PDA

View Full Version : The Decline And Fall of the Liberty Movement, Illustrated




r3volution 3.0
11-15-2016, 09:18 PM
https://i.imgur.com/DgCQh2t.png

fisharmor
11-15-2016, 09:28 PM
I still find it interesting that as it was happening there were plenty of us pissed off at the time because Ron had not suspended his campaign, yet we are expected to remember things differently from how they were.
I read a book once about altering history being vital to keeping the status quo.

fisharmor
11-15-2016, 09:33 PM
I also find it interesting that we're still expected to accept the endorsement because Rand had to play the game to get anywhere, yet the president elect is a man who didn't even recognize that there was a game.

So yeah, it makes sense that people who can't comprehend that are still carping on how Rand is our savior.

nikcers
11-15-2016, 09:43 PM
I also find it interesting that we're still expected to accept the endorsement because Rand had to play the game to get anywhere, yet the president elect is a man who didn't even recognize that there was a game.

So yeah, it makes sense that people who can't comprehend that are still carping on how Rand is our savior.

Trump is either playing the game, or a neocon puppet. How else do you explain Bolten or Giuliani ?

UWDude
11-15-2016, 10:49 PM
Trump is either playing the game, or a neocon puppet. How else do you explain Bolten or Giuliani ?
FUD

Mordan
11-16-2016, 05:29 AM
Trump is either playing the game, or a neocon puppet. How else do you explain Bolten or Giuliani ?

5D chessing you. CTR.

Mordan
11-16-2016, 05:31 AM
https://i.imgur.com/DgCQh2t.png

OP. The liberty movement was destroyed by Purists who abused everyone that didn't fit the mold. I saw that in 2008.

I find myself sometimes a sinner in that regard. My apologies.

Nye
11-16-2016, 05:57 AM
Trump is either playing the game, or a neocon puppet. How else do you explain Bolten or Giuliani ?
You can't. How can you justify the names for Sec of State that have been floating around?

Todd
11-16-2016, 06:07 AM
I also find it interesting that we're still expected to accept the endorsement because Rand had to play the game to get anywhere, yet the president elect is a man who didn't even recognize that there was a game.

So yeah, it makes sense that people who can't comprehend that are still carping on how Rand is our savior.

Trumps personality and status and wallet had a whole lot to do with how much he could ignore the game. You can't just pick a doctor from Kentucky with average charisma for that job and expect same results. Totally different set of circumstances. I get what you are saying.

scm
11-16-2016, 06:17 AM
OP. The liberty movement was destroyed by Purists who abused everyone that didn't fit the mold. I saw that in 2008.

I find myself sometimes a sinner in that regard. My apologies.
So you went completely the wrong way in picking you next choice.



Sorry but the movement died in 2012, need a recap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4&sns=em

ChristianAnarchist
11-16-2016, 07:25 AM
https://i.imgur.com/DgCQh2t.png

+rep

Cleaner44
11-16-2016, 09:34 AM
Maybe just maybe Trump doesn't have anything to do with any liberty movement.

If there is anyone here that thinks Trump is libertarian, please speak up so we can discuss that idea.

ChristianAnarchist
11-16-2016, 10:10 AM
Maybe just maybe Trump doesn't have anything to do with any liberty movement.

If there is anyone here that thinks Trump is libertarian, please speak up so we can discuss that idea.

Not only is he not libertarian he's now appointing all the usual criminals to all his cabinet positions...

Cleaner44
11-16-2016, 10:27 AM
Not only is he not libertarian he's now appointing all the usual criminals to all his cabinet positions...

I would imagine that many people that will be working in his administration will be known people and none of them will be from the Lew Rockwell circle. I would also imagine that almost anyone with a resume that fits these positions is going to be compromised to some degree. Probably the best we can hope for a Republican administration that adheres to at least a portion of their platform.

He is also the first President that I know of that has said anything critical of the Federal Reserve and I welcome that. I wonder if he has ever read End The Fed.

Edit:
This seems encouraging on the surface:
Pence removing lobbyists from Trump transition team
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/16/pence-removing-lobbyists-from-trump-transition-team.html

fisharmor
11-16-2016, 11:05 AM
Not only is he not libertarian he's now appointing all the usual criminals to all his cabinet positions...

I don't place a whole lot of importance on his cabinet picks. AFAIK he never said a thing about reducing the size, role, or budget of any federal departments. As a man who has run large organizations before, he's probably just looking for effective administrators who will work within whatever guidelines he sets, and will probably just fire anyone who doesn't follow his guidelines.
Even though they're cabinet positions, they're still jobs, and if they don't do them the way he wants, he's going to get rid of them.

That is why some people, like me, place more importance on consistency, coherence, and dogma in the head of state, particularly in election season. The danger isn't in John Bolton getting a job. The danger is that we frankly have no idea what Trump is going to mandate John Bolton to do.

fisharmor
11-16-2016, 11:07 AM
He is also the first President that I know of that has said anything critical of the Federal Reserve and I welcome that. I wonder if he has ever read End The Fed.

The man owns a real estate empire. Considering how Fed action and inaction directly correlates to mortgage rates, I don't consider it a possibility that he doesn't know exactly what the Fed does and fully condones at least part of it.

Sola_Fide
11-16-2016, 11:17 AM
The man owns a real estate empire. Considering how Fed action and inaction directly correlates to mortgage rates, I don't consider it a possibility that he doesn't know exactly what the Fed does and fully condones at least part of it.

Sure. Trump obviously loves manipulating interest. He affirms it with trade policy and domestic policy.

TheCount
11-16-2016, 11:51 AM
He is also the first President that I know of that has said anything critical of the Federal Reserve and I welcome that.Another convenient case of forgetting everything Trump has ever said in favor of one time where he said one critical thing at a crucial point of the election in order to shore up support for his candidacy.

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 12:18 PM
OP. The liberty movement was destroyed by Purists who abused everyone that didn't fit the mold. I saw that in 2008.

I find myself sometimes a sinner in that regard. My apologies.

A libertarian choosing liberty over tyranny is not being a "purist," they are simply being a "libertarian." Anyone who actually wants Trump is not a libertarian, they are an authoritarian. You don't get to claim that a Catholic is a "purist" because they won't drink the blood from a demonic sacrifice.

Athan
11-16-2016, 12:46 PM
A libertarian choosing liberty over tyranny is not being a "purist," they are simply being a "libertarian." Anyone who actually wants Trump is not a libertarian, they are an authoritarian. You don't get to claim that a Catholic is a "purist" because they won't drink the blood from a demonic sacrifice.

