@PhilipK: Um, my post was about Icke’s theory of power structures, I don’t see any connection at all between that and RP.
Clayton -
Sophisticated Virus Infects Computers in Iran, Mideast
From the article:
Ever wonder which laws actually apply to Congress?
Luckily they’ve got a nice page online that tells you what they are:
Starting about 7 minutes in Icke says: “At the moment and up to this point people are being led to believe there are 2 partys in America that have any chance of forming a government, actually as in every other country they are not different partys, they are masks on the same face.”
There was a point in President Bushes presidency that I thought Republicans would never come back into ‘fasion’. Ron Paul won me and several others over, but when I think abou the fact that he is looking to take power through the same system Icke disscusses, I feel he gives it some legitimacy.
Isn’t it likely that Ron Paul will be used by this very system? Since he has already bowed down to it in some symbolic way.
Well, I think that what RP was trying to do with the 2008 and 2012 campaigns was to “go back to our roots” and return to saner politics as a means to long-term liberty. In other words, I think RP’s view is that you can’t just say “there’s no place like freedom”, click your heels three times and be there, things have to change first and the first things that have to be changed are the political parties and political structures as they exist today. Does this lend the system “legitimacy”? Perhaps, but only to the extent that the system itself actually is legitimate, which is a miniscule amount indeed.
Eleven terms and not a single vote for increased taxes, pork spending, etc. etc. etc. and you are trying to say he’s given even a symbolic gesture of obedience to the System??? RP is truly one-of-a-kind and you’re not the first to attempt to attach some kind of nefarious purpose to him. He’s been pro-gold, pro-liberty, anti-imperialism, anti-welfarism, etc. etc. since decades before it was cool. He’s explained that, in the last four or five years, he’s seen a response he never once imagined he would see in the 30 years that went before. In other words, he was doing what he was doing because he believed it was right and because it’s what he wanted to do. I can’t think of any nobler motives to do something.
Clayton -
@Clayton Don’t get me wrong I respect the philosophies that RP promotes and like how he votes.
However the very act of voting within the political system is what I’m refering to as a ‘symbolic gesture of obedience’. He is following the rituals of the government and thus is an initiate of that system.
Do you really think if Ron Paul was elected that it would mean an end to the existing power stucture. Ron Paul is educated on a lot of the scams that are going on world-wide but he still follows what he ‘ought’ to do. So in some sense he leads the sheep who have waken to some extent but are engaging in a sort of approved rebellion.
I agree with much of what RP says but think a ‘John Galt’ style approach needs to be taken.
“The question isn’t who is going to let me; it’s who is going to stop me.”
― Ayn Rand
Everything said about sports and its pacification of those who watch it can be said about politics displayed in mass media.
Even if Ron Paul is the ‘good guy’ and what he says is true. It creates a tribal team external to ourselves and puts us in a role of passive observer.
Computer virus briefly hits Iran’s oil industry
Iran, other Mideast states hit by computer virus
Forget Gaga; Indonesia wild for own raunchy shows
That place is beautiful. It’d be nice to go there one day.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2012/05/future-european-union-part-2
Hamilton’s new financial system helped transform the young republic from a basket-case into an economic powerhouse.
So will Europe have its Hamiltonian moment? Probably not.
I hate mises.org - it made it impossible for me to enjoy reading the Economist 
James Altucher calls it “the worst gossip rag of all media.” And he’s not even close to being an Austrian.
It sucks that someone who makes pretty interesting videos on science can produce this rubbish. If he was at one time really part of the Libertarian Party of the USA then I have to question if this so called party actually deserve it’s namesake
[view: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oygQVhu30s&feature=plcp]
So…what is the argument? You need to weigh costs and benefits to actions? Gee. Thanks Einstein. I’m so looking forward to taking another 8 minutes out of my life to watch your next video.
What a loser.
Here He Goes Again: Bloomberg Set To Ban All Sugary Drinks Over 16 Ounces# Inside North Korea# North Korea’s got talent
Anyone notice that there seems to be an increased amount of news regarding North Korea?
- It sucks that someone who makes pretty interesting videos on science can produce this rubbish. If he was at one time really part of the Libertarian Party of the USA then I have to question if this so called party actually deserve it’s namesake
The “Libertarian Party” has been and probably will be in the future a mish-mash of people with “libertarian feelings” and not any kind of bastion of reasoned philosophy. This guy is a prime example of that.
For example, right off the bat, he keeps conflating “the community” and “the majority”. In his Candidates-on-a-stranded-island example, when the others get together and force Paul to work, he says “the community is better off, although Paul’s personal liberty is infringed upon.”
Right there, he goes braindead. Suddenly Paul isn’t in “the community”. While it very well might be true that the other three individuals are better off by forcing Paul to work for their ends, he somehow forgets that 1/4 of the “community” is now working under direct threat of violence. Is that really “better off” or just “more productive”? By that logic, we should be shoving people left and right into coerced servitude to maximise the productivity of “the community”. Sorry! China’s outproducing us! Back to the salt mines!
Of course, this guy isn’t that arguement as a whole, but my point is that he has no solid principles to stand on. Just vauge definitions and feel-good ideas.
I originally thought that we should teach people about property rights. Until, that is, I hit this brick wall:
I think the only really uniting value of big-L libertarians is an overdeveloped sense of individualism… which can play just as well into the hands of the State as an overdeveloped sense of communalism. After all, without a network of loyal friends, family and business associates, you are alone, easily separated from the herd and trapped. I think that many libertarians underestimate the role that family and society play in keeping them safe from even greater levels of State predation than we already suffer under.
A simple illustration is under-the-table work. You can’t do under-the-table work for just anybody… they just might rat you out to the IRS. But the more extensive non-State trust networks are, the more latitude there is for untaxed, under-the-table economic activity (black market activity). In fact, I suspect this is the hidden power of sub-culture communities such as the Mormons, the Amish, Gypsies, etc. They are like little onshore tax-havens.
It is possible to have too much zeal for individualism.
Clayton -