Malice on Progressives – Part Of The Problem #767

Dave Smith and Michael Malice bring you the latest in politics! On this episode of Part Of The Problem, Dave and Michael discuss the hypocrisy of the progressives, the slippery slope into fascism, Kamala Harris track record, and so much more!
This Episode Was Recorded On 8.13.21


Aug 26-28 (ROCHESTER) –
Aug 8 (DC)
Stand up Show –
Podcast –
Nashville Aug 14 –

Support Our Sponsors
FUM – Shop Breathe Fum and save 10% with code PROBLEM10

Part Of The Problem Airs every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 6pm ET on the GaS Digital Network! The newest 20 episodes are always free, but if you want access to all the archives, watch live, chat live, access to the forums, and get the show five days before it comes out everywhere else – you can subscribe now at and use the code POTP to save 15% on the entire network.

Follow the show on social media:



Subscribe On YouTube:

Buy Daves Album : Dave Smith Libertas –

Dave Smith and Robbie The Fire Bernstein bring you the latest in Politics three times a week, with the promise of bonus episodes! Libertarian Philosophy mixed with a sense of humor, POTP is one of the leading voices in libertarianism.

Dave Smith is a New York based stand-up comedian, radio personality, and political commentator. Dave can be seen regularly on “The Greg Gutfeld Show” and “Red Eye” on Fox News, as well as “Kennedy” on Fox Business Network. In 2013 Dave was featured as one of the New Faces at the prestigious Just For Laughs Comedy Festival in Montreal. He was also a featured performer on the New York Comedy Festival’s “New York’s Funniest” showcase in 2014 and 2015. Dave’s outlet for his social commentary is his podcast, “Part of the Problem,” which is available on iTunes. Dave is also co-host of “The Legion of Skanks” podcast, available on the GaS Digital Network.

Written by Dave Smith


  1. Better sanitation was the reason for improved health outcomes, not vaccines. This new one isn't even a typical one. It's brand new technology and it's neither safe or effective.

  2. Regarding immigration, the constant repeating of the stolen private property argument is so easily debunked that it drives me nuts more people don't point it out.

    I know that I have pointed out the flaw in this logic countless times, on Dave's pages, on Lew's pages, Woods', Hoppe's.

    If your argument stems from the desire to simulate the private property control that the victims of government theft would have, then you MUST also accept gun control and any other rule that a private property owner could impose on their land. On someone else's private property, there is not the same inherent expectation of freedom that there is on your own property. And that conundrum when sorting out how rights should be applied on government controlled land is exactly why it should be eliminated.

    The problem is that for every person that wants their private property rights expressed through rule A, there is another that prefers rule B. And you have no more moral authority to dictate one than the other if you want the legitimacy of your percentage of ownership to be represented. They do also. The biggest problem with immigration controls is that they inherently violate the rights of people who wish to associate with each other on behalf of the wishes of people that might never even be affected by those associations. It places a higher value on a person's desire NOT to associate, even though they wouldn't ever even interact with those people anyways, than it places on people's right to voluntarily choose to associate with each other without interacting with anyone else.

    Additionally, even though I know you don't explicitly endorse the goverment actions like deportation and other expensive, destructive controls, the rhetoric by itself emboldens border fanatics. Many of your followers do indeed oppose any attempts to reduce border enforcement which includes deportation, raids of employers, demands for papers, profiling, and even unequal application of law.

    So you should be A LOT more explicit and outspoken on the aspect of your position that denounces state interference in people's lives because I've literally had your followers point me to your podcasts (which I've ironically already watched all of) in order to rationalize their support for stricter border and citizenship controls.

  3. The Anarchist audio lineup is just beyond… Everyone from Maj Toure to Buck Sexton to Mikhaila Peterson to Dave Rubin to Dave smith to Ben domenich to Tom woods to Yeonmi Park, and of course Malice and Lex. Luis did not make the cut ? Stoked for the release ? ? ?

  4. i heard a Libertarian socialist advocate on Tim Pool last week for vaccine mandates, and didn't believe in the n.a.p. Can someone explain to me , seriously, what Libertarian socialist means?

