss-weak wording of the deal.

Not only that, Iran is currently engaged in proxy wars in Lebanon (and seems to have won there), in Yemen, in Syria, in Iraq and is fomenting anti-Arab strife in Qatar, which has severed diplomatic relations between Qatar and the the UAE.

President Trump has decertified the deal and his position is this:
“We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more violence, more terror, and the very real threat of Iran’s nuclear breakout,” he said in a speech at the White House.

“In the event we are not able to reach a solution working with Congress and our allies, then the agreement will be terminated. It is under continuous review, and our participation can be canceled by me, as president, at any time.”

It remains to be seen what will come to pass over this now decertified deal, but as it currently stands President Trump has put it on notice. He’s got his hands full with North Korea right now.

In regard to North Korea, President Trump is pushing forward strengthening ties with South Korea, Japan, China, Vietnam and the Phillipines. Considering the acts of aggression the NORKs have indulged in over the years - and gotten away with, to say nothing of their ongoing violent threats, dealing with the Kim regime as a world menace is long overdue. President Clinton, President Bush and President Obama all failed in action to stop this sore from festering. If anything highlighted their dismal failure in a very pertinent way it was the cruel torture and death of American student, Otto Warmbier. This was Kim Jong Un giving the finger to President Obama - with both of his chubby little hands. Obama did nothing, of course.. repairing to his cowardly default position of 'strategic patience.'

It is now up to President Trump to bring this menace to a head; peace is preferable, but I have no doubt that he will act militarily rather than allow Kim Jong Un to acquire the ballistic/nuclear capability he seeks to be able to hit the American homeland. If people think this little bastard, Rocket Man, is difficult to deal with now, imagine how utterly impossible he will be if he acquires the capability he is so close to having. Whether Trump likes it or not, he has to clean up after the toxic mess his predecessors left him. He is not shrinking from that immense challenge but rather tackling it head-on.

These issues are colossal, civilisation-threatening problems, that’s why they’re on my list of measuring President Trump’s efficacy - they’re not only hard things to deal with, they’re nigh impossible in today’s cynical post-modern climate. America doesn't have to act to benefit the rest of the world, President Trump would be well within his rights to act only for America. So, to the naysayers out there (and they are plenteous in every country) who keep parroting that President Trump has achieved nothing in his first year just because he failed to repeal Obamacare, I say they need to lift their thinking a little higher than their backsides and stop sounding like a Monty Python comedy:

“What has President Trump ever done for us?!
Okay, okay… but apart from crippling ISIS, stopping Syrian chemical weapons attacks, rebooting the economy, lowering unemployment levels, decertifying the shonky Iranian deal, decreasing illegal immigration and tackling the North Korean nuclear menace - what has President Trump ever done for us?!!”



Post-Truth Obleftivism

Bruno Turner's picture

Many so called Objectivists have lamented the fact that we live in a "post truth era", as well any reasonable person should.

The irony is that these same people visibly live in a post-truth, post-fact "Californian" [read Cultural Marxist] bubble.

They lie about immigrant crime, welfare, and job statistics, by using the same manufactured numbers the mainstream Left, and Left-Libertarian counterparts, utilize.

In regards to their Trump "commentary" [read vomit], Obleftivists are indistinguishable from the most far-Left SJWs.

Olivia here brings facts. Obleftivists bring mumbo jumbo about a coming fascist theocracy; just as the far-Left brings mumbo jumbo about a second coming of Hitler.

'I'm currently rereading the

PhilipD's picture

'I'm currently rereading the novel House of Mirth (1905) by Edith Wharton. It requires sustained effort to enjoy her. But I doubt if anyone else on Solo Passion has even heard of this ultra-high-quality novelist -- let alone read her.'

Hardly an unknown author, or book, coming in at number 69 of The Modern Library's 100 Best Novels. Not especially challenging to read, as I remember it, either. And criticised by some at the time for being popular fiction read by housewives.

'And try choosing one or two powerful adjectives occasionally, instead of verbosely bundling a whole bunch of similar ones together in one sentence.'

This is solid advice, Kyrel. Sometimes you are worth reading, but mostly I skim until I uncover an adjective and adverb mash. (It takes little time for one to come along) Then I pause and mentally cross out the redundant ones, of which there are many. Good fun!

May I suggest reading Roy Peter Clark and his book 'How to Write Short' to give your words more power?

