Hey, everyone, welcome to another episode of the Mark Moss Show, where we talk about bitcoin and we talk about the decentralized revolution that is happening right now that we're witnessing.
Each and every week, I'm trying to bring to you the most up to date education so you can understand what's going on, the latest breaking news, so of course you can be the most educated person at that cocktail party this weekend, and some very interesting people to give you some different perspectives, um, and some insights that maybe
I can't provide. And so, uh, if you are not already, if you haven't already, bookmark this, grab your phone, if you're not driving, pull your phone, make up calendar appointment to be with me each and every week at this time, at this channel, same time, same place. You know the drill, um if you are driving, do it later. UM. I'm in the studio today with Spike Cohen. And Spike was a vice presidential candidate UM for the Libertarian Party and you can find them on Twitter at real Spike Cohen.
Very interest. I've been following him for quite a long time. I love his takes. Anyway, Spike, thanks so much for joining me today. Absolutely, Mark thanks for having me on man. Yeah, so it was kind of cool. Like I've been following you on Twitter for a while. I love I love
the takes that you have. And then, uh, just recently, somebody I think that saw me speaking at Ron Paul's conference is like, oh, I gotta get you connect with Spike and um and then it turns out you've seen some of my stuff and retweeted some of my stuff and I love how it works out like that. It's pretty cool. Yes, yeah, it worked out perfectly. Shout out to Guerrimo for facilitating all of this. So Spike, I uh,
I kind of threw out a little bit. I mean, you were the vice presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party. Give us a little bit of background on on on you and how you got into that position and what you're doing. Sure, so my background is actually more in business than in politics. I kind of came out of nowhere seemingly because of that. Um. I started a web
design company when I was in my teens. Uh, and I successfully grew that into I mean it wasn't fortune or anything like that, but it was a successful company. And uh. And then six years ago I was diagnosed with ms UM, and that coupled with the talks we were having about the course of treatment and things like that,
made me realize our life is finite. I had reached a point in my life where I really didn't need to work anymore for money, and I really started kind of rethinking what I wanted to do and what purpose I wanted to have in my life. And I realized I wanted my life too. I wanted for the world to be a better place because I was here, and
for to have even mattered that I was here. And the best way that I could see to do that was to talk to people about the fact that they do best when they're most free UM and that got me into UM libertarian activism, which sort of parlayed its way almost accidentally into it to my getting the UH the Libertarian vice presidential nomination. I didn't actually think they
were going to nominate me. I just was giving them ideas about how they could better message and better reach out to people, and then they ended up picking UM. So that's that's what caught me where I am, and since then I've been continuing to hit the road and spread the message of liberty and work with activists across the country to help you that m that's great. Now
for everybody listening the Mark Ma Show. We talk about bitcoin, but really I like to focus on the intersection of politics, finance, and technology, which of course is bitcoin. To me. UM, I don't uh, I think bitcoin is a political Um. It's not prescribed, it's it's technology. It's an open source protocol. UM. I think people bring their own biases to it. And so we'll talk about some of those things. And I would say, just to the listener, just keep an open mind. Uh,
it's not about politics. Were assigning one necessary way to another, but have an open mind about that. But I'm just curious, Spike. UM. So you're a business person and then you found yourself wanting to kind of submit to a higher, higher calling or do something positive, I guess, and that led you to the Libertarian party. UM. Had you been a libertarian cander or not candidate but a libertarian before that? UM? Or were involved in politics before that or was that
like something new that that dragged you in there? So I'd never really been involved in politics other than giving my opinion and stuff like that, but I had never really actively been involved in politics. And when I started off in my activism. Politics wasn't or political party. Politics wasn't actually my my initial intention. Like I said, when I first ran for the vice presidential nomination, I did it in somewhat of a tongue in cheek way and really was more just trying to present here is how
we can present ideas of liberty better. And apparently I did a pretty good job of selling my ideas because they ended up nominating me to be the the the actual candidate. Um. But but no, so I actually and I tend to agree with you when it comes to bitcoin and and defying all of that, I actually I'm not sure. I think it's a political as much as
anti political. If politics is groups. If politics as groups of people who are trying to basically force people into their quote unquote solution by first denying at least partially denying their cell ownership, their autonomy, and their property and their and their money that that comes forth from that. Then anything that robs them of that ability to rob you, to steal from you inherently robs them of that ability
to engage in politics. Um. And so I actually see the blockchain in general and especially bitcoin, as being an actual act against that against the ability for politicians and policymakers to be able to exert themselves in any real way. If we are are our absence of or outside of their system they've built, then they really can't control us.
