I just saw the video. I always admired Walter, but I really do not understand this circus.

1) he stated that foreign policy takes precedence on economic policy and personal liberty. I do not think the issue is so straightforward. In many cases foreign policy is the output of economic policies. For example, I think that FDR entered IIWW because strong interests needed a standing army, not the other way around. Also, offensive wars would be virtually impossible without fiat money and public debt. Voters/tax-payers would immediately feel the cost throughout increased taxation, cheap nationalism would not be cheap anymore, and voters would likely punish warmongering politicians.

2) even if we consider foreign policy more important, the policies Trump states he wants to implement on personal liberty and economic policies are so outrageous that his supposed softer approach to foreign policy would hardly justify them, at least in my opinion.

3) I am not sure about the supposed relative safety of Trump on foreign policy. Contrary to the other candidates, he really is a lose cannon. The others are more or less restrained by the “establishment”, that wants an aggressive foreign policy, sure, but short of a nuclear war, that could, after all, blows up their asses too. Trump seems the type of guy that once he realizes he is going down in history as a clown, he might just decide to go down with a boom, literary. Notwithstanding all the warmongering rethoric, I feel there is a lower possibility of nuclear war with Cruz than with Trump.

4) finally, but very importantly, Block is in my opinion what Einstein was to physics from the ’20 until his death. He is “mister libertarian” in the eyes of so many people. Jeffrey or Molineax might be more known among the masses, but among “intellectuals” I believe Walter is, maybe together with Ron Paul, the public face of the movement. This action will be distorted and used by our opponents against our message. It is true that it happens anyway, as Walter says, but at least it happens because it cannot be avoided. We cannot, say, be against the legalization of hard drugs, even if our opponents will say that we are a bunch of drug-users. But risking to be accused of being against free-trade or freedom of speech just to promote the marginally least damaging of many horrendous evils (even if you agree about Walter interpretation of Trump, which I do not) is in my opinion irresponsible. Beside, why doing this thing exactly now, and not in previous elections?

I don’t know, maybe old Walt wanted a bit of fun, but I really do not feel comfortable with this.