ADAM KOKESH:
So you’ve described yourself as a voluntarist. Can you tell us what that means for the big picture, and what your ideal society would be, as a voluntarist?
RON PAUL:
Voluntary means no coercion. So if you want to change people’s habits or change the world you should do it by setting examples and trying to persuade people to do it. You can use force only when somebody uses force against you. So voluntary use of information and persuading people, I think, is the best way to go; and no matter what kind of problem you’re looking at.
ADAM KOKESH:
Do you think we have a chance of achieving a society based on those ideals in America?
RON PAUL:
Not soon. We had a relative voluntary society (you know) in our early history, but steadily, even after the Constitution was passed, steadily it was undermined and it systematically grew, it grew certainly through the 20th century; that is the authoritation approach, which is the opposite. That is: the government tells us everything we can do and can’t do. [..]
Yeah it’s on Russia Today, owned by the Russian government. Reminds me of when George Galloway had a show on a channel owned by the Iranian government.
My favorite rules that highlight Ron Paul’s voluntaryist views are one and two. We all know true voluntaryists want to enforce visa rules and put guards on the border. All hail Ron Paul and his awesome voluntaryist ways that are in no way contradicted by his own stances and actions.
So, if by some bizarre set of events Ron Paul actually manages to put sense into the heads of Americans and gets elected the first thing he should do is to open the US borders to let a whole new batch of statist drones into the US?
Strawman. I never said anything about opening the US border. I’m just pointing out that Ron Paul isn’t a ‘voluntaryist’ or an anarchist as some (misguided) people believe.
Okay I’m confused. I’ve seen this debate multiple times on here and all anyone ever comes up with is “oh yeah well listen to this about his immigration ideas”…and you point to his plan to “put a stop to illegal immigration”? That’s the best thing you can come up with? The fact that he wants to stop illegal immigration?
I really don’t get what you people think he should be promoting. “If you can get your ass here, you’re a citizen with all the rights a privileges of someone who was born here”?
What’s next? He’s a neo-con because he wouldn’t send a fleet of planes to the Middle East to make sure every single soldier is out of there within 24 hours? Give me a break.
“Conzalol. I proved you wrong and you just keep changing the subject - no reason to keep proving you wrong over and over.”
Funny that… I don’t see anyone else agreeing with you. In fact, no-one else has. I’m also confident anyone without an agenda to uphold (their own delusions) will come to very differernt conclusion regarding our discussion and who in fact - did the dodging and is wrong.
All signs point to him being a voluntarist who doesn’t like using the word anarchy (for obvious reasons). Not that it matters, you can call a rose a duck, but it’s still a flower.
Btw, it’s more black and gold… 