Not that any of the Solo schmucks would have heard of him, let alone read this book. Smiling

Good enough?

Olivia's picture

Do you seriously think that Trump is good enough as he is, and that if he acquired knowledge about, and then partially converted to, libertarianism (as I advocate) that this wouldn't help him do his job?

Hell yes, I think he is good enough for the job! And he does advocate for slashing regulations and taxes on American business, which is his own thinking and in keeping with Libertarian thought. Not to mention pulling out of Paris climate accords and making America independent of foreign oil etc. These are things he is very serious about.

Funny, Trump went down to Alabama to bat for Luther Strange a while back, because he felt that he could be 100% relied upon to vote for his agenda and Luther was a "good man." The Libertarians, Bannon, Gorka and even Nigel Farage came in to bat for the super-Christian-on-steroids Roy Moore. Now look at what has happened! It is arguable that the same under age sex allegations could've been levelled at Strange too had he won, if they are just a pack of dirty lies designed to bring down a decent man (which is highly possible). But right now I'm thinking everyone should've gone with Trump on this one.

To clear confusion...

Olivia's picture

If fact, you made two. I can only speculate that you meant to reverse the order of "Classical Liberal" and "Liberal"; and that you meant "liberal" for "Liberal". But I can't be sure.

Noted.
I meant substitute Liberal for Classical Liberal.

I just don't think he's as

Olivia's picture

I just don't think he's as idyllic as you and some others here make out.

I think you mean idolic. There's a difference between viewing someone as an idol and throwing the weight of argument behind someone because they are doing a magnificent job: ie, fighting a good fight - in Trump's case, for Western values and a prosperous America.

I view him as a hero. He is grossly maligned by most of the world media, so I push back hard with my writing wherever I can. I have no interest in 'being seen to be fair and balanced in my view', I care about representing online the good stuff he does, since very few do - and certainly no one in my country does. It's end to end negativity every single day.

For example:
Today Trump returned from a long foreign trip where he met with, kissed the asses of, and morally sanctioned, the dictators of China, Russia, Vietnam, The Philippines, and more. What would Ayn Rand say? At some point I have to note these evils. So do you. Gary Johnson and Ron Paul would almost certainly not have done this. The world is a darker place now than 12 days ago. The light of liberty burns less bright due to Trump.

I didn't see him kiss anyone's ass - I saw him call for them to act differently regarding how they do business with America:

"...But for this -- and I call it the Indo-Pacific dream -- if it's going to be realized, we must ensure that all play by the rules, which they do not right now. Those who do will be our closest economic partners. Those who do not can be certain that the United States will no longer turn a blind eye to violations, cheating, or economic aggression. Those days are over.

We will no longer tolerate the audacious theft of intellectual property. We will confront the destructive practices of forcing businesses to surrender their technology to the state, and forcing them into joint ventures in exchange for market access.

We will address the massive subsidizing of industries through colossal state-owned enterprises that put private competitors out of business -- happening all the time.

We will not remain silent as American companies are targeted by state-affiliated actors for economic gain, whether through cyberattacks, corporate espionage, or other anti-competitive practices. We will encourage all nations to speak out loudly when the principles of fairness and reciprocity are violated.

We know it is in America’s interests to have partners throughout this region that are thriving, prosperous, and dependent on no one. We will not make decisions for the purpose of power or patronage. We will never ask our partners to surrender their sovereignty, privacy, and intellectual property, or to limit contracts to state-owned suppliers.

We will find opportunities for our private sector to work with yours and to create jobs and wealth for us all. We seek strong partners, not weak partners. We seek strong neighbors, not weak neighbors. Above all, we seek friendship, and we don’t dream of domination.

For this reason, we are also refocusing our existing development efforts. We are calling on the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank to direct their efforts toward high-quality infrastructure investment that promotes economic growth.

The United States will also do its part. We are also committed to reforming our development finance institutions so that they better incentivize private sector investment in your economies, and provide strong alternatives to state-directed initiatives that come with many strings attached.

The United States has been reminded time and time again in recent years that economic security is not merely related to national security. Economic security is national security. It is vital -- (applause) -- to our national strength.

We also know that we will not have lasting prosperity if we do not confront grave threats to security, sovereignty, and stability facing our world today.