Yeah, but both sides are arguing about a dude who hasn't even been inaugurated, and by ALL accounts was better than Hillary (unless you believed civil war and WW3 was a better alternative which I can understand). It's utter madness over semantics and hypotheticals. This forum's members are crippling each other over unformulated thoughts and theories. The divide is gaining enough momentum to permanently cripple the liberty movement in the future.

I thought it was just gary johnson and bill weld being f*cking idiots sabotaging the libertarian party. This sh*t however is more serious and entrenched than even I imagined. Ron Paul supporters themselves are in disarray. I mean Gunny, you used to be one of the more awesome posters I remember years ago. Now you are simply part of the division over he said she said. At a time when the media and neocons are in route, the intelligence community in revolt against entrenched political orders, there is only unfocused squabbling over each other's point of view on current events.

Utter f*cking maddness. What the hell happened? Is what is going on in Ron Paul Forums mirrored everywhere else in the liberty movement?

ChristianAnarchist
11-16-2016, 12:50 PM
Yeah, but both sides are arguing about a dude who hasn't even been inaugurated, and by ALL accounts was better than Hillary (unless you believed civil war and WW3 was a better alternative which I can understand). It's utter madness over semantics and hypotheticals. This forum's members are crippling each other over unformulated thoughts and theories. The divide is gaining enough momentum to permanently cripple the liberty movement in the future.

I thought it was just gary johnson and bill weld being a f*cking idiots sabotaging the libertarian party. This sh*t however is more serious and entrenched than even I imagined. Ron Paul supporters themselves are in disarray. I mean Gunny, you used to be one of the more awesome posters I remember years ago. Now you are simply part of the division over he said she said. At a time when the media and neocons are in route, the intelligence community in revolt against entrenched political orders, there is only unfocused squabbling over each other's point of view on current events.

Utter f*cking maddness. What the hell happened? Is what is going on in Ron Paul Forums mirrored everywhere else in the liberty movement?

Geez! And I just +rep him for that post! I guess we need to wait and see. There's no guarantee that Trump won't start WWIII just as fast as Billary. Trade wars are a great way to start a shooting war. That said I think the only "fair" trade is to use tariffs equal to the other country. China has a 45% (or so) import tax on foreign vehicles, we need to match that. If the other country objects, we can simply point to their tax as a justification. In the end, I think you would see the Chinese reducing their tax immensely...

Dangergirl
11-16-2016, 12:52 PM
A libertarian choosing liberty over tyranny is not being a "purist," they are simply being a "libertarian." Anyone who actually wants Trump is not a libertarian, they are an authoritarian. You don't get to claim that a Catholic is a "purist" because they won't drink the blood from a demonic sacrifice.

This is where you get it wrong Gunny. No one said they wanted Trump over any Liberty candidate. He's the guy we have and he seems approachable with liberty ideas. We want to take the opportunity to advance our Constitutional values. You're being a "purist" because you're shutting out any possibility of conversion. And this attitude goes towards piers as well. There's a slew of new voters who are excited about their diluted idea of Liberty but instead of welcoming them and encouraging them to learn you want to mash their heads into the dirt with all their "mistakes". I don't see how, in your position, you're so undiplomatic :d

euphemia
11-16-2016, 12:55 PM
So yeah, it makes sense that people who can't comprehend that are still carping on how Rand is our savior.

The thing that bothers me is all the speculation and why everything is not done yesterday. Nothing will happen until January 20 when the Inauguration takes place.

What encourages me is that Rand is out there talking and giving a pretty good thumbnail sketch of his priorities for the next session. He sounds very reasoned and logical. I hope he will stay on message and move forward to get stuff done. He has a bit of an inside track because he was on the debate stage with Trump, and I feel like there was some backstage chat. Trump wants to get to know people, and he needs to get to know them. The fact that he already knows Rand and they seem to be cordial is a really good thing. Presidents can only do so much. The real power rests with Congress.

ChristianAnarchist
11-16-2016, 12:57 PM
This is where you get it wrong Gunny. No one said they wanted Trump over any Liberty candidate. He's the guy we have and he seems approachable with liberty ideas. We want to take the opportunity to advance our Constitutional values. You're being a "purist" because you're shutting out any possibility of conversion. And this attitude goes towards piers as well. There's a slew of new voters who are excited about their diluted idea of Liberty but instead of welcoming them and encouraging them to learn you want to mash their heads into the dirt with all their "mistakes". I don't see how, in your position, you're so undiplomatic :d

Wrong danger. We "liberty types" will work with anyone to promote liberty, even Billary. The problem is we don't see any willingness from any of them to work toward liberty. Trump has certainly made a few very minor concessions to "liberty" but now that he's elected he seems to be changing his tune. Perhaps I'm wrong (GASP!) and he will turn out to promote liberty in some small way. If so, that's great. It's just that we are not going to be fooled over and over again. We will be watching...

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 12:58 PM
Yeah, but both sides are arguing about a dude who hasn't even been inaugurated, and by ALL accounts was better than Hillary (unless you believed civil war and WW3 was a better alternative which I can understand). It's utter madness over semantics and hypotheticals. This forum's members are crippling each other over unformulated thoughts and theories. The divide is gaining enough momentum to permanently cripple the liberty movement in the future.

Not only have I been giving DJT the benefit of the doubt, I was doing so HERE until the Trump supporters started promoting Trump as better than the Pauls. If people are going to sully the Good Doctor's name, I'm going to oppose that.


I thought it was just gary johnson and bill weld being f*cking idiots sabotaging the libertarian party. This sh*t however is more serious and entrenched than even I imagined. Ron Paul supporters themselves are in disarray. I mean Gunny, you used to be one of the more awesome posters I remember years ago. Now you are simply part of the division over he said she said.

You probably missed the months I recently spent as a commie Hillary slave paid by the DNC to send American elections to a clean Democrat sweep. Since I am (according to the people you are defending) little more than a paid sockpuppet of Debbie Wassermann Shultz, and the forum ownership saw nothing wrong with all of this, then why shoulf I give a fk who I insult anymore?


At a time when the media and neocons are in route, the intelligence community in revolt against entrenched political orders, there is only unfocused squabbling over each other's point of view on current events.

Yeah, you have clearly missed the last like 14 months of anyone who didn't like Trump getting thoroughly demonized unchecked around here. The only reason I come here anymore is to try to keep the stain of authoritarian tyrants off of Ron Paul's good name.


Utter f*cking maddness. What the hell happened? Is what is going on in Ron Paul Forums mirrored everywhere else in the liberty movement?

