Here's What Needs To Be Done...

Ajouté : 2026-05-05

[00:00:05]Why do you think that the propaganda lends itself to I'm sorry, but like the top podcasts for women are like they talk about being promiscuous. There's gas.

[00:00:17]>> Can I do my woman podcast impression for you?

[00:00:19]>> Oh god. I would be like I would I hate to do this but I I like as raising a daughter.

[00:00:25]>> Yeah. Yeah. How are you feeling? Yeah.

[00:00:28]But what about Have you heard of Yes.

[00:00:31]Yeah. Yeah.

[00:00:33]They're so insufferable. They're They're so insufferable. I can't take I can't take it. It's too much. Like what? They It's just so insufferable.

[00:00:44]>> I'm so ashamed to say that. Like I don't >> I don't disagree with you.

[00:00:49]>> What What is that do you think? What is the I just see all of these narratives and the you know you're bringing up a few of them but there are so many others. What is behind this propaganda do you think? Cuz I'm starting to think it's like >> you know China and Russia and like you know I'm like am I losing my mind? Like I genuinely starting to think this.

[00:01:14]>> Yeah. Like you're not. The thing is is that with the ideals of universal suffrage came the ideas of voting blocks, competing interests with each other. So it doesn't really feel like much of a united United States, does it?

[00:01:28]>> Oh my god.

[00:01:29]>> No, it doesn't. It feels like we're a bunch of small tribes and we're all worrying for for power. And that's actually what we're doing because we all have we we have different blocks of ideas with different interest base of those ideas and we're competing because for the power of the vote. That's what we're competing for. We want the biggest block we can get so that our ideas win.

[00:01:50]Okay.

[00:01:51]>> And so that our worldview is the one that ends up kind of taking taking over or becoming the dominant worldview.

[00:01:58]That's the the very idea of what it is that universal suffrage did. So with all these different worldviews competing, really is it any wonder that that uh things are so divided and they feel so divisive and they feel like uh it's very tribal. Well, it feels like that because it is. So you're not crazy. You're not going mad uh when you see that people are like, "What the hell are these people over here thinking?" Well, they're thinking within the confines of their personal interest and worldview, and they want power towards that worldview, and they're going to take actions towards that. That's one one of the other problems with everybody can just vote. It's a it's a it's always been silly. Pure democracy didn't work inside of uh Greece. It's never worked anywhere it was tried. Democracy expanded is always a terrible idea. We have a republic. Checks and balances, a system in place which is designed specifically to check government power but also check people's power, right?

[00:02:54]It's it's designed to do that. And the universal suffrage has kind of created an imbalance to that. And so I think I think we got to retract a lot of that and move move backwards towards what worked because what's going on right now doesn't work.

[00:03:08]>> What did work? I mean I I just remember life being easier as a kid, but my you know my mom voted, my dad voted. I mean would you be okay with let's say a competency test to vote? So if you're 18, you have to pass a competency test, a knowledge of the issues, some way to prove you at least understand what you're voting on.

[00:03:28]>> I'm not even sure a test would be the best idea. I think that there's there's a multitude of ways to do this. And all of them have kind of their pros and their cons. And I think that that's the debate which should be had rather than the we should just >> we should just grant that this is just the way things are because it's not a good way to live.

[00:03:46]>> Okay. Uh but some of the ways that you could mitigate this, you could do what's called one household voting and that would just be like married couples can vote, right? And you only get one vote for per household. And so the idea there is that a husband's not divided against their wife, right? You have one one house voting. Uh that's one way that you could do it. There's problems with that, too.

[00:04:05]>> Then I'm going to be like, "What if I'm not married? Now you're going to force me to get married." It's like, >> yeah. Well, that's part of the incentive, though, right? Part of the incentive is like, well, if you're married, uh, you're probably going to have kids and you're pro those kids are probably going to be much more well adjusted in society than if you have them unmarried. So, it' be part of like an incentive program, do it. So, that's one aspect of a way you could do it. Not saying that's the one I advocate for, just kind of giving you different options which have been presented.