Earlier this week, I addressed the National Assembly in Seoul, South Korea and urged every responsible nation to stand united in declaring that every single step the North Korean regime takes toward more weapons is a step it takes into greater and greater danger. The future of this region and its beautiful people must not be held hostage to a dictator’s twisted fantasies of violent conquest and nuclear blackmail.

In addition, we must uphold principles that have benefitted all of us, like respect for the rule of law -- (applause) -- individual rights, and freedom of navigation and overflight, including open shipping lanes. Three principles and these principles -- (applause) -- create stability and build trust, security, and prosperity among like-minded nations.

We must also deal decisively with other threats to our security and the future of our children, such as criminal cartels, human smuggling, drugs, corruption, cybercrime, and territorial expansion. As I have said many times before: All civilized people must come together to drive out terrorists and extremists from our societies, stripping them of funding, territory, and ideological support. We must stop radical Islamic terrorism.

So let us work together for a peaceful, prosperous, and free Indo-Pacific. I am confident that, together, every problem we have spoken about today can be solved and every challenge we face can be overcome..." [President Trump, APEC, Vietnam November 2017]

Kyrel, aside from sorting out the trade situation (a campaign promise he made) we all know he is over there dealing with this stuff because of the threats coming from North Korea - a situation not of his making. He wants his allies to take care of this problem so America doesn't have to do it alone. That's smart, not evil.

I have no idea what Ayn Rand would say, I don't do an automatic repair to someone else's thinking. I thought you believed in thinking for yourself?

Gary Johnson and Ron Paul would never have done anything because neither had a hope in hell of ever coming close to winning the Presidency. Even if they could've, America would be swamped with immigrants coming from second world countries. That truly would make it a darker place.

Rabelais Strikes Back

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Olivia accuses me of "verbosity". But I'm a huge fan of Rabelais! According to him, his hero Gargantua played at the following games when a kid:

"At flush. At love.
At primero. At the chess.
At the beast. At Reynard the fox.
At the rifle. At the squares.
At trump. At the cows.
At the prick and spare not. At the lottery.
At the hundred. At the chance or mumchance.
At the peeny. At three dice or maniest bleaks.
At the unfortunate woman. At the tables.
At the fib. At nivinivinack.
At the pass ten. At the lurch.
At one-and-thirty. At doublets or queen's game.
At post and pair, or even and At the faily.
sequence. At the French trictrac.
At three hundred. At the long tables or ferkeering.
At the unlucky man. At feldown.
At the last couple in hell. At tod's body.
At the hock. At needs must.
At the surly. At the dames or draughts.
At the lansquenet. At bob and mow.
At the cuckoo. At primus secundus.
At puff, or let him speak that At mark-knife.
hath it. At the keys.
At take nothing and throw out. At span-counter.
At the marriage. At even or odd.
At the frolic or jackdaw. At cross or pile.
At the opinion. At ball and huckle-bones.
At who doth the one, doth the At ivory balls.
other. At the billiards.
At the sequences. At bob and hit.
At the ivory bundles. At the owl.
At the tarots. At the charming of the hare.
At losing load him. At pull yet a little.
At he's gulled and esto. At trudgepig.
At the torture. At the magatapies.
At the handruff. At the horn.
At the click. At the flowered or Shrovetide ox.
At honours. At the madge-owlet.
At pinch without laughing. At tilt at weeky.
At prickle me tickle me. At ninepins.
At the unshoeing of the ass. At the cock quintin.
At the cocksess. At tip and hurl.
At hari hohi. At the flat bowls.
At I set me down. At the veer and turn.
At earl beardy. At rogue and ruffian.
At the old mode. At bumbatch touch.
At draw the spit. At the mysterious trough.
At put out. At the short bowls.
At gossip lend me your sack. At the dapple-grey.
At the ramcod ball. At cock and crank it.
At thrust out the harlot. At break-pot.
At Marseilles figs. At my desire.
At nicknamry. At twirly whirlytrill.
At stick and hole. At the rush bundles.
At boke or him, or flaying the fox. At the short staff.
At the branching it. At the whirling gig.
At trill madam, or grapple my lady. At hide and seek, or are you all
At the cat selling. hid?
At blow the coal. At the picket.
At the re-wedding. At the blank.
At the quick and dead judge. At the pilferers.
At unoven the iron. At the caveson.
At the false clown. At prison bars.
At the flints, or at the nine stones.At have at the nuts.
At to the crutch hulch back. At cherry-pit.
At the Sanct is found. At rub and rice.
At hinch, pinch and laugh not. At whiptop.
At the leek. At the casting top.
At bumdockdousse. At the hobgoblins.
At the loose gig. At the O wonderful.
At the hoop. At the soily smutchy.
At the sow. At fast and loose.
At belly to belly. At scutchbreech.
At the dales or straths. At the broom-besom.
At the twigs. At St. Cosme, I come to adore
At the quoits. thee.
At I'm for that. At the lusty brown boy.
At I take you napping. At greedy glutton.
At fair and softly passeth Lent. At the morris dance.
At the forked oak. At feeby.
At truss. At the whole frisk and gambol.
At the wolf's tail. At battabum, or riding of the
At bum to buss, or nose in breech. wild mare.
At Geordie, give me my lance. At Hind the ploughman.
At swaggy, waggy or shoggyshou. At the good mawkin.
At stook and rook, shear and At the dead beast.
threave. At climb the ladder, Billy.
At the birch. At the dying hog.
At the muss. At the salt doup.
At the dilly dilly darling. At the pretty pigeon.
At ox moudy. At barley break.
At purpose in purpose. At the bavine.
At nine less. At the bush leap.
At blind-man-buff. At crossing.
At the fallen bridges. At bo-peep.
At bridled nick. At the hardit arsepursy.
At the white at butts. At the harrower's nest.
At thwack swinge him. At forward hey.
At apple, pear, plum. At the fig.
At mumgi. At gunshot crack.
At the toad. At mustard peel.
At cricket. At the gome.
At the pounding stick. At the relapse.
At jack and the box. At jog breech, or prick him
At the queens. forward.
At the trades. At knockpate.
At heads and points. At the Cornish c(h)ough.
At the vine-tree hug. At the crane-dance.
At black be thy fall. At slash and cut.
At ho the distaff. At bobbing, or flirt on the
At Joan Thomson. nose.
At the bolting cloth. At the larks.
At the oat's seed. At fillipping."

