This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

The Unabridged Ron Paul Guide To Being A Libertarian

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Presented with little comment since whatever we say would likely be superfluous to this all-encompassing speech. The full Ron Paul 'Farewell to Congress' speech and transcript:

...To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome.  Number one is 'envy' which leads to hate and class warfare.  Number two is 'intolerance' which leads to bigoted and judgmental policies.  These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular.

 

The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY...

 

Full Speech Here:

 

 

Transcript Wordcloud:

 

 

Full Transcript (via Campaign For Liberty):

Farewell to Congress

This may well be the last time I speak on the House Floor.  At the end of the year I’ll leave Congress after 23 years in office over a 36 year period.  My goals in 1976 were the same as they are today:  promote peace and prosperity by a strict adherence to the principles of individual liberty.

It was my opinion, that the course the U.S. embarked on in the latter part of the 20th Century would bring us a major financial crisis and engulf us in a foreign policy that would overextend us and undermine our national security.

To achieve the goals I sought, government would have had to shrink in size and scope, reduce spending, change the monetary system, and reject the unsustainable costs of policing the world and expanding the American Empire.

The problems seemed to be overwhelming and impossible to solve, yet from my view point, just following the constraints placed on the federal government by the Constitution would have been a good place to start.

 

How Much Did I Accomplish?

In many ways, according to conventional wisdom, my off-and-on career in Congress, from 1976 to 2012, accomplished very little.  No named legislation, no named federal buildings or highways—thank goodness.  In spite of my efforts, the government has grown exponentially, taxes remain excessive, and the prolific increase of incomprehensible regulations continues.  Wars are constant and pursued without Congressional declaration, deficits rise to the sky, poverty is rampant and dependency on the federal government is now worse than any time in our history.

All this with minimal concerns for the deficits and unfunded liabilities that common sense tells us cannot go on much longer.  A grand, but never mentioned, bipartisan agreement allows for the well-kept secret that keeps the spending going.  One side doesn’t give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesn’t give up one penny on welfare spending, while both sides support the bailouts and subsidies for the banking and  corporate elite.  And the spending continues as the economy weakens and the downward spiral continues.   As the government continues fiddling around, our liberties and our wealth burn in the flames of a foreign policy that makes us less safe.

The major stumbling block to real change in Washington is the total resistance to admitting that the country is broke. This has made compromising, just to agree to increase spending, inevitable since neither side has any intention of cutting spending.

The country and the Congress will remain divisive since there’s no “loot left to divvy up.”

Without this recognition the spenders in Washington will continue the march toward a fiscal cliff much bigger than the one anticipated this coming January.

I have thought a lot about why those of us who believe in liberty, as a solution, have done so poorly in convincing others of its benefits.  If liberty is what we claim it is- the principle that protects all personal, social and economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best chance for peace- it should be an easy sell.  Yet, history has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled.

 

Authoritarianism vs. Liberty

If authoritarianism leads to poverty and war and less freedom for all individuals and is controlled by rich special interests, the people should be begging for liberty.  There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government.

During my time in Congress the appetite for liberty has been quite weak; the understanding of its significance negligible.  Yet the good news is that compared to 1976 when I first came to Congress, the desire for more freedom and less government in 2012 is much greater and growing, especially in grassroots America. Tens of thousands of teenagers and college age students are, with great enthusiasm, welcoming the message of liberty.

I have a few thoughts as to why the people of a country like ours, once the freest and most prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that they have.

Freedom, private property, and enforceable voluntary contracts, generate wealth.  In our early history we were very much aware of this.  But in the early part of the 20th century our politicians promoted the notion that the tax and monetary systems had to change if we were to involve ourselves in excessive domestic and military spending. That is why Congress gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax.  The majority of Americans and many government officials agreed that sacrificing some liberty was necessary to carry out what some claimed to be “progressive” ideas. Pure democracy became acceptable.

They failed to recognized that what they were doing was exactly opposite of what the colonists were seeking when they broke away from the British.

Some complain that my arguments makes no sense, since great wealth and the standard of living improved  for many Americans over the last 100 years, even with these new policies.

But the damage to the market economy, and the currency, has been insidious and steady.  It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy the currency and undermine productivity and get our financial obligations to a point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of our wealth today depends on debt.

The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless, allowed concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected.  As long as most people believed the material abundance would last forever, worrying about protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed unnecessary.

 

The Age of Redistribution

This neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by government kowtowing to any and all special interests, except for those who just wanted to left alone.  That is why today money in politics far surpasses money currently going into research and development and productive entrepreneurial efforts.

The material benefits became more important than the understanding and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market.  It is good that material abundance is a result of liberty but if materialism is all that we care about, problems are guaranteed.

The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pretense that debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was doomed to fail.  We have ended up with a system that doesn’t produce enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free society is crucial to reversing these trends.

If this is not recognized, the recovery will linger for a long time.  Bigger government, more spending, more debt, more poverty for the middle class, and a more intense scramble by the elite special interests will continue.

 

We Need an Intellectual Awakening

Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law.  A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees.

If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties.  Prosperity for a large middle class though will become an abstract dream.

This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how our financial crisis of 2008 was handled.  Congress first directed, with bipartisan support, bailouts for the wealthy.  Then it was the Federal Reserve with its endless quantitative easing. If at first it doesn’t succeed try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely—that is until it too fails.  There’s a cost to all of this and let me assure you delaying the payment is no longer an option.  The rules of the market will extract its pound of flesh and it won’t be pretty.

The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism.  And the pessimism adds to less confidence in the future.  The two feed on themselves, making our situation worse.

If the underlying cause of the crisis is not understood we cannot solve our problems. The issues of warfare, welfare, deficits, inflationism, corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored.  By only expanding these policies we cannot expect good results.

Everyone claims support for freedom.  But too often it’s for one’s own freedom and not for others.  Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force, certain liberties.

Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited.  These are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests.

 

No More ‘isms’

The great news is the answer is not to be found in more “isms.”  The answers are to be found in more liberty which cost so much less.  Under these circumstances spending goes down, wealth production goes up, and the quality of life improves.