So then you're saying that a political means that it's not assigned to one political party or another, versus what you're saying, anti political means it's the end of politics where it's not about one party or another but actually, um, no party that could co opt you or try to put you in that group. Not just no party, but the end of these coercive systems, or at the very least a great reduction and a and a empowering of
those coersive systems. Um. Yeah, absolutely, I mean yes, it is also a political in that it is not left or right or you know, I will say, I do believe it's libertarian as opposed to authoritarian, but not libertarian in terms of a political party or something like that. But no, I think it goes further. I think it actually diminishes their capability and their capacity to inflict their harm on us through the ability to manipulate the currency and the and the money that they forced us to use.
I'm working on a bigger book. We're talking about a smaller book. I just wrote put a bigger book, and um in it, I have a section of the death of politics and basically talking the kind of the same way how um you don't politics is is has has kind of emerged really as a function of kind of coming out of this industrial age, um, and all this
centralization that's happened because of that. And as we start to decentralize and to your point, start taking away the money supply, um, it starts to take away their power and starts to change and any with technology, we organizers differently, and it just kind of takes away the need for
a lot of that stuff. I guess. Oh, I definitely agree that the first example that that was or or widespread example that was ever given of a government happened in the in Mesopotamia, and the first governors were actually called ditch bosses, and it was someone who just hided how much water in their agricultural system each person could use. Maybe that was the best system they could come up
without the time. But the fact that we're still using that same coercive model, uh, you know, thousands of years later, I think at the very if it ever was the best model that humans had available, we've certainly progressed past that. Yeah. Now, one thing that I love about your story is that, UM, a problem that it seems I have anyway with people in politics is that we have these career politicians that have basically never done anything, and so because of that,
they're detached from reality. They've never had to bounce a budget or hire someone or actually try to produce a profit, versus you coming from the um actual business world, and uh, you have a different perspective on that. Is that something that you probably see with the you know, a typical problem with the politics or politicians. I should say, I think the three biggest differences that I know, and yes,
that's a huge problem. The three biggest differences between me and what you would typically see in a politician or elected official is Number one, I actually come from knowing things from living in the real world and not just being in career politics. Number Two, I'm not particularly concerned about getting elected to anything. If I do get elected to something, that's fine, But first and foremost I'm trying
to reach people and share a message with them. And then the third thing is, and this has been in talking with quite a few elected officials, uh everything from the federal level on down. They are often very breaft of any knowledge. They have their narratives, they're talking points, they're good at their at their optics, but in terms of of a deep knowledge of anything, that's often very lacking. Um And so I'm in that way, I'm I'm I'm different,
I think than most politicians. Uh. With that said, I always when I tell people don't trust politicians, don't don't take their word for it, I include me and that you know, don't just take my word for anything. But but yeah, that's there's that's definitely a huge problem in politics, is politicians that are basically going off of narratives and and and uh catchphrases and talking points that are being handed to them. Yeah, all right, um man, there's so much that I want to dig into here. I have
so many questions. And of course you're listening to the Mark mo Show. We're talking about bitcoin and the decentralized revolution and how it could change or maybe even eliminate politics as we know. It's a big subject and a dive in more. I'm with Spike Cohen at Real Spike Cohen let me be back with more in a second. Don't go away, all right, Welcome back. You are listening
to the Mark Mo Show. We're talking about bitcoin. We're talking about the decentralized revolution that is happening right now that we're witnessing. And something that I've been talking a lot about is how bitcoin is going to change the world for any number of ways, one of which is that it changes the way that we interact, It changes the way that we organize ourselves, and because of that,
it's going to change the course of humanity. Right. It's a technological revolution, not in technology, a revolution that changes the course of humanity. We're talking about how it could change politics, and I've even said it could be the death of politics. I'm in the studio joined by Spike Cohen. You can find him on Twitter at real Spike Cohen. He was the vice president Libertarian candidate for and Uh.