Ask Bryan why he let this shit-show go on all year. I spend my efforts in reason elsewhere from this place since these forums do not want it anymore.

ChristianAnarchist
11-16-2016, 01:01 PM
Don't give up gunny. We need all the RP holdouts we can get here...

Athan
11-16-2016, 01:05 PM
Not only have I been giving DJT the benefit of the doubt, I was doing so HERE until the Trump supporters started promoting Trump as better than the Pauls. If people are going to sully the Good Doctor's name, I'm going to oppose that.



You probably missed the months I recently spent as a commie Hillary slave paid by the DNC to send American elections to a clean Democrat sweep. Since I am (according to the people you are defending) little more than a paid sockpuppet of Debbie Wassermann Shultz, and the forum ownership saw nothing wrong with all of this, then why shoulf I give a fk who I insult anymore?



Yeah, you have clearly missed the last like 14 months of anyone who didn't like Trump getting thoroughly demonized unchecked around here. The only reason I come here anymore is to try to keep the stain of authoritarian tyrants off of Ron Paul's good name.



Ask Bryan why he let this $#@!-show go on all year. I spend my efforts in reason elsewhere from this place since these forums do not want it anymore.

1. It's a useless and pointless opinion NO ONE IN RON PAUL FORUMS ARE GOING TO TAKE SERIOUSLY. Let it go nigga. It's just election fever.

2. I did miss a few months. However, point me in the direction where I am defending their statement that you are a paid sockpuppet. Go ahead. I'll wait.

3. You should because guess what, you have an earned reputation and air of respect you are sh*tting on and they can't touch. But I am not going to be telling you what to do. You want to sleep with pigs and slop, go ahead.

4. Yeah, guess why I was gone. Sh*t was going down and RPF is not as quick of a news aggregate as where I go, let alone the Daily Paul in it's hay day which is now gone. I understand your sentiment, but the divisiveness isn't what I recommend you focus on. Old enemies we the liberty movement had are being routed and boned. Is that really less important than internal melodrama? Seriously?

5. You ask Brian bro, I am not the one having an issue. I took a leave because of all the sh*t going down. Just relax. I'm not singling you out either. I just remember you being one of the more respected posters and even you are squabbling with some random posters.

Dangergirl
11-16-2016, 01:07 PM
Wrong danger. We "liberty types" will work with anyone to promote liberty, even Billary. The problem is we don't see any willingness from any of them to work toward liberty. Trump has certainly made a few very minor concessions to "liberty" but now that he's elected he seems to be changing his tune. Perhaps I'm wrong (GASP!) and he will turn out to promote liberty in some small way. If so, that's great. It's just that we are not going to be fooled over and over again. We will be watching...

I am a "liberty type" and I spend time with people I know, no matter what their ideology, to try to promote Liberty and the Constitution. I'm not sure why you haven't found anyone to coach yourself but I think they're out there. We're not in the position to nitpick yet.

We have no idea what Trump will be but he helped us dodge a huge bullet. I hope more of us take this chance to promote our movement and cause because this can turn around against us real quick. 4-8 years is not a lot of time.

I notice Gunny replied but I'll let him stew in his ego for a bit before I reply if I even do :D

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 01:08 PM
This is where you get it wrong Gunny. No one said they wanted Trump over any Liberty candidate.

You either were not around for the primaries before Rand Paul dropped out, or you have forgotten about that time. Likewise, you do not appear to have been paying attention to these forums over the last 10 months AT ALL considering the volume of Trumplove where people thought Tump was savior and messiah. If your memory or experienced is that compromised, then I would tend to not lend much weight to your judgement.


He's the guy we have

True enough.


and he seems approachable with liberty ideas.

You are dreaming now.


We want to take the opportunity to advance our Constitutional values. You're being a "purist" because you're shutting out any possibility of conversion.

Now I know you are lost in fiction-land. Not only will I work with anybody, I HAVE A PUBLIC RECORD HISTORY OF WORKING WITH ANYBODY. The fact that I know Trump will not be adopting a Constitutionalist Platform has nothing to do with prejudice or purity, but the fact that I have eyes, ears, and a brain, and i know how to use them.


And this attitude goes towards piers as well. There's a slew of new voters who are excited about their diluted idea of Liberty but instead of welcoming them and encouraging them to learn you want to mash their heads into the dirt with all their "mistakes". I don't see how, in your position, you're so undiplomatic :d

Perhaps you only have a fraction of the data and this is distorting your analysis. I get along great with Trump supporters on Facebook. It's only you lot here on RPFs who have chosen to shyt all over our principles and then tried to smear your shyt all over our faces.

You want to know why I wouldn't piss on a RPF Trump supporter if he was on fire, while most of my best friends on Facebook are.....Trump supporters?

Ask around. Someone will clue you in on the last year in this place.

Carlybee
11-16-2016, 01:11 PM
I didn't vote for him. Now he's backpedaling on everything, embracing the neocon cabal. Not a bit of liberty there and never was.

r3volution 3.0
11-16-2016, 01:12 PM
At a time when the media and neocons are in route...

Yes, they're en route, to the White House, to fill the top spots in the Trump administration.

Athan
11-16-2016, 01:13 PM
Yes, they're en route, to the White House, to fill the top spots in the Trump administration.
Apparently you haven't heard the news about Pence on that.

euphemia
11-16-2016, 01:14 PM
For better or for worse, Trump is the president-elect. That's our truth for the next 4-8 years. I am really happy Rand did not burn bridges with Trump. It can only work to our advantage. Ron, however, has not been so kind, and it bothers me. I have always thought Trump is amenable to nontraditional thinking, and his personality and work ethic make him fertile soil for liberty thinking.

We have to stay on message and not keep making this about personalities. Let's keep encouraging our senators to vote for a liberty agenda. If never had an opportunity before, we sure have one now. We need to move away from all the bickering and insist Congress do it right this time.

The funny thing is that all the establishment people who did not support Trump are falling all over themselves currying favor. Good luck with that.

Athan
11-16-2016, 01:16 PM
We have to stay on message and not keep making this about personalities. Let's keep encouraging our senators to vote for a liberty agenda. If never had an opportunity before, we sure have one now. We need to move away from all the bickering and insist Congress do it right this time.

THIS is what I was hoping to find when I logged back into Ron Paul forums.

euphemia
11-16-2016, 01:18 PM
It's your lucky day. I'm off work today. :)

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 01:19 PM
THIS is what I was hoping to find when I logged back into Ron Paul forums.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I am not disappointed in Ron Paul at all. I am proud of him. Righteousness is never wrong.

nikcers
11-16-2016, 01:21 PM
Apparently you haven't heard the news about Pence on that.

apparently you haven't heard of Pence..

