Nice and respectful huh? That Ghandi guy did that way.
“Nice and respectful huh? That Ghandi guy did that way.”
Ouch, I felt that point from here.
If you are going to support Ron Paul, at least accept the fact that he is not going to run to win, and has no inclination whatsoever to have power, or be the President. It is not going to happen even if he won 99% of every vote. Ron is running an educational campaign, and nothing more. That is and always has been his goal. Becoming President is not only counter-productive but also anathema to his goals. How people can claim to be Ron Paul supporters and not understand this is beyond me.
There is no magical cure to be found in political action. If you want to make the world a better place, you must engage it every single day, relentlessly, for the rest of your life, as Ron Paul has done. No one else can do it for you. By giving up your autonomy to a [sic] higher office, you are surrendering the capacity to act in your own interest. It’s not only irrational, it is very dangerous.
@JJ, that makes no sense whatsoever. But then all you really have is empty statements.
@LE, when will they learn? On the other hand, there will be at least 100 more Ron Paul President campaign threads this year, so its not like this is the last or only.
"accept the fact that he is not going to run to win, and has no inclination whatsoever to have power, or be the President. "
we’ll agree to disagree. Of all the things to debate…why waste our time on this? He’s running for president, I’ll support him and vote for him.
Even if he doesn’t win, the further he goes in the republican primary, the more his message will be heard and the more airtime he’ll get.
And if he does win the republican primary, he’ll beat any democrat they put up against him. I’ll put money on that fact.
“And if he does win the republican primary, he’ll beat any democrat they put up against him. I’ll put money on that fact.”
I’d take that bet, the message of the democrats is far more appealing and mainstream than Ron Paul’s message, the only thing that would make him win is the fact that Obama (who I’m pretty certain will win the primary) has already been president with average approval ratings and whose change has made people want a change
I wouldn’t be so quick. The bigger hurdle for Paul would be the primary. The masses have a sense that someone is doing something to them. They want “change” but have no idea what that should entail. Pit against Obama, Paul will have a much better explanation for who’s doing what to whom and proposals for ending the racket. As I said, this process is not linear, and initial conditions can cause quite unpredictable outcomes.
Bravo, John!
Of course, a true libertarian schooled in the Austrian tradition would be a tremendous step forward in the path to a free society. Yes, the establishment would do everything in its power to discredit a President Paul, but at least for once, the ideas would be out there. The names Rothbard and Mises would be spread. The libertarian movement would gain a vast number of converts. Is it better for the liberty movement to remain on the fringe? What are these people waiting for? The perfect time to spread the message of liberty? That time will never come.
The bottom line is that Ron Paul most likely cannot become president anyway, but even if he did, a Paul presidency would be infinitely better than a continuation of Obama or the Romney presidency or whatever. Paul would end the wars, pardon countless innocent people rotting in federal prisons, use the bully pulpit to end the drug war and the welfare state, stop enforcing unconstitutional laws (in other words, nearly all of them), veto nearly every bill, and appoint Austrian economists to the Fed in a transition towards abolishing it. To those who argue that Ron Paul would, upon ascending to the presidency, be like all the rest and forsake his classical liberalism in pursuit of political power, I ask them to point out when Paul has ever, in his 30-odd years in politics, ever sacrificed principle in his voting record. Those who allegedly sacrificed principle upon entering office (such as Reagan) never had any principles to begin with and lacked a coherent, consistent political philosophy.
Furthermore, to those who argue that when Paul enters office, the economic crash will occur and discredit libertarianism, I ask wouldn’t it be infinitely better for a true libertarian to be president during a crash than anyone else? Paul would not pass any New Deal-like measures and would instead use the crash to urge vast reductions in government spending and taxation and Fed money printing – similar to the way classical liberal Martin Van Buren responded to the Panic of 1837 and Grover Cleveland to the Panic of 1893.
I am sympathetic to those who argue that the answer is not to be found in politics, but I certainly think Ron Paul is the exception because he consistently, fearlessly, and relentlessly defends the Austro-libertarian philosophy on mainstream TV while the rest of us sit on our asses doing nothing.
thecommaking, well said.
“I’d take that bet”
Sweet…if he wins the republican primary lets bet.
Possibly the best post on this thread but nonetheless this will not change the fact that Paul’s actions would ruin libertarianism in the public eye because of the suffering that would be caused by the end of the welfare state and the increase in debt that would likely occur with the decrease in taxes.
“I ask wouldn’t it be infinitely better for a true libertarian to be president during a crash than anyone else?”