Just this recognition—especially if we move in this direction—increases optimism which in itself is beneficial.  The follow through with sound policies are required which must be understood and supported by the people.

But there is good evidence that the generation coming of age at the present time is supportive of moving in the direction of more liberty and self-reliance. The more this change in direction and the solutions become known, the quicker will be the return of optimism.

Our job, for those of us who believe that a different system than the  one that we have  had for the  last 100 years, has driven us to this unsustainable crisis, is to be more convincing that there is a wonderful, uncomplicated, and moral system that provides the answers.  We had a taste of it in our early history. We need not give up on the notion of advancing this cause.

It worked, but we allowed our leaders to concentrate on the material abundance that freedom generates, while ignoring freedom itself.  Now we have neither, but the door is open, out of necessity, for an answer.  The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests.

After over 100 years we face a society quite different from the one that was intended by the Founders.  In many ways their efforts to protect future generations with the Constitution from this danger has failed.  Skeptics, at the time the Constitution was written in 1787, warned us of today’s possible outcome.  The insidious nature of the erosion of our liberties and the reassurance our great abundance gave us, allowed the process to evolve into the dangerous period in which we now live.

 

Dependency on Government Largesse

Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every need.  Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:

  • Undeclared wars are commonplace.
  • Welfare for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement.
  • The economy is overregulated, overtaxed and grossly distorted by a deeply flawed monetary system.
  • Debt is growing exponentially.
  • The Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed without much debate have resulted in a steady erosion of our 4th Amendment rights.
  • Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people.
  • The drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as the hatred builds for innocent lives lost and the international laws flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged, there will be a lot resentment thrown our way.
  • It’s now the law of the land that the military can arrest American citizens, hold them indefinitely, without charges or a trial.
  • Rampant hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington.
  • Supporters of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation, call the true free traders “isolationists.”
  • Sanctions are used to punish countries that don’t follow our orders.
  • Bailouts and guarantees for all kinds of misbehavior are routine.
  • Central economic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative mandates has been an acceptable policy.

 

Questions

Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions:

  • Why are sick people who use medical marijuana put in prison?
  • Why does the federal government restrict the drinking of raw milk?
  • Why can’t Americans manufacturer rope and other products from hemp?
  • Why are Americans not allowed to use gold and silver as legal tender as mandated by the Constitution?
  • Why is Germany concerned enough to consider repatriating their gold held by the FED for her in New York?  Is it that the trust in the U.S. and dollar supremacy beginning to wane?
  • Why do our political leaders believe it’s unnecessary to thoroughly audit our own gold?
  • Why can’t Americans decide which type of light bulbs they can buy?
  • Why is the TSA permitted to abuse the rights of any American traveling by air?
  • Why should there be mandatory sentences—even up to life for crimes without victims—as our drug laws require?
  • Why have we allowed the federal government to regulate commodes in our homes?
  • Why is it political suicide for anyone to criticize AIPAC ?
  • Why haven’t we given up on the drug war since it’s an obvious failure and violates the people’s rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities can’t even keep drugs out of the prisons? How can making our entire society a prison solve the problem?
  • Why do we sacrifice so much getting needlessly involved in border disputes and civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most deadly border in the world-the one between Mexico and the US?
  • Why does Congress willingly give up its prerogatives to the Executive Branch?
  • Why does changing the party in power never change policy? Could it be that the views of both parties are essentially the same?
  • Why did the big banks, the large corporations, and foreign banks and foreign central banks get bailed out in 2008 and the middle class lost their jobs and their homes?
  • Why do so many in the government and the federal officials believe that creating money out of thin air creates wealth?
  • Why do so many accept the deeply flawed principle that government bureaucrats and politicians can protect us from ourselves without totally destroying the principle of liberty?
  • Why can’t people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty?
  • Why is there so little concern for the Executive Order that gives the President authority to establish a “kill list,” including American citizens, of those targeted for assassination?
  • Why is patriotism thought to be blind loyalty to the government and the politicians who run it, rather than loyalty to the principles of liberty and support for the people? Real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the government when it’s wrong.
  • Why is it is claimed that if people won’t  or can’t take care of their own needs, that people in government can do it for them?
  • Why did we ever give the government a safe haven for initiating violence against the people?
  • Why do some members defend free markets, but not civil liberties?
  • Why do some members defend civil liberties but not free markets? Aren’t they the same?
  • Why don’t more defend both economic liberty and personal liberty?
  • Why are there not more individuals who seek to intellectually influence others to bring about positive changes than those who seek power to force others to obey their commands?
  • Why does the use of religion to support a social gospel and preemptive wars, both of which requires authoritarians to use violence, or the threat of violence, go unchallenged? Aggression and forced redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with the teachings of the world great religions.
  • Why do we allow the government and the Federal Reserve to disseminate false information dealing with both economic and  foreign policy?
  • Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority?
  • Why should anyone be surprised that Congress has no credibility, since there’s such a disconnect between what politicians say and what they do?
  • Is there any explanation for all the deception, the unhappiness, the fear of the future, the loss of confidence in our leaders, the distrust, the anger and frustration?   Yes there is, and there’s a way to reverse these attitudes.  The negative perceptions are logical and a consequence of bad policies bringing about our problems.  Identification of the problems and recognizing the cause allow the proper changes to come easy.

 

Trust Yourself, Not the Government

Too many people have for too long placed too much confidence and trust in government and not enough in themselves.  Fortunately, many are now becoming aware of the seriousness of the gross mistakes of the past several decades.  The blame is shared by both political parties.  Many Americans now are demanding to hear the plain truth of things and want the demagoguing to stop.  Without this first step, solutions are impossible.

Seeking the truth and finding the answers in liberty and self-reliance promotes the optimism necessary for restoring prosperity.  The task is not that difficult if politics doesn’t get in the way.

We have allowed ourselves to get into such a mess for various reasons.

Politicians deceive themselves as to how wealth is produced.  Excessive confidence is placed in the judgment of politicians and bureaucrats.  This replaces the confidence in a free society.  Too many in high places of authority became convinced that only they,   armed with arbitrary government power, can bring about fairness, while facilitating wealth production.  This always proves to be a utopian dream and destroys wealth and liberty.  It impoverishes the people and rewards the special interests who end up controlling both political parties.