Athan
11-16-2016, 01:21 PM
I appreciate the sentiment, but I am not disappointed in Ron Paul at all. I am proud of him. Righteousness is never wrong.

Uh, I have no clue why anyone should be disappointed in Dr. Ron Paul. I'm only disappointed I have not won one of his signed AR-15's.

r3volution 3.0
11-16-2016, 01:22 PM
What Trumpkin Says: "Hey guys, let's stop bickering, let's go fight for liberty together!"

What Trumpkin Means: "Hey guys, stop criticizing Trump, he's great, let's pretend like supporting him advances liberty!"

There is no common ground between the Trumpkin and the libertarian, none, nada, zip, zilch.

The liberty movement is in ruins because it was coopted by Trumpism.

The only hope of it ever rising again from the ashes is for we very few remaining libertarians to circle the wagons.

We can't possibly defeat the enemy if we pretend like he's an ally.

Athan
11-16-2016, 01:22 PM
apparently you haven't heard of Pence..
Thank you for correcting the record.

PierzStyx
11-16-2016, 01:23 PM
This is where you get it wrong Gunny. No one said they wanted Trump over any Liberty candidate. He's the guy we have and he seems approachable with liberty ideas. We want to take the opportunity to advance our Constitutional values. You're being a "purist" because you're shutting out any possibility of conversion. And this attitude goes towards piers as well. There's a slew of new voters who are excited about their diluted idea of Liberty but instead of welcoming them and encouraging them to learn you want to mash their heads into the dirt with all their "mistakes". I don't see how, in your position, you're so undiplomatic :d

He isn't the guy we have. He is the guy the neocons have. That much should be obvious.

And what possibility of conversion have you seen in all of Trump's history of being a Leftist?

While you're right, maybe we have ridden a few too hard, the reason that happened was because of the reality of the many though.

There isn't even a dilution of freedom with Trump. There was that with Rand, but not with Trump. Trump is an authoritarian. He wants power. He wants prestige. He wants to use, abuse, and lose people as it benefits him to do so. And people coming in here claiming that his authoritarian, abusive, destructive ideas are somehow going to make us free need to be put on notice. This is not the place to support the State.

The worst though are those who have long been here and are betraying everything they know about liberty in order to support Trump. They should know better. But either they do not or they do not care. That garbage needs to be exposed for what it is: anti-liberty; anti-humanity; anti-freedom. They deserve to be exposed to criticism and disdain for supporting things obviously opposed to the ideas of liberty and freedom.

Cleaner44
11-16-2016, 01:23 PM
Another convenient case of forgetting everything Trump has ever said in favor of one time where he said one critical thing at a crucial point of the election in order to shore up support for his candidacy.

I am not forgetting everything Trump has ever said, in fact I have paid very little attention to most of what he has ever said. I have never been a fan, don't read his books, don't watch his shows and basically see him as a Romney flip-flopper.

I care about actions, not words. I am hoping that his actions will have some good results mixed in with what I assume will be some poor results.

The Gold Standard
11-16-2016, 01:23 PM
Utter f*cking maddness. What the hell happened? Is what is going on in Ron Paul Forums mirrored everywhere else in the liberty movement?

Why do people keep bringing up the liberty movement? Absolutely none of the discussion going on here has anything to do with liberty. You have people pointing out how Trump is no different from those that came before him. You have Trump's fanatics saying it is all part of a master plan of deception. The Trumphumpers get triggered by the accusations, and everyone else just gets fed up with their eruptions afterward. Trump has proposed nothing that is friendly to liberty, he didn't run on a platform to increase liberty, he doesn't give a fuck about liberty.

Athan
11-16-2016, 01:25 PM
Why do people keep bringing up the liberty movement? Absolutely none of the discussion going on here has anything to do with liberty. You have people pointing out how Trump is no different from those that came before him. You have Trump's fanatics saying it is all part of a master plan of deception. The Trumphumpers get triggered by the accusations, and everyone else just gets fed up with their eruptions afterward. Trump has proposed nothing that is friendly to liberty, he didn't run on a platform to increase liberty, he doesn't give a $#@! about liberty.

Yeah sounds like you all have a silly squabble cycle going on.

Cleaner44
11-16-2016, 01:39 PM
What Trumpkin Says: "Hey guys, let's stop bickering, let's go fight for liberty together!"

What Trumpkin Means: "Hey guys, stop criticizing Trump, he's great, let's pretend like supporting him advances liberty!"

There is no common ground between the Trumpkin and the libertarian, none, nada, zip, zilch.

The liberty movement is in ruins because it was coopted by Trumpism.

The only hope of it ever rising again from the ashes is for we very few remaining libertarians to circle the wagons.

We can't possibly defeat the enemy if we pretend like he's an ally.

I don't see how treating the Trump administration as an enemy will help advance liberty.

I can see how Rand Paul could potentially influence the Trump administration and maybe make something positive happen, such as DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act" (OSTA) (https://downsizedc.org/etp/one-subject/)

Just imagine if Trump got behind the “Write the Laws Act” (WTLA) (https://downsizedc.org/etp/write-the-laws/)...

It may be a long shot, but it is worth fighting for in my opinion... or you could circle the wagons with Gary Johnson and Bill Weld and figure out a better way to advance liberty.

PierzStyx
11-16-2016, 01:39 PM
For better or for worse, Trump is the president-elect. That's our truth for the next 4-8 years. I am really happy Rand did not burn bridges with Trump. It can only work to our advantage. Ron, however, has not been so kind, and it bothers me.

Imagine that: being horrified because Ron Paul actually stuck by his principles while his son sold himself out.

I have always thought Trump is amenable to nontraditional thinking, and his personality and work ethic make him fertile soil for liberty thinking.

You mean extreme narcissism, delusions of grandeur, and being willing and able to take advantage of every government program possible make you think a person is an open-minded person who can be influenced for liberty?

Gonna have to disagree there.

We have to stay on message and not keep making this about personalities.

Yes, by all means, lets ignore what people are actually like for the fantasy we created that will justify us voting for them.

Let's keep encouraging our senators to vote for a liberty agenda. If never had an opportunity before, we sure have one now. We need to move away from all the bickering and insist Congress do it right this time.

Not a bad idea. Not a hopeful one, but still do try.

The funny thing is that all the establishment people who did not support Trump are falling all over themselves currying favor. Good luck with that.