He's a previous business owner who found himself in politics. Now, Spike, UM, A question I was thinking too, is that, Um, you said that you know, you had the business. Um, you were sort of drawn to politics only because you thought that you need to do something better, to kind of do some good in the world, you didn't need politics. I'm curious what it was like trying to work inside that system. Uh what did you learn about politics from
being inside the belly of the beast? So the thing is, because I've never been an elected official, and I've never been in any of the major parties, I may not have been as deeply into the belly of the beast. But in terms of just being involved in the political system, it's a terrible system. Uh. Anyone who follows the Libertarian Party, even if you agree with our ideals, one of the
things you'll notice is the constant in fighting. And the reason there's constant in fighting is the same reason we have constant in fighting in government is because we are because we are trying to have a political party that has to comply with state and federal election law, we are forcing ourselves into this de facto democracy. And when you force people into a democracy, and I meanwhile, I shouldn't say force, we're all choosing to be a part
of it. But as a quote unquote necessary evil to be involved in party politics, we're subjecting ourselves to a democracy, which means that instead of the best ideas rising to the top as a result of supply demand and price signals. The best ideas are in theory rising to the top from everyone arguing with each other and forming political factions and fighting other factions and constantly fighting over who is in charge of the narrative. And that's why there's the
constant in fighting. You know that a democratic system or or really a political system in general, turns your neighbor who might have a different opinion from you into your enemy, potentially depending on how far their opinion is from yours. And that's extrapolated out to the division we see in society, that we see in our country, that you even see in your neighborhood. And uh, you know, that's before you even get into the corruption that happens when you actually
get into office. Do you think that the Libertarian Party actually has a chance or are we stuck in a two party system? So I think, first of all, we've been doing it the wrong way. I think the Libertarian Party has focused so long on finding someone who's going to win the White House by tricking everyone into voting libertarian, and then after that happens, they're going to trickle down
liberty on the rest of the world. And yet that's not what we believe as libertarians, we believe that good ideas happened from a decentralized manner, from people that voluntarily recognize that you know that this is a good idea you and that the the demand is fed by that supply, and that it works up organically from there. But then our politics is the exact opposite. We're gonna shoot all the way for the top and then trickle it down
from there. And uh so what what where we've been successful is in trying to win more local races, everything from city council races, school board races, auditors races. I think from a political standpoint, long before anyone's gonna trust us in the White House or even in Congress or in the governor's mansion, they need to see what we're gonna do in their cities and their towns. We can do immediate changes their harm reduction from what's being done
there from now, and then work up from there. It's not gonna be a slow process, or it's not gonna be an easier quick process, but we're already seeing it happen there. They're the number of elected Libertarians almost doubled in the last election, So it's certainly happening, but I don't think it's gonna happen tomorrow, 're next year. I
like that approach, and actually that's very tactical. I mean it's something that we're seeing a lot of the activists, uh, you know, the George soros Is of the world, um, really starting to target those local elections, right, I mean, starting with the two attorneys and things like that. Um, And it seems to have a lot more effect. And I would say, um, kind of back to this theme of this kind of decentralization, and we're starting to see
like this balconization almost of the United States. And maybe in feel free to tell me what you think, but maybe it goes back to like the last election, um, when there was you know, allegations of of miscounting and whatnot, and then when all over to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court kicked it back down, said nope, that's up to the states. And then fast forwarding through the last two years of the pandemic, we're starting to really see the states starting to kind of uh, you know,
take matters into their own hands. Uh. Texas with their abortion laws. Now we're starting to see them Arizona putting this bill together to have a bitcoin is a cryptocurrency or a legal tender, etcetera. And so maybe do you think, one, I guess, is there this balconization almost in effect um happening in the States. And if so, then does that make this grassroots kind of a style of politics more effective? Yes?