It’s no surprise then that much of what goes on in Washington is driven by aggressive partisanship and power seeking, with philosophic differences being minor.

 

Economic Ignorance

Economic ignorance is commonplace.  Keynesianism continues to thrive, although today it is facing healthy and enthusiastic rebuttals.  Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep slumber.

Supporters of all government edicts use humanitarian arguments to justify them.

Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal liberty.  This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge.  But, initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence.  Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with bad intentions.  The results are always negative.

The immoral use of force is the source of man’s political problems.  Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations, and psychopathic authoritarians endorse government initiated force to change the world.  Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned—or especially when well-intentioned—the results are dismal.  The good results sought never materialize.  The new problems created require even more government force as a solution.  The net result is institutionalizing government initiated violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds.

This is the same fundamental reason our government  uses force  for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at home, and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens.

It is rather strange, that unless one has a criminal mind and no respect for other people and their property, no one claims it’s permissible to go into one’s neighbor’s house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat, smoke and drink or how to spend their money.

Yet, rarely is it asked why it is morally acceptable that a stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and order.  Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a proper search warrant.

 

No Government Monopoly over Initiating Violence

Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society.  Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politicians is a pipe dream.  We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000.  Citizens are guilty until proven innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts.

Government in a free society should have no authority to meddle in social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even when controversial, should be permitted.

We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. But even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech-a dangerous trend. Since 9/11 monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required.

 

The Proliferation of Federal Crimes

The Constitution established four federal crimes.  Today the experts can’t even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books—they number into the thousands.  No one person can comprehend the enormity of the legal system—especially the tax code.  Due to the ill-advised drug war and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code we have over 6 million people under correctional suspension, more than the Soviets ever had, and more than any other nation today, including China.  I don’t understand the complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession with passing more Federal laws.  Mandatory sentencing laws associated with drug laws have compounded our prison problems.

The federal register is now 75,000 pages long and the tax code has 72,000 pages, and expands every year.  When will the people start shouting, “enough is enough,” and demand Congress cease and desist.

 

Achieving Liberty

Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force.  If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed.  To achieve it, more than lip service is required.

Two choices are available.

  1. A government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole objective.  The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force for interfering with another person’s liberty.  Government is given a strictly limited authority to enforce contracts, property ownership, settle disputes, and defend against foreign aggression.
  2. A government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations.  Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer.  This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages.  Though meant to be limited it nevertheless is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find irresistible.  It is used vigorously—though incrementally and insidiously.  Granting power to government officials always proves the adage that:  “power corrupts.”

Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government.  Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression.  There’s no in-between.  Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.

Today’s mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.

The results are not good.  As our liberties have been eroded our wealth has been consumed.  The wealth we see today is based on debt and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for goods and services. They then loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt system.  It’s amazing that it has worked for this long but the impasse in Washington, in solving our problems indicate that many are starting to understand the seriousness of the world -wide debt crisis and the dangers we face. The longer this process continues the harsher the outcome will be.

 

The Financial Crisis Is a Moral Crisis

Many are now acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few understand it’s, in reality, a moral crisis.  It’s the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth of illegal government power.  Without a clear understanding of the nature of the crisis it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and the poverty that will accompany it.

Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government they want; option #1 or option #2.  There is no other choice.  Claiming there is a choice of a “little” tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a “touch of pregnancy.”  It is a myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic planning is a worthy compromise.  What we see today is a result of that type of thinking.  And the results speak for themselves.

 

A Culture of Violence

American now suffers from a culture of violence.  It’s easy to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at will.

Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate.  Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt.  It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to “do good.”  They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.”  The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority.  Victims of TSA excesses never consented to this abuse.

This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to “do good,” as well. It is claimed that war, to prevent war for noble purposes, is justified.  This is similar to what we were once told that:  “destroying a village to save a village” was justified.  It was said by a US Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children, in the 1990s, as a result of American bombs and sanctions, was “worth it” to achieve the “good” we brought to the Iraqi people.  And look at the mess that Iraq is in today.

Government use of force to mold social and economic behavior at home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms.  The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified, is the reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and becomes a political crisis as well.

First, we recognize that individuals shouldn’t initiate violence, then we give the authority to government.   Eventually, the immoral use of government violence, when things goes badly, will be used to justify an individual’s “right” to do the same thing. Neither the government nor individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we are moving toward the day when both will claim this authority.  If this cycle is not reversed society will break down.

When needs are pressing, conditions deteriorate and rights become relative to the demands and the whims of the majority.  It’s then not a great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get what they claim is theirs.  As the economy deteriorates and the wealth discrepancies increase—as are already occurring— violence increases as those in need take it in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs.  They will not wait for a government rescue program.

When government officials wield power over others to bail out the special interests, even with disastrous results to the average citizen, they feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with many casualties resulting, never lose sleep over the death and destruction their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally justified, and the fact that many suffer   just can’t be helped.

When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no remorse, believing they are only taking what is rightfully theirs.  All moral standards become relative.  Whether it’s bailouts, privileges, government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, it’s all part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of wealth.  Violence, or a threat of such, is the instrument required and unfortunately is of little concern of most members of Congress.

Some argue it’s only a matter of “fairness” that those in need are cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than the poor. Second, no one seems to be concerned about whether or not it’s fair to those who end up paying for the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts are free, like printing money out of thin air, and there is no cost. That deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that’s what the economic slowdown is all about.

Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government.  It is the tool for telling the people how to live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money.

To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected.  Granting to government even a small amount of force is a dangerous concession.

 

Limiting Government Excesses vs. a Virtuous Moral People

Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed.  The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people.  The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified.

Most politicians and pundits are aware of the problems we face but spend all their time in trying to reform government.  The sad part is that the suggested reforms almost always lead to less freedom and the importance of a virtuous and moral people is either ignored, or not understood. The new reforms serve only to further undermine liberty.  The compounding effect has given us this steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of debt.  The real question is: if it is liberty we seek, should most of the emphasis be placed on government reform or trying to understand what “a virtuous and moral people” means and how to promote it. The Constitution has not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and frequently their own wealth and power.