They've having astounding luck. So I don't understand why you're being dismissive.

Well, no. Not luck. It was obvious Trump was an establishment man to anyone who paid attention to reality. So it isn't luck. It wa sinevitable.

r3volution 3.0
11-16-2016, 01:42 PM
I don't see how treating the Trump administration as an enemy will help advance liberty.

I don't see how you don't see how actively supporting one's own enemies is counterproductive.

UWDude
11-16-2016, 01:44 PM
He isn't the guy we have. He is the guy the neocons have. That much should be obvious.

And what possibility of conversion have you seen in all of Trump's history of being a Leftist?

While you're right, maybe we have ridden a few too hard, the reason that happened was because of the reality of the many though.

There isn't even a dilution of freedom with Trump. There was that with Rand, but not with Trump. Trump is an authoritarian. He wants power. He wants prestige. He wants to use, abuse, and lose people as it benefits him to do so. And people coming in here claiming that his authoritarian, abusive, destructive ideas are somehow going to make us free need to be put on notice. This is not the place to support the State.

The worst though are those who have long been here and are betraying everything they know about liberty in order to support Trump. They should know better. But either they do not or they do not care. That garbage needs to be exposed for what it is: anti-liberty; anti-humanity; anti-freedom. They deserve to be exposed to criticism and disdain for supporting things obviously opposed to the ideas of liberty and freedom.

I read you were hardcore pushing the Trump is a Hillary plant conspiracy theory in the Rand Paul sub-forum.
And Rand Paul just voted for Mitch McConnell for senate majority leader.
Mitch McConnell is a statist that voted for the Iraq war.
Therefore, by your logic, Rand Paul is a neocon.

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 01:47 PM
I don't see how treating the Trump administration as an enemy will help advance liberty.

I, for one, do not treat the Trump admin as an enemy, but with guarded optimism. There are a few policies like the potential repeal of O-Care and the repeal of the Johnson Amendment that I am actually excited about. Out in the 'real world' and on FB, only about 4% of Trump supporters are asshole enough to count as enemies. It's only here on RPF's that some 85% of Trump supporters have gone category 5 assholecaine.


I can see how Rand Paul could potentially influence the Trump administration and maybe make something positive happen, such as DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act" (OSTA) (https://downsizedc.org/etp/one-subject/)

Just imagine if Trump got behind the “Write the Laws Act” (WTLA) (https://downsizedc.org/etp/write-the-laws/)...

It may be a long shot, but it is worth fighting for in my opinion... or you could circle the wagons with Gary Johnson and Bill Weld and figure out a better way to advance liberty.

Johnson/Weld is nearly as anti liberty as Trump, and may be (probably is) even more anticonstitutional than him.

nikcers
11-16-2016, 01:48 PM
I read you were hardcore pushing the Trump is a Hillary plant conspiracy theory in the Rand Paul sub-forum.
And Rand Paul just voted for Mitch McConnell for senate majority leader.
Mitch McConnell is a statist that voted for the Iraq war.
Therefore, by your logic, Rand Paul is a neocon.

we're all neocons now, trump is Ron Paul on steroids.

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 01:49 PM
I read you were hardcore pushing the Trump is a Hillary plant conspiracy theory in the Rand Paul sub-forum.
And Rand Paul just voted for Mitch McConnell for senate majority leader.
Mitch McConnell is a statist that voted for the Iraq war.
Therefore, by your logic, Rand Paul is a neocon.

Stop. Telling. People. What. They. Are. And. Are. Not. Allowed. To. Think.

nikcers
11-16-2016, 01:50 PM
Thank you for correcting the record.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/05/ef/b4/05efb4d291feaa19aea90dd9baac545e.jpg

UWDude
11-16-2016, 01:51 PM
Stop. Telling. People. What. They. Are. And. Are. Not. Allowed. To. Think.

Wow. Coming from you. Just wow.

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 01:52 PM
Wow. Coming from you. Just wow.

Damn skippy. Now go on and start making crap up about me like you do so well...

TheCount
11-16-2016, 02:18 PM
I care about actions, not words. I am hoping that his actions will have some good results mixed in with what I assume will be some poor results.

If you don't care about words and don't pay attention to what he says, how do you know what he said about the Fed?

Both his actions and his words indicate an entire life focused on deficit spending and leveraging to his benefit and the detriment of others. Why would that change now? He has stated his intent to fiercely deficit spend on a wide variety of programs. How, exactly, do you think that he will be able to implement any of his policies if he is not supportive of a permissive Federal Reserve?

Dangergirl
11-16-2016, 02:21 PM
He isn't the guy we have. He is the guy the neocons have. That much should be obvious.

And what possibility of conversion have you seen in all of Trump's history of being a Leftist?

While you're right, maybe we have ridden a few too hard, the reason that happened was because of the reality of the many though.

There isn't even a dilution of freedom with Trump. There was that with Rand, but not with Trump. Trump is an authoritarian. He wants power. He wants prestige. He wants to use, abuse, and lose people as it benefits him to do so. And people coming in here claiming that his authoritarian, abusive, destructive ideas are somehow going to make us free need to be put on notice. This is not the place to support the State.

The worst though are those who have long been here and are betraying everything they know about liberty in order to support Trump. They should know better. But either they do not or they do not care. That garbage needs to be exposed for what it is: anti-liberty; anti-humanity; anti-freedom. They deserve to be exposed to criticism and disdain for supporting things obviously opposed to the ideas of liberty and freedom.

Thanks for the diplomatic reply. I appreciate it.

I'll start by clarifying that I meant Trump's the guy we have as the President, not the Liberty movement :d though I can't say for sure he's the neocon candidate. He's against a lot of things they promote. I've said before, he hasn't defined himself as a politician yet which is why it's a great time for Liberty candidates and scholars to influence him and also correctly influence those who voted for him, that are not necessarily on this forum, so they can continue to refine their decisions. This is not the time for us to be "isolationists" and that's exactly what I see happening from some of the members here.

GunnyFreedom
11-16-2016, 02:22 PM
If you don't care about words and don't pay attention to what he says, how do you know what he said about the Fed?

Both his actions and his words indicate an entire life focused on deficit spending and leveraging to his benefit and the detriment of others. Why would that change now? He has stated his intent to fiercely deficit spend on a wide variety of programs. How, exactly, do you think that he will be able to implement any of his policies if he is not supportive of a permissive Federal Reserve?