And yes, balcon is anation is going to be natural in a politically created subdivision of three thirty million people who largely share nothing in common. We live in different areas, were culturally different, We're never gonna meet each other or
anyone like each other. We have widespread opinions. And the entire political system is built around this, this good cop bad cop routine between the two major parties, who are to distract from the fact that they're working together to rob us all blind, are constantly creating this theater of culture wars and and partisan in fighting and so forth that feeds that divide even further. But even absent that this country as we as it were would not exist absent the threat of murder, if if we didn't opt
out of it. Right, So that so that but and then that's why naturally we're seeing just at the the real politic is becoming one of nullification cities, nullifying things they don't agree with at the state and federal level. States agree nullifying things they don't agree with at the federal level, the federal government argue, wing and fighting with the states and threatening to withhold money if they don't
cooperate with them. I actually like that if we're going to have a government, if we're going to have a state, I want them constantly fighting with each other, and I want the the push to be as local as possible for people to recognize that there's a tremendous amount of political power in simply refusing to cooperate with higher authorities and nullifying their orders from on high and saying no, we're not going to cooperate with it, because without that
local cooperation, it's usually almost impossible for them to effectively enforce whatever they're trying to impose on us. Yeah. Good point. Now, Um, this is a bigger topic. But I'm curious. You know, I kind of grew up in this kind of grassroots political home, and uh, politics is still something discussed around my family and my extended family's kitchen table. Um. You know, I guess I would consider myself a Republican growing up,
I don't like to assign myself to any party anymore. Um, I'm for the party that gives me more freedom less government. I don't know which. I don't know which party that is anymore. Uh, maybe it's a libertarian party. I don't know right as a freedom already, I don't really know anymore. Um. And it's like not one single party can really give
me everything that I want, I guess, um. But one thing that I've had kind of looking at libertarians and anarchists if you will or whatever, is like, hey, that's great, Like you have a really good idea, Um, but how do we get that to happen? Right? The machine, the political machine, the left and right, it's so powerful. How do we wrestle that power out of their hands? And I guess you've kind of made a good point, um, starting at a local level and not trying to go
straight for the top. But that's one reason why I have been so excited about bitcoin over the last you know, decade, because I feel like we we actually no actually have a tool now and whereas like libertarians were kind of hopeless. I'm curious to your thoughts on that we're gonna talk
about that in a second. Um, you're listening to the Mark Moa Show and we are talking about bitcoin, and we're talking about this decentralized revolution and a revolution, a technological revolution that will change the course of humanity because it will change the way that we work organized. Um, organize ourselves and work with each other. Um. I'm in
the studio with Spike Cohne. You can find him on Twitter at real Spike co and he was the vice presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party in a former business owner, somebody who gets it, um and has a plan. And we'll dig more into that in a second. So don't
go away, all right, welcome back. You are listening to the Mark Moa Show, and we're talking about bitcoin, always talking about bitcoin, always talking about the decentralized revolution, always talking about the way politics, finance and technology are intersecting with each other and about to change the world. If you're just joining us. I'm in the studio with Spike Cohen at Real Spike Cohen. You can find him on Twitter.
