Search the Community

I recently got finished watching the debate between Stefan Molyneux and Bill Mitchell. Bill's stance was trust Trump because he's smarter than all of us. Which he is. Stefan's stance was invading the middle east is and has always been a bad idea. Which is true. Speaking as an ancap/libertarian/voluntarist, I have never bothered with politics because there's no point fighting against that which we cannot change. Before Trump's election the world had a different view on politics than today. Politicians make a lot of promises, we "vote" and if we're really, really lucky maybe a tiny fraction of those promises will be kept. I used to laugh at people that got so involved into politics to the point they were genuinely shocked when a politician didn't keep their promise. I still do this to be fair, with this whole Marine Le Pen hype. She's a lawyer, a career politician, a woman, and a socialist. Who does she remind you of? Anyways, I got invested in Trump not because of his policies but because of the man himself. He fought against literally everyone and won. I genuinely believe that if there's anyone that could put a halt or slow down the machine of power known as the state it would be him. I can't think of anyone else who could do it. Well, maybe Batman but crime-fighting billionaire playboys don't exi-- So where I'm getting at is what if the the cogs of the warmachine with Syria were put into motion and Trump couldn't stop it? What if the "most powerful man on Earth" doesn't really have that much power? A lot of shady stuff has been going on in Trump's cabinet with Bannon being pushed further away, Trump loyalists getting kicked out and neocons brought in, the corrupt media suddenly doing an 180 literally over night, other globalists start praising him, and so on. How much of these events is Trump and how much is deep state? How could we possibly even know the difference at this point? I think this is the most important question. It used to be simple. Are the democrats, McCain, Merkel, MSM, etc upset? Then it's Trump. Now's I'm just confused who's doing what. There's no point in debating x decision was right or wrong when we don't even have a method of determining if he's the one that's making it. So what do you guys think? Are these high-ranking state officials just glorified poster boys (and girls) or does the office actually hold power?