And I enjoyed reading about every single game! Smiling

Confusion

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Olivia -- You ask me to read you "carefully" -- but you carelessly made a huge mistake in your first sentence. If fact, you made two. I can only speculate that you meant to reverse the order of "Classical Liberal" and "Liberal"; and that you meant "liberal" for "Liberal". But I can't be sure.

I think it's legitimate enough to accuse me of possible "utopianism" and "self-perceived cleverness" and "verbosity" and even beyond. But why attribute utter nonsense to my views? Here's the words you put in my mouth:

"I'm the only true Classical Liberal left in the world." My actual belief is: "I'm the only pure liberal who has emerged in the world." You're again making two mistakes in just one sentence fragment. And this despite the fact that I've explained myself to death on these issues. Again, it's a matter of you occasionally paying attention to what I actually say. It's not reasonable for you to attribute a dozen different false claims to my views and myself, and then expect me to fully correct them. In my humble opinion, I think I went beyond the call of duty in addressing many of them last time.

But here's one more (probably vain!) attempt: Despite what you say, I praise Trump repeatedly. I compliment him for everything you mentioned in your article and more. I just don't think he's as idyllic as you and some others here make out. For example:

Today Trump returned from a long foreign trip where he met with, kissed the asses of, and morally sanctioned, the dictators of China, Russia, Vietnam, The Philippines, and more. What would Ayn Rand say? At some point I have to note these evils. So do you. Gary Johnson and Ron Paul would almost certainly not have done this. The world is a darker place now than 12 days ago. The light of liberty burns less bright due to Trump.

I attempt to balance praise and condemnation of Trump (and Obama, Merkel, Putin, etc.) based on truth and justice. Have you ever condemned Trump for his manifest errors and weaknesses? Have you ever even condemned a Republican/conservative or praised a Democrat/progressive based on their philosophy (which I think rules the world)? Your analysis of President Trump and others would be more persuasive if you showed a bit more balance and fairness. Do you seriously think that Trump is good enough as he is, and that if he acquired knowledge about, and then partially converted to, libertarianism (as I advocate) that this wouldn't help him do his job?

Kyrel... you're blowing hard again.

