Sam Sedar: “Epic Libertarian Presidential Candidate Meltdown & Freakout Ends Debate”

(Updated with new video): YouTube, June 23rd, 2016 (Via American Third Party Report):

In this Majority Report clip, Sam Seder raises a couple points for debate, but Darryl Perry reaches a serious breaking point and tells Sam what he REALLY thinks of him.

On June 23rd, 2016, Sam Sedar, host of the Majority Report, participated in an on-air debate with former 2016 presidential candidate Darryl W. Perry, who, as a anarchist, sought the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential nomination, ultimately coming in 4th place on the first ballot of voting at the 2016 Libertarian convention with 6.8% of the vote.

Sedar asked Perry to define libertarianism:

The full debate can be viewed below; the part when Perry is introduced is at the 35:20 minute mark:



37 thoughts on “Sam Sedar: “Epic Libertarian Presidential Candidate Meltdown & Freakout Ends Debate”

  1. Thane Eichenauer

    I listened to the clip. Darryl Perry ended his interview by twice thanking Sam Sedar, calling him a horrible and despicable person in a calm tone then hanging up. Calling this an epic meltdown and freakout certainly sounds like a inaccurate description.

    At about the 9 minute mark:

    Also I don’t think describing Darryl Perry as Libertarian Presidential Candidate without including the word former is accurate.

  2. Andy

    Darryl should not have hung up, in my opinion, but Snedar is an annoying person.

  3. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    I find left-wing talk-radio to be insufferable, although the same goes for “right-wing” talk radio. I used to be thoroughly addicted to talk radio. Instead of music like my peers, I listened to Limbaugh, Hannity, Hartmann, Savage, once in a while Alex Jones. I even had my own 11-episode stint called The Lesiak Report (on YouTube) on, which is now defunct. I had fun doing it, but I was terrible and as far as I know my audience could be counted on the fingers of one hand. Nowadays, I’ve stopped listening to talk radio entirely, including Free Talk Live. I used to listen to Chris Cantwell’s Radical Agenda regularly and have stopped that too. When it comes to media, there’s nothing worse than TV, I don’t own one and never will, but at the end of the day, talk radio just doesn’t beat reading.

    I was somewhat borderline on whether or not to post this. It may be more appropriate for just ATPR. That’s one of the reasons why ATPR continues to exist. The title caught my attention, so I thought it was going to be a nice little bit of entertainment for a Friday night. After re-watching it, it doesn’t seem like that much of a “freak out” or “meltdown”. Perry says [to Sedar] “you are a madman, Sam, if you think you have a legitimate right to force people to do what you want them to do.” Towards the end, Perry asks Sedar what he thinks should happen if someone doesn’t pay taxes to the government. Sedar says he ultimately believes that person belongs in jail. Perry retorts: “Thank you for saying that Sam, you’re a horrible, despicable person,” and ends with thanking Sedar for having him on the show before hanging up.

    Now, I realize the title is not “nice”, but it comes from Sedar himself. I’m once again identifying as a paleoconservative, a label I’m going to stick with. but I think Perry is an interesting and admirable figure. To an extent, he embodies what I wanted to be in life when I was younger: a radio talk show host, writer with several published books and a passionate political activist who gains a following running for office and ending up with a respectable result.

    I really like putting words together in an IPR comment. If WordPress was like this, I’d be more inclined to churn out some stuff on ATPR. I like the comment box “feel,” so excuse, or skip over, the long windedness.

    Here’s a clip from this appearance that doesn’t has a normal title and may be more of interest to the IPR community:

  4. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    I don’t know why the video won’t embed on my above comment. Anyway, I think I should change the title to be more objective and reflect what transpired. Perry seemed to be a tad angry, but not nearly the level of a “meltdown” or “freak out”.

  5. T Rex

    If the conversation had been held during the slavery debate in the 1800s:

    Seder: If we end slavery, how will all the dumb slaves get jobs you moron?

    *Progressive cast cackles in the background*

    Perry: We will get them jobs

    *Progressive cast explodes in uncontrollable laughter*

    Seder: How? There has never been such a thing.

    *Progressives continue laughing*

    Perry: You’re a jerk

    Seder: I mindlessly regurgitate the conventional wisdom of my time while you say something that is different!

    *Progressives continue laughing*

  6. Thomas Knapp

    “Also I don’t think describing Darryl Perry as Libertarian Presidential Candidate without including the word former is accurate.”

    You’re right. It’s inaccurate. But helpful.

  7. Stewart Flood

    Proof of why Perry should never be a candidate for office. The points that the somewhat obnoxious host made about “who” would issue deeds and “who” would arbitrate are exactly the problem with “pure” anarchism.