No, people would hate Paul and his ideology which “caused” the recession. People blame Bush for the Great Recession, and as for your two examples above, Martin Van Buren was run out of office next term even though the recession was short, they called him “Martin Van Ruin” and blamed him for everything that happened, Grover Cleveland has been forgotten by most people and most modern historians see him as someone who was still trying to hold on to old fashioned ideas and wasn’t ready to deal with modern financial crises.
People aren’t ready for libertarianism, any attempts at it without a societal shift will lead to a discrediting of the ideology itself and halt any further shifts towards it.
Disagree about what part?
“Sweet…if he wins the republican primary lets bet”
You’re on son. If he does win how much are you thinking? Ten bucks? Or how about a copy of Man Economy and State '
Why?
Speak for yourself. Ron Paul didnt create success in the last election, it was individuals in the grassroots who propelled him to where he is, and he will readily admit that.
Call me insane, but I think he might win the GOP nomination. A few weeks ago, I thought otherwise, but if he gets the GOP nomination, then it’s over for Mr. Obama. However, if someone else gets the GOP nomination, then there is still hope for the incumbent Obama.
There will just be smear campaigns against him and people believe everything they read.
“Or how about a copy of Man Economy and State”
yeah, I’ve never read that book. It would be nice to have you ship it to me for free.
8P
Instead of your armchair psychoanalysis, do you have any hard evidence that the Presidency would be turned down by Ron Paul? In fact, he routinely endorses the Constitution and it specifically delegates constrained power to the executive branch, so I am unsure of how it would contradict his professed beliefs (e.g., Constitutionalism). And, while I am sympathetic to the notion that Paul might be secretly an anarchist, I am not so bold as to declare it as fact (in the manner that you’ve turned your opinions into facts).
If, during a televised debate, Ron Paul were asked, “Do you want to be President?” do you believe he would unequivocally answer “No”?
Why is being a congressman not “anathema to his goals”? It too is a coercive political office. Was this logical contradiction not glaringly obvious to you? Additionally, if his motive is educational, then the platform of US Presidency surely provides one of the loudest megaphones.
I’m not sure how long you guys have been following Ron Paul, but if I was to guess, it would be less than 2 years, and more than likely, you guys barely had any experience with his last campaign.
You’re welcome to believe that Ron Paul really wants to be President, and that he will try to win, or that Ron Paul really believes the Contitution has any authority, or that Ron Paul really believes the American people want a government the size it was in 1778. You’re entitled to believe anything you want.
I will however be very interested to hear what you guys think once Paul winds up his campaign.
I was a huge supporter the last time around, I dedicated 10s of hours each week to Ron Paul from September 07 to February 08. I like Ron Paul very much, and understand that as last campaign, people will project their dreams and goals onto him, and ignore what he is about and what he is trying to achieve. Ron Paul is putting on this show after all, for those people who can’t and won’t imagine a world of freedom, but one where the state decides for everyone. He’s trying to show people there can be a different state. I don’t think he believes it, but it moves many people closer to libertarianism.
How does he resolve contradictions or rationalize being a Congressman? I’m not sure, but I certainly don’t hate him for it. It is his life, and he tries to abide VOLUNTARILY by the Constitution and exercise as little intervention through legislation as humanly possible in the Congress.
If Americans were ready for a Ron Paul world, we wouldn’t need Ron Paul to run for President. Ron I am quite sure, understands this since he is a very intelligent man.
Folks, there is no state, there is no Constitution, and there is no Congress. There are just people wearing costumes and adopting titles, pretending to be something which was never more than a delusion or fantasy. In that sense, Ron Paul is like Morpheus in the Matrix, manifesting within the paradigm to communicate with the people trapped by their minds.
Also, I know there will be lots of die hard fan boys who will not like what I am saying. I simply do not care. I did my tour, donated a ton of time and money to a political process that at best, was an expensive marketing campaign for minarchist ideas.
Root for Ron Paul’s courage, ideas and stamina, but if you’re expecting anything to change politicially, you’re setting yourself up for a major disappointment.
The change possible in this world is you, and starts with your mundane interactions with your fellow human beings each and every day.
Thread unlocked. I deleted a couple of posts.
Remember to direct all personal problems and concerns you want public to MEMBER ISSUES
members issues is here:
https://forum.freecapitalists.org/groups/memberissues/default.aspx
"yeah, I’ve never read that book. It would be nice to have you ship it to me for free.
8P"
We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it