Olivia's picture

Read this paragraph again from me, carefully, but substitute Classical Liberal for Liberal, since you insist:

The mistake you are making is the same mistake Socialists make when they say because Capitalism isn't perfect and hasn't solved every single human problem it is worth fuck all. You suffer from a kind of Classical Liberal Utopian expectation. I would wager that you are so caught up in your own self-perceived cleverness ("I'm the only true Classical Liberal left in the world, so much so that everyone should read my book because I'm the only one who understands this stuff") that you fail to see cleverness/greatness in folk who are actually IN REALITY doing a lot of good in the world. It's Objectivist narcissism on steroids.

Here's your response: I read Trump's recent speech to South Korea closely. You didn't. No-one else on Solo Passion did either probably. He made many Teleprompter errors. It wasn't even possible to know what he meant to say in several instances. I know this because I was paying attention. You and they weren't.

And:

Not only do I read the fundamental speeches of Trump with far more care and insight than anyone else on Solo Passion, I did so with Obama, Bush, Clinton, Putin, Yeltsin, Gorbachev, Brezhnev, etc. This is because I pay attention and take things seriously, which the rest of you don't. I'm not a glib, trite, shallow, "practical" conservative with no real ability to articulate or advance political liberty.

I rest my case.
And try choosing one or two powerful adjectives occasionally, instead of verbosely bundling a whole bunch of similar ones together in one sentence. If I struggle to properly absorb the stuff that you write it's because it's hard to get past your verbosity - and you contradict yourself too often.

Worthwhile Videos and Writing

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Lindsay -- No-one is more contemptuous of, and disgusted by, the non-libertarian aspects of Libertarians Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, and the rest. But they give us hope. The name of their party is magical. It's at least possible that they can be persuaded to govern in a pro-freedom manner. There's no hope with the conservatives or Republicans. Ayn Rand and the ARIans were and are dead wrong to support them.

As for you persuading me to watch or read some lame, shallow, boring, fatuous, worthless (probably conservative) video or article to the end -- no, that's never gonna happen. I watch and read interesting, fun, high-quality stuff only. It pretty much has to be innovative, challenging, difficult, and important to engage me.

I'm currently rereading the novel House of Mirth (1905) by Edith Wharton. It requires sustained effort to enjoy her. But I doubt if anyone else on Solo Passion has even heard of this ultra-high-quality novelist -- let alone read her.

Brief Response

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Olivia -- It's as if you don't read anything I write or pay any attention to it. You misrepresent and misunderstand me and what I say vastly. You don't reasonably expect me to take time to correct a dozen separate errors do you? But here's a valiant effort to address some:

In philosophy, culture, ethics, politics, and spirituality, I'm a pure liberal or perfected neoliberal -- not a classical liberal. This is something new, not old.

I don't remotely advocate isolationism. Nor did Rand. But "engagement" with dictatorships is 100% evil and 100% impractical.

I read Trump's recent speech to South Korea closely. You didn't. No-one else on Solo Passion did either probably. He made many Teleprompter errors. It wasn't even possible to know what he meant to say in several instances. I know this because I was paying attention. You and they weren't.

Trump's frankness in off-the-cuff speech isn't any better than anyone else who is a "brash asshole who speaks his mind", to quote South Park, or someone who speaks "without a filter", to quote Objectivist Penn Jillette (both comments specifically regarding Trump).

It isn't "trite" to note major obvious flaws which everyone else notices, and it isn't unfair or untrue to say Trump often doesn't act presidential.

Capitalism is perfect politically, socially and economically.

The difference between Trump reading the words of hired writers in a speech on some topic, and Trump discussing it in an interview, is immense and worth pondering.

Not only do I read the fundamental speeches of Trump with far more care and insight than anyone else on Solo Passion, I did so with Obama, Bush, Clinton, Putin, Yeltsin, Gorbachev, Brezhnev, etc. This is because I pay attention and take things seriously, which the rest of you don't. I'm not a glib, trite, shallow, "practical" conservative with no real ability to articulate or advance political liberty.

And, yes, it's easy for me to read Trump's mind with deadly accuracy; and that of quite a few others. In many, many respects you conservo-progressive guys got nothing going on upstairs.

Advocating Freedom

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

In post #4 I wrote:

"Anyone who has a halfway decent understanding of politics and freedom knows that America needs the legalization of drugs, prostitution, gambling, and broadcast obscenity; the privatization of schools, streets, parks, and money; and the termination of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Unemployment Insurance, business regulation, labor law, etc..."

"And anyone who has a halfway decent understanding of politics and freedom knows that the proper way to deal with dictatorships is to have no diplomatic, economic, or social relations with them, while powerfully morally condemning them, and actively working to destroy them...."