  5. Progressives don’t see any threats to liberty because they don’t believe in individual freedoms. They believe in THEIR authoritarian dictates and anyone who opposes them must be the other…

  6. The big problem is that government mostly doesn't act directly any more. They've trained all of the collectivist ideologies in the top rated universities, who then go on to run the major corporations and becomes members of boards, especially of big tech. These boards then choose the CEOs who represent their ideologies. The government brings in tech to sit before senate hearings and threatens to break them up, so tech responds by forming relationships with the government in order to protect their interests, hiring ex-government officials into upper level positions in their companies, making them a revolving door for government workers just like it is currently for Corporate Media. Then the corporations implement all of the policies that the government want to but can't because, you know, rights: complete control over the narrative, being vaccinated or wearing masks is required for your continued employment, shutting out anyone who is against what they stand for. The government then claims to work against big tech by regulating them, which in actuality just prevents any upstart competition from getting a foothold. Then Reason acts like this is not complete collusion or an act of government forced ideologies, because a private company is implementing the policies, like a company being simultaneously banned on Apple and Google Play, being kicked off of AWS, having PayPal and Visa denying their payment system — no collusion going on there!

  7. Technically and theoretically, for the anarchist….i.e. an advocate of statelessness, the question framed as "open borders" or "closed borders" is a baseless question. There are no "borders" because there is no "political/state jurisdiction" because there is no state. There is ONLY property and property "boundaries". So I would say, if someone asks you "are you for open borders", DON'T take the bait. Unless of course, you want to discuss the question in the terms of statelessness or not.

  8. Many argue that nations can exist and have existed outside of the state paradigm; I agree. This would be a VERY interesting discussion…..states and nations. I simply say, there are "nations" and there are "nation-states". There are similarities but there are MANY differences, the main one being the existence of state jurisdiction and boundaries (borders). As a corollary, the distinction and difference between "property rights" and "political jurisdiction" would be a great discussion.

  9. I don't think DeSantis is mandating or prohibiting businesses from masks. He IS saying that sub-governments like cities and counties (which includes government schools) cannot require them.

  10. Just because the government puts people in jail for heroin use or even sell, does not justify removing more freedoms from other people! Two wrongs don't make a right! Yes, fight for the freedom to use heroin, but if you see the government starting to prevent people from even working maybe you should also be very angry about if not more!

  11. I'm not hearing how these libertarian or anarchist solutions get us to a place better than what we have now, as much as I hate to say it. Like "Everything would be privatized" – so what we have now but minus what's left of the guarantee to the Bill of Rights? I don't get the appeal. If anyone can explain how these ideas work, please go for it, cause I'm swimming in circles here.

  12. Dave, Please do an episode on your views on border policy like you mentioned. I'm very interested and it is one of the major issues I have with the libertarian party as a whole. I think I and many others would benefit well from hearing your position. Thanks for everything you do. Your podcast has been a breath of fresh air for me.

  13. Here's what's missing from the immigration discussion:

    The state specializes in dual-use programs. You may have a good reason for wanting the government to do something, that doesn't mean your reason is why it's being done.

    People ask for free education, the state assembles the physical, legal and institutional infrastructure needed to provide free education, then it proceeds to do all sorts of other things to all these kids they've rounded up, but never seems to get around to educating most of them.

    People ask for free security, the state assembles the physical, legal and institutional infrastructure needed for police and military forces to keep people secure, then it proceeds to do all sorts of other things with all these goon squads they've assembled, most of which put the average citizen in more danger.

    People ask for free roads so they can get from here to there safely, the state assembles the physical, legal and institutional infrastructure needed to build and maintain free roads, then it proceeds to routinely harass and rob people on those roads.

    People ask for immigration controls, so the state assembles the physical, legal and institutional infrastructure needed to track, identify, round up, imprison and relocate vast numbers of peaceful people….. What else are they going to do with all that manpower and hardware? How many real trucks and real guns and real lawyers and real thugs are you going to watch your enemy assemble while you self-soothe with lullabies about imaginary private borders in imaginary Rothbardistanopolis?

    Good people had good reasons to want free education, free security and free roads. So what?

  14. Great conversation, love the "Your Problem" crossovers!! I just have to say that many who oppose mandates are not "anti-vaxxers," rather people concerned about safety, efficacy and overt corruption in both the pharmaceutical manufacture and regulatory sectors. There very legitimate concerns. If these technologically novel injections wind up having negative long term health effects the mandates could turn out to be unbelievably catastrophic… just putting it out there!

  15. I wish these guys did this everyday. Could listen to these two talk forever. So much authenticity that’s missing from almost all other discourse

  16. This episode should be called "Reasons why Libertarianism have never become that popular."
    All the complaints that they're talking about on this episode are many of the reasons why people don't stick around the Libertarian party even though it's clearly the most logical political position to have. So many Libertarians push people out when they disagree with them on something. I'm no longer libertarian because I believe that abortion is killing someone and that all countries have a right to have borders.