Libertarian candidate, vice presidential Libertarian Party candidate. Now Spike. Before the break, I was saying, how, um, you know, while I like what the libertarians do shout out to Ron Paul kind of running that. Um. I got to speak on a stage with him a few weeks ago. As I was saying, was was pretty amazing highlight of my my life. I don't know about my life, but one
of the one of the key points. But anyway, one thing I've always kind of looked at these libertarians and these anarchists is like, hey, you know, your ideas are great, um, and that's cool, and like maybe we should try that, but like, how does that ever really gonna work? And as I was saying before the break, like I finally feel like maybe there's actually something that we can do. And it just seems like most libertarians and most anarchists have overlooked that. Um, would you agree with that? Is
that something that you've seen. I think that a lot of libertarians and anarchists and liberty lovers in general, maybe even those that that consider themselves constitutionalists or whatever, but people who want far less control and less government than we have now. I think a lot of them have just shrugged their shoulders and resigned themselves that it's going to be this way. You hear this a lot from people that, well, you know, most people are stupid and
their sheep and they want to be controlled. And so the idea that we can actually effectively uh forget you know, you know, uh, eliminating the state or even greatly reducing it, but have any kind of real uh progress towards more freedom. I think they've given up on it. But I think
and you know you alluded to this before the last break. Um, I believe that bitcoin and defy and the blockchain are possibly the first, and certainly one of the first in our lifetimes, effective tools to greatly reduce the amount of control that people in power have. I mean, think about it, with bitcoin and uh and I believe you're a bitcoin maximilist, so I won't say crypto, but with bitcoin, would defy with whatever. These are basically anti theft systems right like that.
The current system we have right now is your dollar bill is worth your your money, that your U S dollars that you're sitting on for that matter, you're your euros, whatever Fiat currency you have is based entirely on the whim of policymakers, and they literally print out trillions of new notes every single They don't even bother printing them out now, they just add it to a digital ledger, and they hand it off to uh, you know, to their political cronies and the people that help get them
in office, the government agencies that they want to see bigger and everything else. And the thing is when they do this, they're adding more money without adding more value, which means that money is chasing the value, which means that as more money chases the value, the value of each of those individual currencies goes down and the cost of living goes up. The closer you are to the distribution distribution of that new money, the more money you get, and the further away you are from it, the less
money you get. But the price goes up about the same for everyone. And that's why we see this growing gap between those who have and those who have and it's theft. We're being robbed, and something like bitcoin completely eliminates their ability to do that. Yeah, how does it? How does it start to build those cracks, widen those cracks? How does it start to penetrate? I mean, we've seen a lot of entrenchment in the in the in the
political sphere already, a lot of senators, congressman, etcetera. That are starting to adopt bitcoin, but how does it start to wrangle that power away. How do you see that playing out? I guess I see it playing out over a long and and and uh sometimes frustrating slog you know. I think it was Hiak who said, you know that one of the best most effective ways we could uh control or have more power is to take away the currency control of currency from from the state, but that
he can't do it. He said that there shall never be another sound money again until we take the thing from the hands of the government. But it can't be done by force exactly. And so he was basically you know, coming up with the reason for the eventual Bitcoin white paper, right like he was saying, it's not gonna be done by force. It has to come from it just being such a no brainer, better alternative to fiat currency. And so I think it's just gonna be this constant thing.
There's gonna be more and more regulations to try to restrict it. There's going to be this uh vacillating between coping with just you know, adapting it as official tender, legal tender, or trying to restrict it. But I think at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. It's just going. All they can do is delay the inevitable.
Because Bitcoin because defy and for that matter, all of the solutions that are coming out of the blockchain, not just C based, but every solution that's coming out of it, is better than one that's centralized and based on coercions and implicit threats of violence and the use of violence. Anything that's based on supply and demand is always gonna be better, based on better than something that's based on I will kill you if you don't do it. Yeah, yeah,
always right without without the coercion. Uh, free imagine imagine a free and voluntary exchange. So revolutionary, right, Um. Right. It seems though, like I mean, if you look at like the political sphere today, I mean, it seems like we're almost approaching a climax. And maybe it seems like
we've been approaching a climax for a long time. But um, you know, I've done a lot of work on this, these cycles that are happening, and we're kind of in the middle of this like two and fifty year revolution cycle, and then you have like this eighty year kind of fourth turning cycle, and all these things are kind of coming together right now, and uh, you know, we're at a point where like, um, we're at like peak centralization.