To my knowledge, no-one from the The Atlas Society, The Ayn Rand Institute, or Solo Passion has ever described political freedom so clearly and specifically. Not even close. You guys almost always sound like a bunch of pathetic whiny conservatives. You are all "libertarians" and "capitalists" who take care to virtually never advocate libertarianism or capitalism, and to always act like card-carrying conservatives. Maybe you should just be done with it already -- abandon all this irritating, obnoxious "liberty" stuff! -- and go where you belong, and do what you secretly want to do: join up with the welfare statist, fascist, socialist, tyrannical Republican Party. Eye

Hahahaha!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Maybe, just maybe, the humour will get through, both to the short fat man and ARISIS—who have even less humour than Kim—and thus save the world a whole lot of grief:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
10h10 hours ago

Why would Kim Jong-un insult me by calling me "old," when I would NEVER call him "short and fat?" Oh well, I try so hard to be his friend - and maybe someday that will happen!

Kyrel

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Olivia is right. You're a worse Obleftivist sometimes than Bwook and the rest of ARISIS. Because Trump isn't a card-carrying Objectivist he should be trashed in favour of Hillary, or, Galt help us, Gary Johnson of "Christians bakers should have to bake cakes for gay weddings" infamy??!! That's a voice of freedom??!!

And it really would help if you watched a whole video or read a whole article to its conclusion occasionally. I thought Attention Deficit What's-It was confined to moronnials!

Oh, by the way...

Olivia's picture

And, yes, Gary Johnson is a poor advocate of freedom when it comes to immigration. But assuming he wouldn't have been entirely wimpy and wishy-washy, I think he would have been the better president overall.

That's assuming too much. The guy would have been a travesty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is where your judgment Kyrel, is so way off base that I despair. He was a piss weak, ignorant fool. An ant compared to the man, Trump.

Kyrel...again

Olivia's picture

there's something profound here that you, and I bet many others, don't get.

You preach a radical isolationism - America isolating itself from trade or friendship with anyone who is dictatorial - which is most of the world outside of the U.S, Europe (who are moving toward it) and Australasia. That's just nonsense on stilts.

Facts: I just watched Trump do a quick Q & A in Vietnam with their PM where he was on the spot asked: "You talk about extreme vetting with regard to who comes in to America, would you also consider extreme vetting with regard to guns (the second amendment)?"

Without missing a beat, President Trump said: "It would have made no difference to what happened in Texas the other day, and in fact you wouldn't have had the guy who shot at him with his own rifle and neutralised him which stopped him killing people." (I'm paraphrasing.)

This is off the cuff - in bloody Vietnam of all places - where Trump gets peppered with random questions and understands freedom all too well to be able to deliver a well considered, freedom-oriented answer (contrary to your stupid view that he can't string two coherent liberty oriented sentences together). You are not paying attention!

You are making the common mistake of thinking because Trump is not John Galt, he is worthy or your trite criticisms all the time - as if he doesn't have enough of that to contend with everyday.

The mistake you are making is the same mistake Socialists make when they say because Capitalism isn't perfect and hasn't solved every single human problem it is worth fuck all. You suffer from a kind of Classical Liberal Utopian expectation. I would wager that you are so caught up in your own self-perceived cleverness ("I'm the only true Classical Liberal left in the world, so much so that everyone should read my book because I'm the only one who understands this stuff") that you fail to see cleverness/greatness in folk who are actually IN REALITY doing a lot of good in the world. It's Objectivist narcissism on steroids.

Also, regarding Trump's amazing, freedom oriented speeches (which I'm now convinced that you don't even bother to view), do you think he just hires speech writers to write stuff which he doesn't actually viscerally believe? I can assure you that he is not the type of President to parrot words that he doesn't understand or have convictions about. His speeches in Poland, the UN, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Vietnam are actual wonders which he understands, approves of and then goes out and delivers in front of the world because they put into eloquent language what HE WANTS put into eloquent language.

It's as though you think he doesn't know anything about the issues of which he speaks, but is just parroting a speech written by someone else that has been delivered to him that he couldn't really care less about either way and doesn't actually understand.

Is that your belief in the oh so super-wise world of being Kyrel, the only true classical liberal left in the world, who can see into President Trump's private mind?

Phenomenal!