    Perry showed his dangerous and somewhat unbalanced personality. He backed himself in a corner and then he attacked the host verbally. The host is obviously a statist, but you don’t win arguments with statists the way Perry acted.

    The host’s listeners would not be converted from any statist beliefs by Perry’s statements in this interview.

    I give Perry a zero for this one.

  8. Thane Eichenauer

    Stewart Flood commented: “The host is obviously a statist, but you don’t win arguments with statists the way Perry acted.”

    I see rather little evidence that more than 1% of people change their political beliefs after age 21. The project of finding some method to do so is ongoing in my opinion. Maybe Perry will be effective with Sedar and his audience, maybe he won’t. I rather think he planted a seed in the desert but only time will tell.

  9. T Rex

    The Native Americans never existed, according to Seder. There was no central government keeping track of land! Land simply didn’t exist altogether.

  10. Andy

    Stewart, I disagree that this illustrated a problem with pure anarchism. The truth is that the state does a poor job of determining property rights. One example is eminent domain, particularly in regard to the Kelo decision.

    The fact of the matter is that there is never likely to be a utopia even if libertarians win, but I believe the evidence clearly indicates that we would be better off with a lot more freedom, not less, and certainly not with what we have now.

    I agree that Perry could have handled himself better here (but that host is particularly annoying, in my opinion), and Perry usually does, as I have listened to him on Free Talk Live and other shows on the Liberty Radio Network on and off for several years.

  11. Be Rational

    Wow. Horrible behavior

    Meltdown, absolutely.

    Angry without provocation.

    Darryl Perry should NEVER be allowed to speak for the LP or Libertarianism or liberty in any forum, until he learns to control himself better.

    Anyone hearing this is likely to develop a permanent anti-Libertarian bias.

    Mr. Perry should get a job, something where he doesn’t have to interact with people, and donate to the LP, if he wants to help. But, if he represents the face of Liberty to the world, nearly everyone will become a statist.

  12. Andy

    What about Gary Johnson’s meltdowns during some of the LP presidential debates? Were they not worse?

    Also, what about the cringe worthy comments made by Johnson and Weld since they have been on the campaign trail, particularly during the CNN Town Hall? I have already encountered people who are questioning the Libertarian Party’s devotion to gun rights because of comments made by Johnson and Weld (and Welds record).

  13. Stewart Flood

    I was not trying to compare Perry to Johnson. Perry’s problem is his temper and his inability to explain his message when he is thrown off his script — see the debates, same scripted sound bites each time, same pen throwing, same everything!

    Johnson? Same problem with his script, but instead of anger he just waffles.

    I am not at all happy with Johnson. He is turning the public image of libertarians into watered down republicans.

  14. dL

    I listened to parts. It wasn’t a meltdown. It was just another demonstration that NAP is not an effective method of argument against those who ascribe to the legitimacy of the state. Both parties simply end up talking past one another. One then hang ups in frustration.

    I very rarely hear libertarians argue against proggies effectively. And assuredly, a retreat to mealy-mouthed respectability politics is not the correct course. You first have to establish that your opponent does indeed reasonably subscribe to a presumption of liberty. If your opponent does not, you probably should end it right there. Its impossible to argue with someone who begins with a presumption of authority. The authoritarian will simply resort to making you falsify a million and one objections. The debate will inevitably devolve into a final insult, “stick it up you azz, fascist,” before signing off.

    Now if you opponent does reasonably subscribe to a presumption of liberty, then you can go with something like: “libertarianism is a radical branch of liberalism. It begins with the liberal presumption of liberty but it relies on a real-world political economic critique(Laissez Faire) to tear down liberal abstractions that serve as suppositional contraventions of liberty. These abstractions include:social contract theory, implied consent, social justice, regulatory prior restraint and representational democracy. In short, the state is not the organization of justice, the organization of rights protections, the organization of this or that…it is the organization of plunder. The argument proceeds by tearing down every legitimacy claim made the liberal statist, and it ends with the liberal statist signing off with “stick up you azz, you anarchist.” But it is an argument. The participants are not talking past one another. They share a common premise. The statist simply can’t make the case for statist legitimacy–that is, it does what it is supposed to do without violating all of the things it supposedly exists for in the first place.

  15. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Be “Rational” cracks me up every time. If I want to see an epic meltdown, I scroll to the comments to see what he has posted.

    I am seldom disappointed.

    I would support Perry in a run again in a heartbeat.