You have like these you know, World Ecomic Forum and World Health Organization and the u N and i m F kind of like peak centralization. And at the same time we're seeing, um, the narrative is really starting to fall apart, and trust is like plummeting really really fast. And like that trust or that confidence in the in the leaders in the state. Man, once that goes, it goes really quick. I mean, I kind of think that we might see something acts. So maybe real big change
happened in the next like five years. Do you think that's too soon? I don't. In fact, I personally think and you know, everyone put your tinfoil hats on before I say this. I okay. So I think that it is increasingly likely, based on the reports that are coming out, that the COVID nineteen virus itself may have come from as a result of gain of function research. We already know that the US government was funding gain of function research which created at least one virus that was similar
to COVID nineteen. That's established fact that the government themselves
admitted that. I think that it is very likely, Uh, and possible that over the next year or so, it is eventually going to come out that yes, this specific virus was as a result of GAINA function research, either from the US, maybe the Chinese government, maybe some other government, and that it ended up accidentally leaking, and that multiple governments, including the Chinese government and probably the US government as well, we're involved in trying to cover it up and pretend
it didn't happen. In the midst of everything that has happened with COVID nineteen, the millions of deaths, the lockdowns, and all the devastation that have caused, and just the sheer amount of anxiety that the average person on this planet, not just in this country but on the planet has experienced as a result of this virus and the ancillary things.
If they end up finding out that this all happened because of government and that they tried to cover it up, we can't even imagine the amount of distrust that is going to create, not just in those specific governments, but in the entire concept of, oh, well, they're doing these things to protect us. I think the level of trust in these systems is going to completely plummet as a result of that. Again, We don't know that's going to happen,
and I'm not saying it's going to happen. If it does happen, then your five year predictions that it won't take the Thing with that, though, is that it's it's back to the trust, right And so the fact that they openly are and and in your face are trying to censor and shut down any talk, any communication, any report, it just leads us to think they have something to hide.
If you had a business partner that you suspected wasn't Bezline, for example, and uh, you asked him about some expenses and he got all nervous and wouldn't wouldn't you know, took the books away from you and wouldn't let you look at him, and it's like, well, hang on, like, uh, I think you're probably now stealing from me, right, Versus if he's like no, like, let's take a look, here's the banks and here's right, that would be open and transparent.
And so when you have the government basically doing the same thing right now, I mean, uh, Sakie was saying yesterday or day before that they should do more to sensor Joe Rogan's podcast, and uh, I mean, I mean, so in your face, trying to censor everything, and that doesn't it doesn't leave trust, No, it doesn't. And honestly, I'm glad that they're being more open about what their intentions are, both because it is called distrust and because finally,
this whole well, Facebook is a private company. Nonsense is over. Facebook wasn't doing this as a private company. Facebook and Twitter and the rest of these social media we're doing it at the BHS and sometimes the order of government here and around the world. And I'm glad that that's out of the bag and we don't have to pretend that anymore. Yeah, there's a saying, and I don't know
who said it, but it's like, you don't. You don't prove a man wrong by ripping out his tongue, right, You only prove that they have something to hide kind of a thing. Right. And so I've always believed that the truth wins, right, the truth wins, and open debate. Um. And uh, you know, I know there's a problem with information today, but I think if you let information be free, then we'll find the truth. Um, not not trying to censor it. And that looks shady. Um, you're listening to
the Mark Moa Show. We're we're talking about bitcoin. Uh in a long, roundabout way. I'm in the studio with Spike Cohen um at Real Spike Cohen on Twitter. Um, we're talking about politics and bitcoin and how it's going to change. We'll be back with more. Don't go away, all right, welcome back. You are listening to the markma Show. We're talking about bitcoin. We are talking about the decentralized revolution, and today we're talking about how it is changing politics.