If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of freedom.

If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.

It is self-evident that our freedoms have been severely limited and the apparent prosperity we still have, is nothing more than leftover wealth from a previous time.  This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits from a false trust in our currency and credit, will play havoc with our society when the bills come due.  This means that the full consequence of our lost liberties is yet to be felt.

But that illusion is now ending.  Reversing a downward spiral depends on accepting a new approach.

Expect the rapidly expanding homeschooling movement to play a significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to build a free society with Constitutional protections. We cannot expect a Federal government controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties.

The internet will provide the alternative to the government/media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it’s essential that the internet remains free of government regulation.

Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare and corporatism and ignore the need for a virtuous people.

I never believed that the world or our country could be made more free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.

Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to assume responsibility for themselves, if it is liberty that they truly seek.  Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.

If this is true, our individual goal in life ought to be for us to seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only comes from using one’s natural ability, in the most productive manner possible, according to one’s own talents.

Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction. Freedom, and not dependency, provides the environment needed to achieve these goals. Government cannot do this for us; it only gets in the way. When the government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these cannot provide a sense of  personal achievement.

Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be our goal. Most of the change, if it is to come, will not come from the politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders and our religious institutions.  The solution can only come from rejecting the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands, and aggressive force, to mold social and economic behavior.  Without accepting these restraints, inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the responsible individuals who seek excellence and self-esteem by being self-reliance and productive, become the true victims.

 

Conclusion                                                                                                                                                    

What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today and impede the goal of a free society? There are five.

1. The continuous attack on our civil liberties which threatens the rule of law and our ability to resist the onrush of tyranny.               

2. Violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world. Because the phenomenon of “blow-back” is not understood or denied, our foreign policy is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in. National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will result.                                                         

3. The ease in which we go to war, without a declaration by Congress, but accepting international authority from the UN or NATO even for preemptive wars, otherwise known as aggression.                                        

4. A financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive debt, unfunded liabilities, spending, bailouts, and gross discrepancy in wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of central economic planning, by the Federal Reserve must be understood.                                               

 5. World government taking over  local and US sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade, banking,  a world currency, taxes, property ownership, and private ownership of guns.

Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous trends.                                                     

What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression.  The retort to such a suggestion is always:  it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal.

The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of government force, to rule over the people, at the sacrifice of liberty, was considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and prosperity.

What could be more utopian than that myth—considering the results especially looking at the state sponsored killing, by nearly every government during the 20th Century, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions.  It’s time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state.

No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior.  Such power, when left unchecked, becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny.  This method of governance has been adequately tested, and the results are in: reality dictates we try liberty.

The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting all offensive use of force should be tried.  The idealism of government sanctioned violence has been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and war.  The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been around for a long time.  It’s time to take a bold step and actually permit it by advancing this cause, rather than taking a step backwards as some would like us to do.

Today the principle of habeas corpus, established when King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, is under attack. There’s every reason to believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead advance the cause of liberty by spreading an uncensored message that will serve to rein in government authority and challenge the obsession with war and welfare.

What I’m talking about is a system of government guided by the moral principles of peace and tolerance.

The Founders were convinced that a free society could not exist without a moral people.  Just writing rules won’t work if the people choose to ignore them.  Today the rule of law written in the Constitution has little meaning for most Americans, especially those who work in Washington DC.

Benjamin Franklin claimed “only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.”  John Adams concurred:  “Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people’s beliefs or habits.

A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society.  All great religions endorse the Golden Rule.  The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials.  They cannot be exempt.

The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.

The solution falls on each and every individual, with guidance from family, friends and community.

The #1 responsibility for each of us is to change ourselves with hope that others will follow.  This is of greater importance than working on changing the government; that is secondary to promoting a virtuous society.  If we can achieve this, then the government will change.

It doesn’t mean that political action or holding office has no value. At times it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for the right reasons it’s easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles.

Political action, to be truly beneficial, must be directed toward changing the hearts and minds of the people, recognizing that it’s the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.

The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the people’s attitudes aren’t changed.

To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome.  Number one is “envy” which leads to hate and class warfare.  Number two is “intolerance” which leads to bigoted and judgmental policies.  These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular.

The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism.  Both views ought to be rejected.

I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out “the plain truth of things.”  The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.

If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:11 | 2983999 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Personally, although I like RP a great deal and don't believe his abortion stance is particularly significant OVERALL, I like to bring it up because it is a major point of irritation for many of Paul's fanboys.

Ron Paul is the real deal as far as anything like a "man of principle" in Congress would be, and I respect him for that, but his anti-abortion stance is anti-libertarian and reveals a major conflict in the world-view he espouses.

Given his religious faith, it's not something to critique the man himself for, but it is odd that the conflict it highlights is not addressed by his biggest fans.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 15:40 | 2985223 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

.

Please, do yourself a favor and be open-minded enough to admit: 1) that it is possible for a principled libertarian to be opposed to abortion in good faith, and with NO contradiction of his principles, and 2) that if you agree with most or all of Ron Paul's other political positions, it is counterproductive if not outright insane to disregard ALL those other positions with which you are in agreement over this ONE issue of relatively minor contemporary importance.

akak, I've said I don't vote, never have, so I don't have "voter's mind" - I just watch the edifice die, that's all I'm doing.  if I continually bring up the same subject, consider that I might be trying to use it as a prod to get some deeper thought going on - here of ALL places, I had hoped for critical thinking to be applied to "voting" but it hasn't, so *shrug* - a bit less respect for yet another space in the world. . .