  16. Caryn Ann Harlos

    As far as changing political beliefs after 21, I have done it twice. Was a Democrat, nearly progressive up until about age 30. Became more conservative, eventually quite neo-con for near about 15 years, and then dropped out of participation in disgust for 4-5 years and discovered libertarianism. The conservative portion though was somewhat of an aberration, very much influenced by religion… in the church I went to, if you were a Christian, you were a Republican and that was that. If I had found libertarianism while in the democrat period I would have probably went from that to that.

  17. Election Addict

    “Do you have any rights that the state doesn’t grant you?”

    “I don’t have the right to secede. … because we don’t really have property rights since the state will kick you out if you don’t pay property tax….”

    “Well, I don’t understand, how can you secede if you don’t have property rights?”

    ” … The town would come and kick you out of your land” (like he had already said)

    “Huh? How would you know if it were your land?”

    Seder’s transition wasn’t smooth. Why assume he was suddenly speaking of the hypothetical anarcho-capitalist society, rather than continuing the previous conversation? Immediately after that the two were discussing different things, I think.

    Some of Seder’s counter-arguments later on are common, though, I presume. Especially about how anyone would follow private agencies’ decisions on who is in the wrong. Wouldn’t one agency have to come out on top, to prevent either party from seeking more private agencies to side with him, with the richest inevitably being the most successful? How could it ever be assured under such a system that people keep the fruits of their labor, rather than the society devolving into cronyism or feudalism? Shouldn’t people agree on which agency that should be (presumably one that represents them the best)?

    I also don’t get how the state with a monopoly on power is always worthy of contempt and a pure libertarian society (with, really, multiple institutions of power) is not, if they practically have the same result. Forcing people to pay taxes is a better way of ensuring that people keep the fruits of their labor, if we have reason to believe that the higher brackets are ripping off their workers (which… we do, since Carter and Reagan). Maybe an anarchist would even say the capitalists are stealing from their workers, but I don’t care to go that far (I don’t hate capitalists).

  18. Tony From Long Island

    This guy should NEVER be representing the LP or libertarianism in general. He again shows the selfishness of pure libertarianism. He’s also rude. He is on the Sam Seder show, not his own show.

    Wow – what a jerk. He comes on someone else’s show – then RIGHTFULLY is told that he should be arrested for not paying taxes, but the HOST is the “horrible despicable person.” Give me a break.

    I love the argument that he should just be left alone and doesn’t want any of the town’s services – but I wonder how he would feel if there was a fire at his house and the local fire department comes to his assistance. Of if he has a heart attack and the local paramedics come to his assistance. I guess he doesn’t want any mail either.

    While I agree that government needs to be smaller – but it should (and needs to) exist. Let Mr. Perry start his own anarchist party because he is an embarrassment to the LP.

    Go ahead – rip me. It’s Monday, so I’m ready for it. 🙂

  19. Thomas Knapp

    “Go ahead – rip me. It’s Monday, so I’m ready for it. ”

    What’s there to rip? You’re an authoritarian douchenozzle who thinks that calling himself a “libertarian” makes him sound cool. Nothing uniquely ripworthy there. Your type is a dime a dozen and overpriced at that.

  20. Tony From Long Island

    Oh yeah. Libertarians are definitely considered “Cool.”

    Defending a creepy rude jerk who made the LP look terrible (again) is the epitome of “cool.”

    One other reason I left the LP (among several) – anything that is not 100% doctrinaire libertarian is considered “authoritarian.” But I will say that’s the first time I have been called a “Douche Nozzle.” Can’t I be the whole bag? Why just the nozzle?

  21. steve m

    So mail service, fire protection and emergency health services are only possible through the government?

  22. Tony From Long Island

    I do believe the words are “promote the general welfare. . . .

    Go ahead and start your own Mail Service. It won’t be free. Go ahead and start your own fire department. It won’t be free. Go ahead and start your own emergency health services. They won’t be free either.

    Can each of those which are provided by the government now be vastly improved? Of course. However, they DO cost money.

  23. Be Rational

    Perry had a good opportunity to present his Libertarian views. He could have done so calmly and possibly encouraged some listeners to become more Libertarian over time.

    The listeners are the audience – not the host. It’s the listeners we want to reach. The host knew this. Perry didn’t.

    The host asked some challenging, but reasonable questions, then Perry blew up. It was plain that Perry hadn’t done his homework, and although Perry believes religiously in NAP doctrine, he had no idea how it might work or how to explain it. Perry was completely out of his league. So, out of frustration, he exploded in anger at the host.

    Perry made himself the fool. Some listeners may just put it all on Perry and give Libertarianism another chance with another speaker. Some listeners will conflate Perry with all Libertarians and never consider the LP again.

    At my business, I’ve had to fire employees who explode into uncontrollable outbursts like Perry did. Angry representatives can quickly destroy the good reputation it takes years for a business to build. We have to apologize to the offended customer for the behavior of the employee. Sometimes the employee’s intended message was correct, but the angry reponse makes him wrong every time.