It's Trump-money. He gonna get it from his stash.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ojd13kZlCA

ChaosControl
11-16-2016, 02:24 PM
Trump isnt now and has never been a liberty candidate in any way whatsoever. He just appeals to alt right types or people ignorant enough to believe is immigration and trade b.s. and think it will help them get jobs when in reality he is just another puppet. He wanted the title and now will do whatever his neocon advisors tell him to do. But alas this was obvious to anyone who actually thought it through even a little bit.

Athan
11-16-2016, 02:31 PM
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/05/ef/b4/05efb4d291feaa19aea90dd9baac545e.jpg

Thank you for correcting the record.

otherone
11-16-2016, 03:09 PM
Why do people keep bringing up the liberty movement? Absolutely none of the discussion going on here has anything to do with liberty. You have people pointing out how Trump is no different from those that came before him. You have Trump's fanatics saying it is all part of a master plan of deception. The Trumphumpers get triggered by the accusations, and everyone else just gets fed up with their eruptions afterward. Trump has proposed nothing that is friendly to liberty, he didn't run on a platform to increase liberty, he doesn't give a $#@! about liberty.

What has become apparent is that the Trumpers have joined a cult of personality, and that their former support of RP was a cult of personality. Those in the actual Liberty Movement, while they may have affection for RP, are followers of his ideology, not the man. As Americans, and Liberty-lovers, we SHOULD be critical of DJT. If Ron or Rand were elected POTUS, we STILL would be critical of their actions, if those actions were counter-Liberty. This is not being "purist", it's being consistent.

r3volution 3.0
11-16-2016, 03:18 PM
What has become apparent is that the Trumpers have joined a cult of personality, and that their former support of RP was a cult of personality. Those in the actual Liberty Movement, while they may have affection for RP, are followers of his ideology, not the man. As Americans, and Liberty-lovers, we SHOULD be critical of DJT. If Ron or Rand were elected POTUS, we STILL would be critical of their actions, if those actions were counter-Liberty. This is not being "purist", it's being consistent.

A very important point

Unfortunately, we can't build a liberty movement consisting only, or even predominantly, of people who understand and accept the ideology (as opposed to people who just happen to like our current standard bearer for some superficial reason); there just aren't enough people who think that way. The vast majority of the electorate reasons emotionally and always will, period. The trick is to somehow corral such people and get them to support our candidate (as in '08 and '12) without allowing them to lead us off course (as happened this cycle).

otherone
11-16-2016, 03:21 PM
A very important point

Unfortunately, we can't build a liberty movement consisting only, or even predominantly, of people who understand and accept the ideology (as opposed to people who just happen to like our current standard bearer for some superficial reason); there just aren't enough people who think that way. The vast majority of the electorate reasons emotionally and always will, period. The trick is to somehow corral such people and get them to support our candidate (as in '08 and '12) without allowing them to lead us off course (as happened this cycle).

The candidates who are an actual threat are marginalized by the media. Solutions?

euphemia
11-16-2016, 03:24 PM
I don't think there is any such thing as a purist. We disagree on open border and commerce, for starters.

Liberty is for all, and it is the life we life when we understand we don't need permission of government to put up a fence or use a substance on our own property. We don't need government's permission to form relationships, and we are the ones who decide when it becomes the government's buisness to appropriate our property or give custody to children. We can buy what we want (including insurance) from wherever we want, and we don't need the government to tell us how to do it.

otherone
11-16-2016, 03:29 PM
I don't think there is any such thing as a purist. We disagree on open border and commerce, for starters.

Liberty is for all, and it is the live we live when we understand we don't need permission of government to put up a fence or use a substance on our own property. We don't need government's permission to form relationships, and we are the ones who decide when it becomes the government's buisness to appropriate our property or give custody to children. We can buy what we want (including insurance) from wherever we want, and we don't need the government to tell us how to do it.

wait...you're for open borders?

CCTelander
11-16-2016, 03:29 PM
What has become apparent is that the Trumpers have joined a cult of personality, and that their former support of RP was a cult of personality. Those in the actual Liberty Movement, while they may have affection for RP, are followers of his ideology, not the man. As Americans, and Liberty-lovers, we SHOULD be critical of DJT. If Ron or Rand were elected POTUS, we STILL would be critical of their actions, if those actions were counter-Liberty. This is not being "purist", it's being consistent.


"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to otherone again."

This post can't be +repped enough.

r3volution 3.0
11-16-2016, 03:37 PM
The candidates who are an actual threat are marginalized by the media. Solutions?

I wish I had some, but other than "somehow acquire fifty billion dollars" nothing much comes to mind. That said, it's not impossible to overcome the media bias. It's about who can pump out the best propaganda at the highest volume. Lack of money makes it impossible for us to win on volume, but we can potentially win on quality of propaganda (money matters here as well, e.g. hiring the best PR firms, but it's not as much of a limitation). A lot of this has to do with the candidates themselves. We need better quality candidates: not ideologically, but in terms of speaking ability, how impressive is their background, etc. We should be more involved in local and state races to build up a stable of future candidates.

Just a few scattered thoughts, I don't have any grand solution here...

thoughtomator
11-16-2016, 03:44 PM
Real libertarians recognize liberty for all.

Collectivist!

;)

You hit the nail on the head there. The key divide on this forum is between those who do believe in liberty for all, and those whose sole interest is liberty for themselves only.

otherone
11-16-2016, 03:46 PM
Collectivist!

;)

You hit the nail on the head there. The key divide on this forum is between those who do believe in liberty for all, and those whose sole interest is liberty for themselves only.

wait...now YOU'RE open borders?

nikcers
11-16-2016, 03:53 PM
nah...what was sad was when i was sitting in my chair at the 2008 Republican Convention in Spokane Washington with the delegation from my county as a State Delegate, when Lou Moore, Ron's campaign manager got up on stage and announced he was going to support John McCain....thats when i knew this 'liberty' movement was truly co-opted.

I left the convention and went home to the dismay of my fellow Ron Paul delegates...

I tried again in 2012 to become involved with Rand, but he didn't get much support from the likes of whiners like you, so, here we are....

maybe next time right?...

That's the second time i've seen you claim you were involved in 2012 with the Rand Paul's Presidential campaign. Most Ron Paul people I know don't mistake the two.

Bryan
11-16-2016, 08:14 PM
Cleaned up and re-opened.

Please keep things civil. It's best to just focus on the issues, not on each other.

Thanks!

RJB
11-16-2016, 08:31 PM
Some of you guys take things way to personal. If you disagree with someone, big deal. These forums are for debating not arguing. I see some people carrying bad feelings from one thread and unloading on another. That boggles my mind. I've simultaneously had screaming matches with Christianliberty on one thread and a cordial discussion on another. I wish we could all go out and I could buy y'all a beer.