It's uh, I'm saying the death of politics A certainly um as a Spike here said anti politics. I'm in the studio with real Spike Cohen um at Real Spike Cohen on Twitter. Um he was the Libertarian Party, the vice presidential candidate. Um and uh man Spike. So we started talking about this trust breaking down before the break and um, you know how this could lead to massive change, right, just trust in the system, um von Mesis said in the Crack Up Boom. But suddenly the people wake up.
They realized that inflation is both persistent and intentional. And uh, it's like suddenly and like we see inflation all over the news today. We oh, well it's persistent and oh you mean the FEDS always targeted inflation. It's intentional, right, and so like they're starting to wake up. The trust is breaking to your point, maybe some stuff comes out on this game of functions, something maybe happens that caused
that right away. Um, this morning I saw article I forget Uh some MSN mainstream media on publication said Nancy Pelosi was speaking out against China and their human rights issues with the weak ares and um, they're actually calling for like a ban on the Olympics over that, And UM, I thought, man, what a narrative shift, Like what are they getting ready for here? Like why all of a
sudden are they turning on China. There must be something that's like caused them to go from like covering it up to now all of a sudden like openly doing that. And so um, trust has fallen, Uh in my opinion, like the cats out of the bag. And in a sense almost like when the printing press came out, the Protestant Reformation happened and there was nothing the church could do to stop it, and that's kind of what we're
seeing today. Where do we go from here? Like uh, for the average person, I mean you've obviously decided you have made enough money you want to go effect change. You got into politics. Do you think politics is a good use of time for the average person to like really be engaged or is it kind of a waste of time and it's a you know, it's a a dopamine fix or something. I think it depends on the
person and what their goals are. I don't. First of all, I want to say, I don't think politics is or should be the primary route by which we try to affect change. Um. Which is why most of my activism was actually based more and similar to what you're doing, you know, starting my podcast that I do and uh and doing interviews with other people and talking about my experiences as a small business owner. Getting into political into
the political party happened again, almost accidentally. I went in and said, hey, you guys could be doing it this way and saying that this way and maybe doing this, and they're like, okay, great, you're you're our candidate. Okay. UM. So I don't think that party politics is going to be the way that we save mankind or that we
that we are are able to truly free ourselves. I see politics especially electoral politics as a means of harm deduction, as we use things like counter economics, as we use use things like mutual aid and activism, as we use things like education and outreach to bring people into the movement. As as we do that, if we can also use electoral politics to convince elected officials and politicians that it's in their best interests to fight other politicians and try
to nullify what they're doing, then that's great. But no, I don't think we're going to vote our way out of this, no matter how hard we vote. I don't think we're going to protest our way out of this, although protests can certainly have an effect. Um, I think that the main way this is going to happen is going to be from the market coming up with better
ways of doing things. And it's going to be fought at every step by those in the political realm and arena because they want their political solutions over actual economic solutions. But the economic solutions are eventually gonna win out. I believe that liberty is going to win, and I believe when it wins, it's going to be because it makes
more sense and it works better. So, UM, I think what you're saying is something that I have been trying to live, which is the most effective form of voting is voting with your pocketbook, voting with your money, and voting with your feet. And um, that's one reason why I was living in Puerto Rico, UM last year, and I left at the end of the year because they got crazy with their mandates and I'm like, well, you're not gonna get my money anymore. I'm gonna have to
leave now. UM. And I just I can't stay there and give them my money that way. And we've seen, you know, Texas and Florida have how competed California, New York. Both governors found themselves on the chopping block. One kept his job, one didn't. Um. But you know, voting with your feet. But we almost kind of have to get a little bit more of the state's rights or balconization, if you will, in order for that to be really effective. Right, Otherwise,
if everything is federal, it maybe doesn't it's not as effective. Oh. Absolutely, We're not gonna have a federal solution, and for that matter, we're not gonna have a fifty state solution. I think, like I said, I my when I talk to people