[00:04:29]Another stakeholder, meaning you have to actually have property bought and be paying taxes on it. Though I think that that's the >> tell you they can't and then it's a trap because it's all set up. So then you're going to hear that one.

[00:04:42]>> Yeah. And and also that could be the least effective for other reasons that I don't even think are really relevant to the conversation, but it could it could be it could create other issues. Uh one really good proposition from various libertarians that I think has a lot of merit is that people who pay more into the system than they get out of the system. I like >> should be able to vote. And so this creates incentives for people who want to vote.

[00:05:06]>> Speaking my language.

[00:05:07]>> Yeah. So that gives incentives to people who want to vote to become to become a net gain to society rather than and and what that would do ultimately is it would also cut down social welfare. It would cut down social programs. It would cut down entitlements which is the largest spending in the United States.

[00:05:24]So you could look at that option. I get it.

[00:05:26]>> There's a multitude of ways to kind of look at this where it's like we're not going to even you don't even have to disenfranchise. It's not even that's not even necessary. Women by a natural process will just limit their votes anyway because they'll be less interested in that from the political perspective. And so, by the way, will many men or even most men. The whole idea here though is that you want the people in society to vote who have either the best stake towards the thing >> or they have the education on the thing.

[00:05:56]And there's only so many different ways you can do that. It where you're kind of narrowing the bracket down to the people who really should be doing it. And it also that will cut down tribalism drastically.

[00:06:07]>> So if I can show that I'm contributing just hypothetically, right? If I can show that I'm contributing and I'm invested in our country, it doesn't matter. Would you say okay at that point doesn't matter if you're a man or a woman? If you're equally giving back to the system more than you take, would there be some sort of equal playing field there despite having test?

[00:06:28]>> Yeah, you could. Sure. You could have the the system set up if if egalitarianism is still the mode that you want to operate under like you know I want to >> I don't think you're ever going to get Andrew I just don't no is going to be like yeah take my right to vote it's going to make them more >> but but I want to let you know evil patriarch it's going to lean into that though >> yeah but once upon a time it was the opposite that that women said women are never going to want the right to vote and it was women who said that >> was a better time necessarily though. I mean I >> I don't know. I'd have to ask my grandmother who passed >> a better time. Well, I mean it wasn't better technologically but it the but that was due to the confines of you know it being uh pre-industrialization uh but even post-industrialization when you still had some limits on voting.

[00:07:19]Yeah, I would say that th at least the the spirit of the US was a far more moral uh place and a far less degenerate and horrific place to live in for sure when it came to those those issues. But most wallets still plug into the same system we were trying to escape in the first place. And that's why Rumble built Rumble wallet. It's a self-custodial wallet that lives inside an ecosystem that actually defends free speech and financial freedom. No bank holding your balance. Not even Rumble can touch your funds. This is your money on your keys, on your terms. So, if you're serious about sovereignty, financial and digital, this is where you level up. Go to wallet.rumble.com or search Rumble Wallet in your app store, download it, back up your recovery phrase, and move your money where it belongs, in your hands.

[00:08:07]>> That aside, I'm just saying yes, you can make it completely fair across the board, men and women, if you wanted to.

[00:08:12]And the idea here is just uh hey, if you're a net gain to the system rather than a parasite on the system, you can you can go ahead and cast your ballot male or female. I wouldn't have a problem with that system because it limits suffrage.

[00:08:26]>> Yeah. Well, limit suffrage. And that's my ultimate goal, right? is to limit suffrage down to prevent the ideas of tribalism and things like this and also to prevent all the money which comes into politics from third party systems and NOS's and think tanks and and things like this uh and packs and super PACs which just pump billions and billions of dollars uh into the system in order to influence these various voting blocks.

[00:08:50]That's where all that money comes in.