1) it's possible for a "voter" of any flavour to have an opinion about something believed to not affect their life, because voters tend to think short term, by design.  they choose their team, and defend it.  if abortions are removed as an option for women who are raped, even by their "family" then a woman will continue to be seen as property to do with as desired by the owner - you may think this is emotive, I see the occupation of minds doing the biding of the occupiers.  if a voter wants to remove a woman's body sovereignty, then I would like to see the voter's expected outcome of this Law, enforced, on society, and if forcing a pregnancy to birth, then will this New, Caring Society explain how the forced birthed baby will live, beyond receiving the SS# stamp of approval?  who pays to raise the child?  will the sperm donor be a part of this?  will the rapist, family or otherwise, be given access to the new baby, and how will this continue to impact on the mother?  etc.    can you see the myriad laws that will inevitably follow, and how the minutiae will creep into everyone's lives, working as intended??

2) for me is irrelevant, as I'm not a voter, particularly when it allows minds to see Laws to regulate a woman's body as "relatively minor contemporay issues" in exchange for something else they desire in their governance.  we're right back to "liberty and justice for all" and the decades of defining who "all" is, and the rights to be a part of "all" being fought by those who were other'd as not quite a full human. if you and others need to have a politician give you moral words to be inspired, fine.  I find inspiration elsewhere is all.   and I've never once been inspired by someone paid to sit in the District of Columbia.  ever.

but ultimately, we both know this isn't a part of the monologue, and no one cares a bit.  this is all theory and arguments, but it's sure fascinating to see the blind spots in some people's beliefs.   (not aimed at you at all)

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:02 | 2983320 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

I've read your posts, I am not impressed.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 13:17 | 2984555 Overfed
Overfed's picture

So long as abortion is legal, nay, mandatory, then a totalitarian police state is fine by you then?

See how that strawman argument works?

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 14:59 | 2985029 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

no, that argument is weak and illogical, not well argued at all.

try again.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 00:53 | 2983091 Cabreado
Cabreado's picture

Be afraid:  there was only one Ron Paul left.

Thank You, Ron Paul.
I've never done the "hero" thing, but in fact, you are one, indeed.

 

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 01:00 | 2983104 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Clearing the way for " Junior"?

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 01:03 | 2983112 Audacity17
Audacity17's picture

If you're under attack by thugs on the side of the road....Ron Paul wishes you well.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 02:14 | 2983193 Mine Is Bigger
Mine Is Bigger's picture

And what would YOU do?  Join the thugs?

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:47 | 2983607 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

LOL ... had to read that twice to get the full effect (before 1st cup of morning coffee).

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 01:33 | 2983154 EscapingProgress
EscapingProgress's picture

EPIC.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 03:03 | 2983237 paso24
paso24's picture

John Galt-esqe? 

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 03:25 | 2983246 Joe A
Joe A's picture

We need to overcome greed.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:49 | 2983282 Floodmaster
Floodmaster's picture

Avoiding reality, scapegoating... libertarians are lunatics, they are more optimistic than Obama supporters.The end game of the unregulated free-market utopia is always the same, the fittest control everything including the rules of the game.Some people have a Rockefeller in them, they don't have the means to be evil and it's a good thing.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:26 | 2983287 zilverreiger
zilverreiger's picture

He went out with a whimper

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:31 | 2983293 IridiumRebel
IridiumRebel's picture

The Zen is mightier than the horde.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 08:10 | 2983423 beaglebog
beaglebog's picture

zilverreiger, 

 

I'll wager that, "He ain't done, yet."

 

Freed from the shackles of government, you just might be hearing a lot more of Dr. Paul.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:29 | 2983292 IridiumRebel
IridiumRebel's picture

Ladies and Gents.....we are at the precipice. This Philosospher King with the Mandate of Liberty shall have statues and literature in his honor so that we may never forget what true greatness is. It resides in the heart. It is up to us to make these words resound throughout the land. Let freedom ring and to those who oppose these most righteous of concepts.....

YOU ARE FUCKED. LET'S GET THIS FUCKING THING GOING.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:31 | 2983294 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

What a piece, what a piece!

Easy to understand why Paul did not want to hang his boots after all. The scam is too good...

_____________________________________
The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY...
_____________________________________

Oh, my, my, Paul writes from an utilitarian point of view? Guess what? The 'american' order is delivering just that at the moment: peace and prosperity for the maximum number of people world wide.

That 'american' man, Paul, has no added value on that... Just another 'american' wishing to be portrayed as someone he is not...

But what a piece! It takes an 'american' to write such awesome pieces.

How can one write so much sentences that are so unrelated to the basic reality and even best, contradict one another? Only 'americans' have this level of talent to achieve that spectacular result.

________________________________________
If authoritarianism leads to poverty and war and less freedom for all individuals and is controlled by rich special interests, the people should be begging for liberty.
________________________________________

Rich special interests can not be individuals? Ummmm, maybe, those individuals are not that convinced that 'americanism' has led them to more poverty? Maybe 'americanism' has made them even richer and that is why they'll keep backing up 'americanism'...

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:41 | 2983300 akak
akak's picture

Go ahead, say it:

-Ron Paul is a US 'american' citizenism citizen.-

You know you are just itching to let it out.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:46 | 2983305 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

I do not itch for it, you did. And you made.

I wont write something like US 'american' citizenism. That is a trick used by 'americans' who can not deal with the reality of 'americanism' and need to flee in fantasy.

By the way, has not Paul received your memo already? Paul speaks of "anti americanism". He does not know that 'americanism' does not exist?

'Americanism' is as 'american' does.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:13 | 2983314 akak
akak's picture

 

I wont write something like US 'american' citizenism. That is a trick used by 'americans' who can not deal with the reality of 'americanism' and need to flee in fantasy.

Well, that is funny that you refuse to write it now, as you used to write it constantly --- and condemn EVERY single US citizen, alive or dead, past, present and future, for it.  That trick is apparently used only by ragingly bigoted Chinese Citizenism trolls, i.e., you.

Par for the course with AnAnnoyingUs, just more evasion, more outrageous lies, more egregious bigotry, more inability to face facts and his own sordid past ramblings about "US Citizenism".  Make me laugh!

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 04:43 | 2983301 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

What a fabulist, what a fabulist! Diamond!

____________________________________
There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government.
___________________________________

Does Paul mean when 'american' special interests were eyeing on the indian lands and felt prevented from expanding by the King, who enforced the indians' property's rights?

But what a fabled past this 'american' lives in. Splendid.