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Olivia -- I consider Trump a phenomenon -- as you said. But he would be five times that if only he had a tiny amount of knowledge of political science and freedom. He's operating with a governmental knowledge base which is practically non-existent. When talking politics, he can't put two coherent sentences together -- let alone two pro-libertarian ones. In a real interview, I've never heard him advocate liberty even once. Admittedly he does hire speech writers with a small but important neoliberal edge to them, politically and philosophically.

And, yes, Gary Johnson is a poor advocate of freedom when it comes to immigration. But assuming he wouldn't have been entirely wimpy and wishy-washy, I think he would have been the better president overall. But possibly Johnson has such a weak character and lack of interior mettle that maybe he would have been quickly corrupted as president and ended up as a conventional conservative with a bit of conventional progressivism thrown in. Trump has shown everyone that it's possible for a sincere politician to speak up more loudly, confidently, and aggressively that practically everyone previously thought possible. I have a theory about this last which perhaps I'll soon put into practice.

Humans today aren't doing extremely badly in gov't due to their lack of angelic status but due to their brain-washing into welfare statism and their stunning and egregious lack of political knowledge.

Kyrel

Olivia's picture

So Trump isn't likely to much uplift America's politics or freedom. Not compared to an actual libertarian.

An actual Libertarian like Mr. 'What's Aleppo?,' open the borders Gary Johnson?

Just imagine that scenario for a moment... most of poverty torn Mexico and Central America crosses into the U.S bringing more of their drugs, gang-violence (which always accompanies drug culture because it fucks people in the head) - and covert ISIS operatives also. Insert this inside a post-modern, culturally Marxist culture where they all have the vote and see how long the country lasts. You might call that "freedom," I would call it an anarchic jungle that doesn't recognise that men are not angels.

Politics and Freedom

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Anyone who has a halfway decent understanding of politics and freedom knows that America needs the legalization of drugs, prostitution, gambling, and broadcast obscenity; the privatization of schools, streets, parks, and money; and the termination of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Unemployment Insurance, business regulation, labor law, etc. Trump favors none of this. Indeed, he probably views even a single such proposal as a species of madness.

And anyone who has a halfway decent understanding of politics and freedom knows that the proper way to deal with dictatorships is to have no diplomatic, economic, or social relations with them, while powerfully morally condemning them, and actively working to destroy them. Trump favors none of this. Indeed, he probably views most movements in these directions as a species of madness.

So Trump isn't likely to much uplift America's politics or freedom. Not compared to an actual libertarian.

My god!

Olivia's picture

I have just watched Trump's extraordinary speech to communist Vietnam - what a miracle he is. He is calling them to fair and free trade according to the rules of reciprocal value - not government owned, crony, investment manipulators and intellectual property thieves, but honest traders worthy of business with the United States.

This man is better than Galt - because he's actually real and running the country!

Let Yawon Bwook and all the Objectiloon/Free market libertarians decry this speech as something terrible and anti-capitalist. I dare them! He just lay voluntary value for value capitalism down as the standard of trade with the United States to a communist nation - what's Rand's terminology?... oh yes, volitional trade which goes by the rules of value for value, judged independently by the people trading. That was the theme of Trump's speech without referencing Rand's terminology.

This President is a phenomenon.

If he doesn't understand "freedom" Kyrel - only primitively, as you say - why did he just lay down the rules of sovereign nations trading fairly and reciprocally with America so clearly?

Kyrel...

Olivia's picture

What on earth is "acting presidential?"
I've just watched the man speak powerfully and honestly in China for goodness sake, a communist country, without compromising his stand on immensely complex issues or acting as if he weren't a friend. I would call that an enormously talented diplomat. They deeply respect him!

I couldn't think of a more presidential president.

because Trump has only a primitive understanding of political science and freedom

You have absolutely no basis, or knowledge, to make that claim - can you see into his mind? Judging from his actions, he understands "freedom" perfectly.
Primitive? Bullshit!

Hurricane Trump So Far

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Trump doesn't act at all presidential, but he's pretty much a man of substance. He accomplished everything listed in Olivia's article as a businessman with little knowledge of politics and libertarianism, and with little desire to acquire such. Trump relies upon his winner persona, go-getter energetic approach, common sense, and pro-Americanism and pro-Westernism to get the job done.

But because Trump has only a primitive understanding of political science and freedom, when it comes to dealing with dictatorships, medical reform, and tax reform he seems substantially in over his head.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.