[00:08:52]>> I know. Do you think that there is any universe where that can be reformed?

[00:08:57]Because >> yes, >> you do because it without being able to reform this the campaign finance, I just don't know how you ever It's Can I Can I ask you this? So many people get really upset when I talk about wanting to regulate big food or big farmer or big insurance. It's like I don't want big government. I'm like, well, they certainly want big government working for them. They're paying a heck of a lot of money to get big government to work on their behalf.

[00:09:24]And you think I'm crazy? like I want these monster corporations to be regulated. They should not be able to put poison in our food and it's like I don't want a nanny state but everything but then by the time we're done everything is going to have pesticide, herbicide, fungicide, fake fat, fake color, fake flavor. We're seeing I just I'm looking at this from a health perspective, right? I am seeing all of this evil that these guys are allowed to do for profit. But on the other hand, it's like, oh, you just want a nanny state. What do you see here? Well, the thing when I break down what big government is, uh big government is mostly set in military and entitlement spending, right? So, that's where it all is. Entitlement spending especially, that's the number one expenditure uh that we as a country do is is on entitlements. The second is military.

[00:10:11]Both of those. Now, I would argue that at least from the military perspective, uh perhaps having a bloated budget there may not be the worst idea for the security of the United States. When you're the global hegeimon, having the most powerful, vicious military on planet Earth, I think is an advantage.

[00:10:26]>> Yeah.

[00:10:26]>> But massive entitlement spending is not a huge advantage and that's the number one expenditure. If it was the case that you were to draw down on some of the bloating like what Trump was trying to do with you said and other programs like this, I wouldn't have any problem with food regulation because the way that we distribute food now is far different than the locally grown organic things that we used to have in in ages past when people did not have these massive stomach issues and all of the uh various autoimmune system issues which basically are all coming from the things that they eat. Uh, you know, my wife has talked about this pretty in depth, too. She's she's a kind of in the the fitness aspect of things like you are. Um, I I don't know why the hell she's with me, but but but she but that's but that's her thing, right? And I don't think that there's an actual problem there with the idea of regulating out actual poisons.

[00:11:21]In fact, that's one of the few functions government is supposed to have, okay?

[00:11:25]>> Is is to take care of the health and welfare of the people of the United States. that's in the Constitution itself.

[00:11:31]>> Okay. Thank you for that. Cuz sometimes, you know, you you speak on more conservative or when I go on more conservative news channels, it's like, okay, but you know, we don't want a nanny state. You know, we really don't want big government getting involved.

[00:11:42]I'm thinking this is ex this is exactly >> that's small government in comparison to the things that are actually big government.

[00:11:48]>> I understand. So, if I was going to if I was going to point out like big government, I would be I'd be looking at what many many other things uh before I would look at whether or not uh testing in meat factories for lististeria was going to be, you know, cut from the budget.

[00:12:03]>> Does that mean that there wouldn't be waste, fraud, and abuse in that system?

[00:12:06]Of course, there would be. Uh but there's a lot more waste, fraud, and abuse likely to come up in systems where Somalians are pretending that they have daycarees and taking in hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpay dollars to take care of the elderly that they're not even taking care of. And that's happening in multitudes of states now that it's being pointed out. Um and the thing is is like a little bit of of oversight there actually would have saved the state, you know, maybe billions of dollars, right? So there when you're talking about the bloating of government and big government, we're talking about Reagan's ideas um you know of cutting cutting government down, but you're supposed to cut out departments which are useless and worthless and are not doing any. They're not really assisting with the health and the welfare of the people. One thing about food intake and now in the world of vaccines and medicine where you know people are getting prescriptions for all sorts of things that industry of course you want to have oversight on for the purposes of regulating the health and welfare of people like that's part and partial of how things ought, right? That's the that's the point.

[00:13:10]You're going to have some oversight there. Uh, but I do think that you can cut down the size of government in other arenas and you would save way way more money than trying to cut it out of food safety.