More
__________________________________

Freedom, private property, and enforceable voluntary contracts, generate wealth. In our early history we were very much aware of this.
__________________________________

Does Paul mean the times when the US was a slaver nation and that 'americans' used to kick the can of the slavery abolition on future generations because ending slavery would wipe out their wealth?

Wonderful. And that is indeed 'american' freedom, 'american' private property and enforceable voluntary contracts...

_____________________________________________
This neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by government kowtowing to any and all special interests,
_____________________________________________

The US is a story of redistribution of wealth by the government. From the start... The FF used the government to redistribute the King's wealth to the US citizenry. The US american government was used to redistribute the indian lands to the US People.

Nope, it did not start in the XXth century. It started in 1776, on July, 4th.

The XXth was the mere continuation of 'americanism' dealing with the mere fact that there was no more indian land to be redistributed.

'Americans' preaching for freedom. Always that funny taste as 'americanism' is all about submission.

'Americans' require submission to their gross manipulation of basic facts so you can get free.

No subtlety here. Part of the consent of the governed somehow.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:12 | 2983324 Floodmaster
Floodmaster's picture

The founding fathers were virtuous and slave owners at the same time ! Welcome to wonderland.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 07:14 | 2983379 Zero Govt
Zero Govt's picture

there's no part of the lie that is democracy that was or can be produced from the virtuous

Govt is a parasite/monopolist mechnism, all else is bullcrap window dressing. Don't fall for the coloured rosettes, follow the theft of money and abuse of power

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:44 | 2983865 aerojet
aerojet's picture

You can't simply dismiss the impact of men like Thomas Jefferson simply because they were slave owners.  You're looking at them through a lens and passing judgment about matters that were understood differently (more honestly, actually) two and three centuries ago.  BTW, there's more slavery today than ever before, we just paper over it differently.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 12:59 | 2984416 Floodmaster
Floodmaster's picture

All men are created equal ...,yet he was also a lifelong slave owner who freed only nine of his more than 600 slaves during his lifetime.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 15:45 | 2985245 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

All men are created equal.

and then there's the "half" of humanity that aren't "men" to remember. . .

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:51 | 2983897 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

Read Thomas Paine, dipshit.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:04 | 2983321 Helvetico
Helvetico's picture

All you need to know about LOLbertarians: https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Libertarianism

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:42 | 2983339 Floodmaster
Floodmaster's picture

Libertarian are anti-globalist globalist.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 13:34 | 2984648 Overfed
Overfed's picture

The way that you're an anti-idiot idiot?

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:27 | 2983333 praps
praps's picture

There has to be something very wrong witha a system where a tiny percentage of the population has grabbed the majority of the wealth.  No mention of this Mr Paul?

 

Not in his interest.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 08:08 | 2983418 beaglebog
beaglebog's picture

He spoke widely of this iniquitous redistribution in his departure speech. 

 

You must have missed it, praps.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:16 | 2983537 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

I believe he mentions 'envy' in his first couple paragraphs...that envy is a perfectly normal emotion for people waking up to a rigged game is what he has ignored to mention.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:28 | 2983334 Tsukato
Tsukato's picture

Living here in china for so long, Ron Paul has been one of the few Americans left that give me any hope. Thank you mr. Paul for all your efforts. On another note, I can't help but getting excited about all the secessionist news coming out now. This is a hell of a great idea. I hope the many Paul supporters will jump on this idea. It's good for all involved... Except those holders of treasuries like china, but fuck them. If this can pick up steam, I will pick up and make a beeline back to Austin. Wishfull dreaming I'm sure, but this is the kind of thing even the brain dead cattle can get on board with.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 05:58 | 2983352 Cult of Criminality
Cult of Criminality's picture

Thanks Dr Paul for your service to the country.

Summarizing your speech, I will lock and load.

The new lines forming are at the gun range,around here, it is standing room only.

Seriously.

Cheers

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 07:00 | 2983376 Zero Govt
Zero Govt's picture

see if you can knock $60 off your Tax bill for every 6 bullets you aimlessly expel into a shooting range target... one pastime does nothing, the other weakens the beast in a peaceful highly effective way aimed straight for its bloated greedy mouth

get the cues at the range converted to the 'Zero Tax' agenda while you practice taking out the IRS if it really comes down to that. Govt is a parasite, hit the scum where it hurts most

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 06:55 | 2983365 Zero Govt
Zero Govt's picture

So Ron Paul retires from Hell (Monopolist Matrix HQ) with not a single convert/convict moved to join his Freedom faith

Has Mr Paul learnt anything in his time there? Has a penny dropped for him about why he has no takers for the life of freedom/competition from the assembled parasitical monopolist hoards??

Govt's job description is to Lord-it over society like a monopolist. What was he expecting, parasites to change their spots and give up the good easy life of living off societies backs for a real life of competitive productive effort?

You achieved zip in your time RP, time you reflected and understood precisely why. Judging by your speech you're still humming a mantra and haven't got a clue why your time in Parasite Heaven has been 100% fruitless

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:39 | 2983849 aerojet
aerojet's picture

His legacy is yet to be understood.  A lot of my own principles come from having Ron Paul as a role model--someone who stands up against the machine, knowing full well he's going to lose every battle.  It's still better than siding with evil.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 13:37 | 2984660 Overfed
Overfed's picture

So... if ya' can't beat 'em, join 'em?

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 07:05 | 2983377 Miss Expectations
Miss Expectations's picture

In the battle between good and evil, the advantage goes to the evil doers, who feel nothing...which makes them capable of anything.  You can not appeal to their conscience, as they don't have one.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:15 | 2983531 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

But enough about Mitt.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 08:05 | 2983415 beaglebog
beaglebog's picture

A Nobel Peace Prize for Dr. Paul?

 

Opposes the Military-industrial Complex and promotes the Non-aggression Principle ... has brought the concepts of liberty to the forefront of public' opinion.  

 

He must be deserving of such recognition.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:15 | 2983536 Nimby
Nimby's picture

The Nobel Prize is nothing more than a political trophy handed out to the most enthusiastic member(s) of the progression towards tyranny.

We should start a prize given out in Dr. Paul's name. 

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:38 | 2983839 aerojet
aerojet's picture

He would never get one because he is opposed to those socialist twits over there in Sweden.  The Nobel Peace prize is an outlier, though--most of the prizes seem genuine, but the peace one has been dirtied forever by its recipients.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 08:16 | 2983428 news printer
news printer's picture
Protesters break into German conference in Greece          Greek protesters attack conference, throw coffee at German diplomat
Thu, 11/15/2012 - 08:54 | 2983486 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Dr. Paul, your approach only works in a world where people want to be free.

They don't.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giaZnIr-faM

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:11 | 2983707 Sockeye
Sockeye's picture

To be human is to desire freedom, that's kind of the whole point here.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 13:41 | 2984673 Overfed
Overfed's picture

The trouble seems to be that most humans aren't human at all, but are indeed of the genus Ovis, species Aries. A large number of the remainder are Canis Lupus.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 08:55 | 2983487 Pumpkin
Pumpkin's picture

Here is something that I have never heard from ANY POLITICIAN including Ron Paul.  The territorial jurisdiction of the United States is defined within Title 18 section 7 and it states THREE TIMES, WITHIN 1 1/2 PAGES, THAT IT DOES NOT EXTEND INTO THE SEVERAL STATES.  This small detail is somehow missed by the officials within each of the states themselves.  Why do the states allow this then?  Because the states cannot function without gold and silver coin, as they are forbidden from doing so in Article 1 Section 10 of The Constitution for the United States.  Check it out and tell me this is not correct.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:19 | 2983541 rustymason
rustymason's picture

If he was here now, if he could hear what I say, I'd congratulate him on being a great man, and thank him for being a friend.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:28 | 2983564 El_Puerco
El_Puerco's picture

RON PAUL!...Hey!...Where are you?!...

 

:P

:)

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 09:59 | 2983641 flattrader
flattrader's picture

>>>What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today and impede the goal of a free society? There are five.<<<

No.  There are six:

6.)  A cranky old Chrisitian Reconstructionist masquerading as a Libertarian all the while promoting the prohibition of abortion and impinging on the rights of women to control their own reproduction.

If this is the best "Libertarians" and do, fuck them.

Ron Paul was never what he appeared to be.  He did a great job of hiding is nut case religious beflefs and supporters.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:34 | 2983819 aerojet
aerojet's picture

Ron Paul was a doctor who delivered babies.  I don't think his beliefs about abortion come from religion, but from having delivered so many babies and being present at the moment a new human arrives in the real world.  Straighten your fucking headgear out--while I don't think government should regulate abortions, I do think abortion is a monstrous form of birth control.  BTW, when a woman has a miscarriage, sometimes it doesn't resolve itself and she has to have the same procedure to remove the dead fetus--all these anti-abortion assholes have helped make that a touchy process when in fact it is a necessary medical procedure.  Dr. Paul rightly understands the issue and not from some idiotic religious zealot opinion, but from actual experience with matters of life and death.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:54 | 2983893 flattrader
flattrader's picture

Lots of OB/GYNS have the exact opposite view of RP as MDs themselves.

He is and was a religious nut case Christian Reconstructionist.

Do some basic research on his Texan "roots" and see who his earliest supporters were...and have continued to be troughout his political career.

Libertarian my ass.

>>>Straighten your fucking headgear out--while I don't think government should regulate abortions, I do think abortion is a monstrous form of birth control.<<<

You straighten your fucking head out.  "It's none of your damn business."

That's a REAL Libertarian response in case you don't recognize it.

Fri, 11/16/2012 - 19:20 | 2989984 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

Ron Paul can deliver all the babies he likes, and mothers can birth all the babies they like.

we're talking about ZYGOTES being awarded personhood by Constitutional Amendment, okay?  when you RP worshipers decide to allow some truth into your tiny gated minds, then we can have an adult conversation about sexuality, and where babies come from, and how long it takes for a FOETUS to form.

and creeping government CONTROL, enForced by Laws - learn some history, ffs.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 13:46 | 2984689 Overfed
Overfed's picture

Holy shit! You stupid motherfuckers will accept a total destruction of the constitution and all liberties, pre-emptive wars all over the world, TSA, DHS, FISA, the drug war, the war on terror, the world's highest incarceration rate and number, but don't fuck with abortion or gay marriage. Holy fuck! Get your priorities straight!

 

BTW, RP doesn't promote the abolition of abortion. He merely opposes federal laws regarding abortion one way or the other. Stop being spoonfed by the Democratic Party platform.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 16:29 | 2985466 flattrader
flattrader's picture

Funny how you are so concerned about freedom, but guaranteed reproductive freedom for women is not a civil rights issue and can be left to idiot state legislatures to mandate.

And he is a pro-life nut job

"Those who seek a pro-life culture must accept that we will never persuade all 300 million Americans to agree with us. A pro-life culture can be built only from the ground up, person by person. For too long we have viewed the battle as purely political, but no political victory can change a degraded society. No Supreme Court ruling by itself can instill greater respect for life. And no Supreme Court justice can save our freedoms if we don't fight for them ourselves."

  • Federalizing Social Policy, January 30, 2006 [100]

You got your issues, I got mine.

 

 

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 17:04 | 2985603 Overfed
Overfed's picture

Show me where in the Constitution the federal government has the authority to regulate any social issue whatsoever. 'Til then, that argument is pretty much null.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 17:54 | 2985801 flattrader
flattrader's picture

It is not a "social" issue at all.

>>>BTW, RP doesn't promote the abolition of abortion. He merely opposes federal laws regarding abortion one way or the other. Stop being spoonfed by the Democratic Party platform.<<<

Here's more to dispell the commonly held nonsense notion that he's a "disinterested" parrty.  He clearly thinks abortion is murder and says so.

That is a religiously held belief on his part.

  • Jan Mickelson: One of my litmus test questions to find out what kind of thinking process a candidate has done on this, is to ask my test question. Test question is: do you think that Roe v. Wade is the law of land?
    Ron Paul: Well, they call it the law of the land, but I want to clarify that by getting rid of it. I think this is one example of the courts overstepping their bounds tremendously. Texas had a law against this violent act, and it went in to the federal courts and the Supreme Court. They overruled the state law, which should have been legitimate, and then came down on the side of legalizing killing a fetus, even into the 3rd trimester. But the fastest way to accomplish this is not through a constitutional amendment, or waiting till you get enough justices to overrule. You can pass a law in the Congress, which denies jurisdiction to the federal courts. So if Iowa or Texas or any state passes a law against abortion, you can't get it into the federal courts, and the states would decide this issue, as they decide all issues of violence: murder, manslaughter, theft, all this things are supposed to be state issues.
  • John Lofton: Do you think abortion is murder?
    Ron Paul: Yes, but we have in our state laws, which enforce the law against murder, there are degrees. You have 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree murder. I think somebody who takes a pill the day after probably isn't committing quite the horrible murder when you see somebody lying on the floor and somebody takes a gun and puts it to their head. I don't equate those...
    John Lofton: What do you think ought to be the penalty for the abortionist and for the person who gets the abortion?
    Ron Paul: I really don't have the wisdom to know exactly what it should be... The girl who goes and gets an abortion, she's a participant in it, I don't think she deserves the death penalty... But there are some abortionists that it wouldn't be very hard to give them a pretty harsh punishment, because, you know, nothing annoys me more than the fact that an abortionist can make money killing a live viable fetus, in the 3rd trimester, and they think nothing about it, and they make a living doing this. Any yet, one minute after birth, that same mother, who might throw the child away, rightfully is called to task, and actually charged with murder. So that inconsistency has to be resolved.
Fri, 11/16/2012 - 19:32 | 2990006 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

so disingenuous Dr. Paul, always with the "3rd trimester viable baby" meme, yet with the other hand, seeking to award a zygote Constitutional Personhood - a zygote minutes old, and weeks from even being a foetus - neither of which are VIABLE by any stretch of any imagination, nor any Godly Voice.

more fodder for the "why does a mother want to kill her children?" immature thinkers here to play with.

we're talking LAWS and enforcement by armed policing here, a woman's body under a man-made Laws.  modern witch-hunters.

thanks for the links, sigh.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:11 | 2983706 Commander Cody
Commander Cody's picture

Thank you, Dr. Paul!  Live long and prosper.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:29 | 2983802 aerojet
aerojet's picture

A people who want to be both ignorant and free want what never was and never shall be.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 10:39 | 2983846 andyupnorth
andyupnorth's picture

I forwarded to my friends his 48-minute speech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqAIaj61QwQ

It covers all the major ideas, providing a good introduction to Libertarianism.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:23 | 2984064 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The love for manipulation of mere facts is what enables the likes of Ron Paul.

'American' economics is all about consumption and Paul does his 'american' job: consuming. Consuming time, consuming resources, piling on drivel that only exists because propped by 'americans' whimsical want that their propaganda or fantasy must be the official version of reality.

___________________
The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests.
___________________

How can it be so when the Constitution was a document expressing the mandatory possibility of owning people providing labour or service?

'Americans' keep building their narrative on the denial of their own nature. They keep depicting slavery and the possibility to have slaves as being freedom, coercion as being freedom, injustice as being freedom and their propaganda and fantasy truth.

Paul is a fine 'american'.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:27 | 2984089 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Skeptics, at the time the Constitution was written in 1787, warned us of today’s possible outcome. The insidious nature of the erosion of our liberties and the reassurance our great abundance gave us, allowed the process to evolve into the dangerous period in which we now live.
______________________________

What skeptics? If Paul refers to the founding fathers themselves, well, one can forget about them. They set the standards for the 'american' behaviour so duplicity was commended.

If Paul speaks of some other 'skeptics', they did not warn about what could possibly happen in a future, they outlined what 'Americanism' was and meant in their times. Indeed, a few 'skeptics' had no trouble seeing through what it meant when people declared freedom an unalienable right and kept slaves or declared property an unalienable right and went on the most violent land transfer ever made.
They did not speak about the future, they spoke about their present.

Nowadays are simply the continuation of the past, as shaped by 'americans'.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:35 | 2984115 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Welfare for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement.

_____________________________________

Nope. In 'americanism', the only welfare that is considered to be an entitlement is the ones benefiting the 'american' middle class.
Only these ones are entitlements.

The rich pay for their welfare. The rich have to manipulate and buy the voting process in order to get their welfare. When they are given a favour, it is usually because not doing so would endanger the 'american' middle class's entitlements.

The welfare for the poor only exists because it betters the standard of life of the 'american' middle class, strengthening their entitlements. 'American' economics is all about consumption and 'americans' run a business of farming the poor. The poor are mere vectors of demand to boost the 'american' middle class's consumption.

As to the future of these two 'welfare': the one directed to the poor will end as soon as consumption by the poor no longer better the 'american' middle class way of life.
The one to the rich is going to be harder to dislodge as they provoke it.

The only unrootable entitled welfare in 'american' societies is the welfare to the 'american' middle class.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:44 | 2984167 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

A real mine, this paper. Nearly every line is an 'american' construct to validate false thesis.

______________________________
Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people.
______________________________

With no complaints and support from the US American People. A sizeable segment of the US population considers that the US government is too soft with the 'enemy' and requires more terminal solutions.

The US military is a middle class institution and the 'american' middle class wants to keep thriving through war and the opportunities associated to it.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 11:46 | 2984182 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Rampant hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington.
_______________________

Then they would represent the US american popular will. And only in Washington? Big changes that all those in Washington could be easily empowered on that topic by 'americans' coming from the Ron Paul's movement for liberty (*cough, cough*)'s ranks.

Thu, 11/15/2012 - 14:10 | 2984797 akak
akak's picture

Alas, alas, alas, alas, pentuple alas!

It's five, five, five roadside turds in one!

Mon, 11/26/2012 - 06:49 | 3010810 resurger
resurger's picture

REspect

Mon, 11/26/2012 - 06:49 | 3010811 resurger
resurger's picture

REspect

Mon, 11/26/2012 - 06:49 | 3010812 resurger
resurger's picture

REspect

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!