StevenShafer Posted August 11, 2014 Posted August 11, 2014 So I wrote this article on Liberty.me, I'd love for you all to check it out and give a brother some feedback. If you happen to like it, clicking the heart would be exquisite. Thanks!
Pelafina Posted August 12, 2014 Posted August 12, 2014 Ron Paul promoted anarchy in a recent interview. Many people credit Ron Paul for turning them toward libertarianism. You have to give credit where credit is due. http://www.youtube.com/embed/IcWPji8fXwU
regevdl Posted August 14, 2014 Posted August 14, 2014 I have no interest in his son and many people I have been in contact with who pay any sort of attention have kept a skeptical eye on Rand especially after he endorsed Mitt Romney, made a trip to Israel ( I think after elections...don't remember exactly) and well... you can research the rest. Many do not have the respect for Rand as they do for Ron Paul. And with all respect in the effort you put towards this article and I agree with Pelafina, Ron Paul did a HELL of a job waking people up. I came from the LEFT and he woke me up...or at least solidified my decision to leave the left..and look where it led me. I don't see Rand ever having that type of influencial, raw and organic talent. Even those who pushed for Ron Paul new in silence he wouldn't win or if he did he could not change everything or the better, the system is completely broken that one man dealing with a bought congress won't change a whole lot, that his purpose was using the main stream mediums to promote his message which was a brilliant tactic.
nathanm Posted August 15, 2014 Posted August 15, 2014 There's one subtle emotional manipulation that it seems nobody is above doing; not the media at large, not me and not even the mighty FDR staff; which is using juuuust the right photograph of the person you're criticizing that makes them look "bad". Not criticizing, I just find it amusing how universal that is. Personally I like the dead-eyed, no-catchlight mafioso pose of Ron Pal in that shot, he looks more badass than usual. Now that looks like "Doctor No"!
Maestro Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 I understand the sentiments of your article, but I feel like it's a little unfair to Dr. Paul.Ron Paul was clear from the start that he never really wanted to get into politics to win. He wanted to spread his message of liberty. In many interviews, he talks about his wife saying "Be careful, you might actually win!" to him when he ran for Congress in the 1970's. This was a man talking about libertarian ideas for 40 years. He used his status as a congressman and his presidential runs to give him credibility to the public. The media driven internet as we know it did not exist in the 70's 80's or even really the 90's, so how else was he supposed to get the message out? When he ran for president in 1988 for the Libertarian party, he didn't expect to win. He wanted to use the run as a platform to spread his ideas. And since his run in 2008, he's been very successful in spreading his ideas. He's been to college campuses around the country talking about liberty, and tons of young Americans are waking up because of that. Even with the media against him, he still got his message across strongly. And today, he's recognized that his political action did little in terms of repealing laws and taxes. But what is he doing now? Hosting an internet show just like Stefan Molyneux.Ron Paul doesn't claim to be a pure anarchist, but he's often mentioned a very important principle, and that is the idea that you can opt-out. The video that Pelafina linked shows that, and he speaks about opting out of government entirely in other speeches and interviews. Government is not a monopoly of force if you have the option of opting-out. Government as we know it is a monopoly of force, but I don't see why you can't have voluntary "government" that collects fees, raises a defense, has a system of basic laws through an elected body, etc. all with the option of opt-ing out. Some would argue then, that by definition that isn't a government, but at that point we're just arguing semantics.
Recommended Posts