That's what is really killing this place.

Origanalist
11-16-2016, 08:56 PM
Some of you guys take things way to personal. If you disagree with someone, big deal. These forums are for debating not arguing. I see some people carrying bad feelings from one thread and unloading on another. That boggles my mind. I've simultaneously had screaming matches with Christianliberty on one thread and a cordial discussion on another. I wish we could all go out and I could buy y'all a beer.

That's what is really killing this place.

Hey bite me you jerk, how would you like to get throat punched?

Origanalist
11-16-2016, 08:57 PM
:D

Origanalist
11-16-2016, 08:59 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxbbAPUXcAEVVb0.jpg

RJB
11-16-2016, 09:00 PM
Hey bite me you jerk, how would you like to get throat punched?

Reported, ya dingus.

Origanalist
11-16-2016, 09:01 PM
Reported, ya dingus.

Reported back, biatch.

CCTelander
11-16-2016, 09:02 PM
Hey bite me you jerk, how would you like to get throat punched?


Travlyr? ;) :D ;)

RJB
11-16-2016, 09:03 PM
Reported back, biatch.

Hey, report this:

Origanalist
11-16-2016, 09:04 PM
Travlyr? ;) :D ;)

lol, shhhhhhh......

:toady:

Suzanimal
11-16-2016, 09:39 PM
Some of you guys take things way to personal. If you disagree with someone, big deal. These forums are for debating not arguing. I see some people carrying bad feelings from one thread and unloading on another. That boggles my mind. I've simultaneously had screaming matches with Christianliberty on one thread and a cordial discussion on another. I wish we could all go out and I could buy y'all a beer.

That's what is really killing this place.

+++++rep

Jamesiv1
11-16-2016, 10:12 PM
Why do people keep bringing up the liberty movement? Absolutely none of the discussion going on here has anything to do with liberty. You have people pointing out how Trump is no different from those that came before him. You have Trump's fanatics saying it is all part of a master plan of deception. The Trumphumpers get triggered by the accusations, and everyone else just gets fed up with their eruptions afterward. Trump has proposed nothing that is friendly to liberty, he didn't run on a platform to increase liberty, he doesn't give a fuck about liberty.
You sound like a dope-smoking hippy that hasn't had a bath in a month, sitting on the couch taking bong hits and pissing bullshit about real Americans.

Here's a buck. Buy some soap and take a bath, hippy.

RJB
11-17-2016, 06:16 AM
Reported back, biatch.

It looks like we fought the war to end all wars. It looks like no one but James has the balls to continue on.

thoughtomator
11-17-2016, 06:26 AM
Some of you guys take things way to personal. If you disagree with someone, big deal. These forums are for debating not arguing. I see some people carrying bad feelings from one thread and unloading on another. That boggles my mind. I've simultaneously had screaming matches with Christianliberty on one thread and a cordial discussion on another. I wish we could all go out and I could buy y'all a beer.

That's what is really killing this place.

The creation of this state of affairs here was absolutely 100% intentional (complete with confession by the ringleader).

At a certain level of bad blood, and the absence of the tiniest scintilla of remorse by the perpetrators, there is no reconciliation possible.

And make no mistake about it - that bad blood was purposely created by one specific set of users here.

RJB
11-17-2016, 08:46 AM
The creation of this state of affairs here was absolutely 100% intentional (complete with confession by the ringleader).

At a certain level of bad blood, and the absence of the tiniest scintilla of remorse by the perpetrators, there is no reconciliation possible.

And make no mistake about it - that bad blood was purposely created by one specific set of users here.
Meh, just don't hold a grudge. Act like a woman. You don't see Lucille or Suzanimal getting overly emotional like a lot of men on the forum.

The Gold Standard
11-17-2016, 08:52 AM
And make no mistake about it - that bad blood was purposely created by one specific set of users here.

Exactly. The filthy anarchists. We finally won our liberty and they just want to take it away.

thoughtomator
11-17-2016, 08:58 AM
Meh, just don't hold a grudge. Act like a woman. You don't see Lucille or Suzanimal getting overly emotional.

I didn't work my ass off for liberty all these years just to give deliberate saboteurs a pass on intentionally wrecking the movement.

I will diligently work for the rest of my life to make sure anyone professing adherence to any form of anarchism is purged from any political organization or movement in which I will have influence, and to warn others of the damage that those who tolerate them will inevitably suffer.

No matter how broadly I may agree with them on many conclusion-principles (their reasoning is terrible but that's another topic), it has been proven without a reasonable doubt that any organization with an anarchist in it is going to be less useful and effective than those with none.

So if you want any progress towards liberty in your lifetime, it is all but compulsory to start by identifying anarchists and purge them from the political system.

thoughtomator
11-17-2016, 09:02 AM
Exactly. The filthy anarchists. We finally won our liberty and they just want to take it away.

Golly gee. Where would anarchism be without the natural right to limitlessly shit on someone else's property?

CCTelander
11-17-2016, 09:18 AM
Exactly. The filthy anarchists. We finally won our liberty and they just want to take it away.


Burn the witches!!!

phill4paul
11-17-2016, 09:40 AM
I didn't work my ass off for liberty all these years just to give deliberate saboteurs a pass on intentionally wrecking the movement.

I will diligently work for the rest of my life to make sure anyone professing adherence to any form of anarchism is purged from any political organization or movement in which I will have influence, and to warn others of the damage that those who tolerate them will inevitably suffer.

No matter how broadly I may agree with them on many conclusion-principles (their reasoning is terrible but that's another topic), it has been proven without a reasonable doubt that any organization with an anarchist in it is going to be less useful and effective than those with none.

So if you want any progress towards liberty in your lifetime, it is all but compulsory to start by identifying anarchists and purge them from the political system.

Yawn.

fisharmor
11-17-2016, 09:57 AM
Yawn.

He takes an awful lot of credit for a dead movement which changed precisely nothing.
:rolleyes:

Ender
11-17-2016, 10:17 AM
Some of you guys take things way to personal. If you disagree with someone, big deal. These forums are for debating not arguing. I see some people carrying bad feelings from one thread and unloading on another. That boggles my mind. I've simultaneously had screaming matches with Christianliberty on one thread and a cordial discussion on another. I wish we could all go out and I could buy y'all a beer.

That's what is really killing this place.

ON. THE. NOSE.

All the name-calling, neg repping, and finger-pointing has really gotten out of hand.

Can we just STOP?

