Podcast #310b: Thaddeus Russell Q&A (Part 2) – The Politics of Self-Interest


Part 10 in the survey series, A Renegade History Course. This is a live discussion with historian Thaddeus Russell, the author of A Renegade History of the United States. Thaddeus addresses questions and objections from the audience regarding our previous shows. Carlos Morales (http://www.truthovercomfort.net/) and Wes Bertrand (http://www.completeliberty.com/) are the co-hosts.

Discussed Today:
Most of the discussion in the second half of the Q&A is built off Ali's question:

"My opinion is that stealing is always bad practice because of the golden rule of property rights (or the NAP) regardless of how big the group is you’re stealing from, how many handouts they receive from the state, or whether you get caught doing it.

Thadeus claimed that his only problem with stealing is in cases where it does not serve your self interest in that you may get caught in which case future trade with that person or organization would be impossible or limited. But then he claims its okay steal from large corporations such as Walmart because they receive corporate handouts from the state. Let’s put aside the fact that it’s in Walmart’s self interest to accept these handouts and instead explore which place you’re better off stealing from based purely on self interest: Walmart or your locally-owner corner store.

If you are caught stealing from the small business the only cost is that you can’t shop there. Worst case scenario the word spreads among business owners, you have a poor reputation in this limited sphere of perhaps your town, and you have to move to another town. If you get caught stealing from a large chain like Walmart and tarnish your reputation with them you are worse off than in the other example because Walmart is everywhere. It doesn’t matter where you are, if you’re blacklisted by Walmart you are arguably much worse off than if you can no longer shop at Bob’s discount beverages. So by Thadeus’s logic, wouldn’t you be better off stealing from small businesses because of their limited influence than a big corporation like Walmart?"

We also return to the objectivism vs. relativism debate, and we then touch on academia, parenting and Stefan Molyneux.

Listener Questions we didn't address:
View Here


Bumper Music:
"The Roof Is On Fire" Rock Master Scott and The Dynamic Three
"Dictaphones Lament" Tycho

Look Closer:
Thaddeus Russell's Site - www.thaddeusrussell.com

Previous School Sucks Show With Thaddeus Russell - https://schoolsucksproject.com/category/podcast/a-renegade-history-course-with-thaddeus-russell/

Please Support School Sucks

Our Amazon Wish List
Donate With Bitcoin
Or Join the A/V Club

Your continued support keeps the show going and growing, which keeps us at the top of the options for education podcasts and leads to new people discovering this message. This subscription also grants you access to the A/V Club, a bonus content section with 200+ hours of exclusive audio and video. If you are a regular consumer of our media, please consider making a monthly commitment by selecting the best option for you...

Join the A/V Club! $6.00/Month

Join the A/V Club! $9.00/Month

Join the A/V Club! $12/Month

Check Also

In My Awareness [PODCAST #692]

(Exploring Integral Theory, Conclusion, With Wes Bertrand) Today Wes and I will discuss self-integration, and ...


  1. It seems to me as if a significant point has been missed. Since much of the discussion revolves around the axiomatic ideals of Objectivism and Relativism, I would reference Cantor’s Diagonal Argument, which would seem to offer a middle ground by offering two orders of infinity. This mathematical proof might be able to bridge the gap between the apparent paradox you have all been discussing. Perhaps all three theories are correct, at least for the purposes of argumentation. Either way, it was a great discussion, though I tend to side with Thad. Don’t worry Brett, I still love you 😛

  2. If Thad has problems with you guys and objectivism/relativism then he’ll rip passages in spacetime in order to deal with Stefan Molyneux. I agree with Carlos – six shows on how Molyneux is a cult leader and a hypocrite is pretty close to ad hominem, esp given that it’s not 100% clear if Molyneux and his lackey DeMarco are on the same page. I don’t know if Carlos will read this, but that person used to put Molyneux and Ben Stone in the same category and has some connection to tru shibes. Maybe there’s some resentment over Molyneux making grandiose statements, being a hypocrite about copyright, and engaging in ad hominem himself in his The Truth About… series?

    Here’s hoping Thad gets asked more questions next time!

  3. Beware of Solipsism and moral relativism, those are tenets of Satanism.
    There is such thing as objective truth. I suggest watching some of Mark Passio’s lectures on the subject. Other than the UFO stuff Mark nails the subject of truth.

  4. How can one have self interest if “self” is a subjective term. Thad says he’s choosing to operate under other people’s subjective constructs but who is doing the choosing in this? If we are all interpretations then who/what is doing the interpreting?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: