The last 25 years have delivered amazing economic and technological progress for humanity. *Political* progress, in contrast, is hard even to detect during this period.
Here’s how parents can push back on the alarming ideology that’s infecting our children’s classrooms.
Episode 439 welcomes Patrick Smith to the podcast to chat with Skyler on the following topics: growing up in the Dallas area, his Corvette and run-ins with cops; training to be a voluntary police officer in order to keep the cops off his back, and learning on ride-alongs that cops mostly just harass peaceful people all day long; studying the American founding fathers to answer the question of authority; delving deeper into Judge Napolitano and (old) Stefan Molyneux; his Not Governor campaign; creating Peaceful Parenting University; why communism even at the home/family level doesn’t work; why child dependency on their parents creates a positive obligation; spanking as a protective use of force; Walter Block’s evictionism theory of abortion; his search for practical peaceful parenting tools; was homeschooled for a year as a youth and always wanted that for his own kids; how he “unschooled” himself after hours as a youth; his unique experiences of raising separate sets of kids both traditionally and peacefully; responding to tantrums; how authoritarian parenting creates the expectation of authoritarianism; and more.
Episode 430 has Skyler giving his commentary on the following questions from Quora: “Why are you against communism?”; “What is the role of a government in the modern economic system?”; and “What are some negative misconceptions about libertarianism that people should be aware of?”
You may have heard the terms “Cultural Marxism,” “Critical Theory” or “Frankfurt School” bandied about. And while you might have an intuitive approximation of what these terms mean for America in the 21st century, there’s a good chance that you don’t know much about the deep theory, where the ideology comes from and what it has planned for America – and the world.
One thing I dislike about people who discuss social justice and other such ideas is that they are merely trying to shame and bully people into having a singular idea regarding certain complex social concepts. This runs extremely contrary to how I think the world should run. It feels very socially and emotionally tyrannical.
I was just recently contemplating the fact that Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto (1848), Gustave de Molinari’s The Production of Security (1849), and many if not most of Lysander Spooner’s core works all coincided with one another temporally.
As Marx and Engels put it in The Communist Manifesto, “The theory of Communism may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”
What’s afoot? Orwellian doublethink of the highest order. Sure, the hated 1950 Loyalty Oath seems far less onerous than the new Diversity and Inclusion Vow. But the people who refused to sign the 1950 Oath were heroes standing up for freedom of conscience. The people who question today’s orthodoxy, in contrast, are hate-mongers who need to be excluded from high-skilled employment.
What are you supposed to do if you want to continue the good fight against social ills you’ve already practically driven to extinction? Move the goalposts all the way to Mars. These days, the world’s best detectives would struggle to find outright racists and sexists. Yet implicit racism, structural racism, implicit sexism, and structural sexism will always be in plain sight, because the definition expands as the phenomenon contracts.