    The same is true for the LP. The interviewer or host may try to get your goat, but you should never let yourself get angry, for then the argument is lost, no matter how sound your logic.

    Until Perry gets anger management training, he should not represent the LP publicly. He should get a job where he doesn’t have to deal with the public. He can donate funds, if he wants to help the LP, and let cooler heads deliver the message.

  24. steve m

    Is the existing mail service, fire protection and emergency health care free? Did anybody ask of these to be free? Well besides non-libertarians that wan’t their services to be subsidized by others.

    You do realize we have postal systems that are private (UPS and fedex) and in many places the ambulance services are also private though they may have contracts with local governments. I see no reason you couldn’t have private fire services as well.

  25. Tony From Long Island

    The costs to send a regular letter is considerably less with the USPS than with Fed Ex and UPS.

    Private fire services would be redundant. My point about them not being free is that you can complain about paying taxes and not wanting the government go be in your lives, etc, like Perry was trhing (very unsuccessfully) to do, but if you set up your own system of whatever, it’s not free. You are paying SOMEONE for those services.

    You can say “well, I may never need the fire department, so I should only pay for them when I need them.” OK well if that were the case for EVERYONE, the fire department would not have the funds to exist. You pay taxes that go toward the fire department for the safety of EVERYONE – not just yourselves. We’re all in this together.

    I didn’t like paying taxes for fire protection until I actually needed them in 1997. They arrived in minutes and saved my house from being completely smoke damaged (not to mention saving the life of my cat).

  26. steve m

    You changed your point. You had suggested that Perry had no options other then government services. I suggest he does have other options.

    Now you are suggesting that the tax payer subsidized mail is cheaper then the private mail. I contend that isn’t true. I am paying for you to be able to send your letter cheaper through the US mail. Your use of the US mail costs me money.

    Similarly, the fire department run by local governments and subsidized by the tax payers caries large overheads including wonderful pensions for their employees. The local government workers and state workers combined unions fund may politicians campaign chests. In return they get wonderful benefits. Bidding these services out to private companies could help reduce these benefits and get the groups to run leaner.

    In short, the government run and subsidized services are often over priced for the benefit of the employees. The tax payers are the ones left holding the bag. Take a look at Detroit Michigan and Stockton California. These government services and how they are being run combined with the under funding of their pensions is putting a fair number of US cities at rick of bankruptcy

  27. Tony From Long Island

    Most fire departments in this country are volunteer departments. The taxes cover the cost of running it, equipment, training, etc.

    Yes, you certainly can cent your regular letters via UPS and Fed Ex. Go right ahead and spend at least $9.00 a letter with UPS. I have the UPS world ship program open at my computer right now at work. That $9.00 option is only if the letter isn’t going particularly far.

    So, sure, you have other options.

    I did not suggest that Mr. Perry had NO OTHER options. If that is how it came across, I mis-spoke. I suggest that purist libertarians are SO AVERSE to anything involving the government that they ignore reality.

    You give some examples of poor government management. You won’t get an argument from me that government is efficient all the time.

    Sometimes, taxes are necessary because we are a SOCIETY. We are not 350 separate nations. Are there examples when certain taxes could be eliminated or certain services made more efficient? Yes. There are probably thousands of examples.

  28. steve m

    I use electronic mail for almost everything.

    “But as Robert Shapiro—former Treasury undersecretary and chairman of the economic consultancy Sonecon—points out in a new analysis, American taxpayers subsidize the USPS at a rate that surpasses the costs associated with any Congressional mandate. He estimates that, all told, the subsidies and legal monopolies that Congress bestows upon the post office is worth $18 billion annually.”

  29. steve m

    so we could send 2 billion $9 pieces of mail for what the US post office is costing us.

  30. Tony From Long Island

    The postal service runs at a huge deficit because of the ridiculous provision stuck to them by Republicans that they fund health care for their employees until 2075 or something like that.

    Gentlemen. I suggest we move to our next topic. Thank you for not calling me a “douche nozzle” like our good friend Mr. Knapp.

  31. steve m

    I am thinking, that compared to what we are doing… Darryl Perry might just be rational.

  32. Steven R Linnabary

    TFLI, why do defenders of authoritarianism always demand to know how a theoretical fire company would fund itself but always hope we forget about the hordes of bureaucrats for life ( w/ really cushy retirement plans) and politicians cronies?

    And then you try to confuse people by comparing apples and oranges with your silly USPS v UPS & FedEx comparison. By law USPS has a monopoly on first class mail but UPS & FedEx are limited to overnight and special delivery mail.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.