about the grassroots move intellectoral politics for Britarians. And incidentally, I'm working largely within the Libertarian Party, but this is also going to include liberty Republicans, It's going to include people that are not involved in politics political parties at all and run as a write in for their school board. So this is not you know, you have to be
a part of the Libertarian Party. But those who choose to get involved in electoral part politics, those who are the most effective at reducing the harm being done at the hands of the state, are largely going to be finding themselves fighting other politicians and bureaucrats and policymakers and working to nullify or combat what's happening. And that that's
largely what we have seen. You know, the biggest moves we've seen in the political realm towards liberty have been politicians saying, even if it's only to get reelected, no, I'm going to fight against this. I'm not gonna let this intrusion stand. Yeah, now you said you didn't think that the protests were that effective. I'm sure I don't even have to ask. I mean this, this, this trucker convoy going on in Canada has been something to see and I was I was load. I was noticing today,
actually tweet about it this morning. Um. They raised over ten million dollars on go fund me, which is more than every political party combined in the last quarter, more than Trudeau, more than anybody. Um. And you know Trudeau keeps saying this is some fringe element, this doesn't represent Canada, right. Um, Well, people voted with their money and the money tally's shows that it's not friends. As a matter of fact, it's more more important, or more powerful than all the political
parties together. It is the largest political movement in Canadian history. Someone joked, you know it's bad when Canadians start protesting on mass um. By the way, I want to be clear, I said, we can't protest our way out of this. I do think protests can be one of the many effective tools, and the Trucker Convoy is a perfect example of that. The Freedom Convoy is a perfect example of that.
More so than even yes, they are bringing people to a message of way, more people agree with you than than the media has been telling you that these lockdowns are bad, that these mandates are bad. But there's also been the real effect of when these tens and hundreds of thousands of truckers come into these cities that have been under various forms of lockdown and capacity restriction and mask mandates and vaccine mandates for months and years. Now,
all that stuff goes away. In Ottawa, people were walking into stores with no respect to any kind of capacity limitations or max mandates or vaccine mandates, going and buying food, going and eating and everything else. And what was happening was the police were unable to do anything about it. They had neither the physical means or the capacity to
try to stop these people from doing it. And so not only did these these truckers and their supporters demonstrate that there's way more people in Canada and frankly around the world that are against the COVID regime restrictions, but they've also just come in and said, now I not obeying any of this, and they've demonstrated in doing so, that there is no such thing as government power. There's
only what the people are willing to tolerate. And the moment they're not willing to tolerate, that ability to effectively enforce goes away. Yeah, when they stopped, when they stopped giving them their consent, right, And so that's kind of going back to why I left Puerto Rico. Like I said, it's like if I continue to stay here and give you my money because a lot of my friends they were like, ah, you know, just use this fake thing
and you can kind of get away with that. And I'm like no, because if I'm here and I'm giving them my money, then I'm basically telling them that what they're doing is okay. And if you look at like the story of like how the Berlin Wall wall fell, or any or really the whole uss are but you know Berlin Wall, the people stopped consenting, right. The people went and sat on the wall and they said, we're not leaving, and uh. The guards are like, well, we'll
shoot you, and they're like, well then shoot everybody. And the guards are like, well, I guess, I guess we can't do that, and uh, they just stopped consenting, and so, uh, I love. I've been reading um lately a lot of the work the Hovel have done and Solcianizchev and talking about how the USSR fell, and they talked about how, um, whenever you're living in a lie, it just takes one person to kind of break through that crust and live
in the truth. And then when other other people see that and they want to do the same, and then you know, more and more people join in, and then to your point, they just can't stop it. If you're listening to the Mark Mos Show, we're talking about bitcoin, We're talking about the decentralized Revolution. I'm in the studio
with Spike Cohen at Real Spike cohen Um. The conversation we've had today and how we'll end it is the quote from Samuel Adams that says it doesn't take a majority to prevail, but rather a small, irate minority to continually light brush fires in the minds of men.