Ender
11-17-2016, 10:27 AM
I didn't work my ass off for liberty all these years just to give deliberate saboteurs a pass on intentionally wrecking the movement.

I will diligently work for the rest of my life to make sure anyone professing adherence to any form of anarchism is purged from any political organization or movement in which I will have influence, and to warn others of the damage that those who tolerate them will inevitably suffer.

No matter how broadly I may agree with them on many conclusion-principles (their reasoning is terrible but that's another topic), it has been proven without a reasonable doubt that any organization with an anarchist in it is going to be less useful and effective than those with none.

So if you want any progress towards liberty in your lifetime, it is all but compulsory to start by identifying anarchists and purge them from the political system.

Murray Rothbard


Society Without a State

By Murray N. Rothbard

Murray Rothbard delivered this talk 32 years ago at the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP), Washington, DC: December 28, 1974. It was first published in The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January 1975, available in PDF.

In attempting to outline how a “society without a state” – that is, an anarchist society – might function successfully, I would first like to defuse two common but mistaken criticisms of this approach. First, is the argument that in providing for such defense or protection services as courts, police, or even law itself, I am simply smuggling the state back into society in another form, and that therefore the system I am both analyzing and advocating is not “really” anarchism.

This sort of criticism can only involve us in an endless and arid dispute over semantics. Let me say from the beginning that I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state.

On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/murray-n-rothbard/how-anarchism-can-work/

^^THIS^^ is true anarchism and we do not want to purge it.

CCTelander
11-17-2016, 10:31 AM
He takes an awful lot of credit for a dead movement which changed precisely nothing.
:rolleyes:


That's because those goddamned anarchists have ruined everything. If we could just purge those asshats we'd hacve liberty restored in a decade. Two, tops.

What a petulant child.

Origanalist
11-17-2016, 10:37 AM
I didn't work my ass off for liberty all these years just to give deliberate saboteurs a pass on intentionally wrecking the movement.

I will diligently work for the rest of my life to make sure anyone professing adherence to any form of anarchism is purged from any political organization or movement in which I will have influence, and to warn others of the damage that those who tolerate them will inevitably suffer.

No matter how broadly I may agree with them on many conclusion-principles (their reasoning is terrible but that's another topic), it has been proven without a reasonable doubt that any organization with an anarchist in it is going to be less useful and effective than those with none.

So if you want any progress towards liberty in your lifetime, it is all but compulsory to start by identifying anarchists and purge them from the political system.

So....it's meltdown time again?

CCTelander
11-17-2016, 10:44 AM
So....it's meltdown time again?


Nothing says "Liberty!" like a good, old fashioned purge.

Amirite?

Origanalist
11-17-2016, 10:59 AM
Nothing says "Liberty!" like a good, old fashioned purge.

Amirite?

Uncle Joe knows.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/08/03/12/2B0FE91C00000578-3183792-image-m-44_1438601670127.jpg

CCTelander
11-17-2016, 11:00 AM
Uncle Joe knows.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/08/03/12/2B0FE91C00000578-3183792-image-m-44_1438601670127.jpg


I'd +rep you if I could.

r3volution 3.0
11-17-2016, 12:51 PM
Regarding the dearly departed thoughtomator's anti-anarchist screed...

From the perspective of a pragmatic minarchist, ancaps do tend to be a problem: not because of their principles, but because they tend to be purists when it comes to practical efforts to realize those principles, to a degree that's counterproductive (we all have our litmus tests, but some are unreasonably strict). Some ancaps are like this, some aren't, as we see here on RPF (e.g. some supported Rand, some didn't); nor is this a problem unique to anarchism (though of libertarians afflicted, a disproportionate number are ancaps). But if ancaps are a problem, they're a relatively minor one: that fly that keep landing on your neck. It's the giant, retarded, Messicun-hating, orange toupeed gorilla in the room which is the real problem facing the liberty movement at the moment.

GunnyFreedom
11-17-2016, 12:59 PM
//

Occam's Banana
11-17-2016, 01:01 PM
I'd +rep you if I could.

Covered.


I didn't work my ass off for liberty all these years just to give deliberate saboteurs a pass on intentionally wrecking the movement.

I will diligently work for the rest of my life to make sure anyone professing adherence to any form of anarchism is purged from any political organization or movement in which I will have influence, and to warn others of the damage that those who tolerate them will inevitably suffer.

No matter how broadly I may agree with them on many conclusion-principles (their reasoning is terrible but that's another topic), it has been proven without a reasonable doubt that any organization with an anarchist in it is going to be less useful and effective than those with none.

So if you want any progress towards liberty in your lifetime, it is all but compulsory to start by identifying anarchists and purge them from the political system.

LOL. Sure. Okay ... "Please don't throw us into the briar patch, Brer Fox!" LOL ...




"I've got you this time, Brer Rabbit," said Brer Fox, jumping up and shaking off the dust. "You've sassed me for the very last time. Now I wonder what I should do with you?"

Brer Rabbit's eyes got very large. "Oh please Brer Fox, whatever you do, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

"Maybe I should roast you over a fire and eat you," mused Brer Fox. "No, that's too much trouble. Maybe I'll hang you instead."

"Roast me! Hang me! Do whatever you please," said Brer Rabbit. "Only please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

"If I'm going to hang you, I'll need some string," said Brer Fox. "And I don't have any string handy. But the stream's not far away, so maybe I'll drown you instead."

"Drown me! Roast me! Hang me! Do whatever you please," said Brer Rabbit. "Only please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

"The briar patch, eh?" said Brer Fox. "What a wonderful idea! You'll be torn into little pieces!"

Grabbing up the tar-covered rabbit, Brer Fox swung him around and around and then flung him head over heels into the briar patch. Brer Rabbit let out such a scream as he fell that all of Brer Fox's fur stood straight up. Brer Rabbit fell into the briar bushes with a crash and a mighty thump. Then there was silence.

Brer Fox cocked one ear toward the briar patch, listening for whimpers of pain. But he heard nothing. Brer Fox cocked the other ear toward the briar patch, listening for Brer Rabbit's death rattle. He heard nothing.

Then Brer Fox heard someone calling his name. He turned around and looked up the hill. Brer Rabbit was sitting on a log combing the tar out of his fur with a wood chip and looking smug.

"I was bred and born in the briar patch, Brer Fox," he called. "Born and bred in the briar patch."

And Brer Rabbit skipped away as merry as a cricket while Brer Fox ground his teeth in rage and went home.


-- from "Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby" as retold by S.E. Schlosser (http://americanfolklore.net/folklore/2010/07/brer_rabbit_meets_a_tar_baby.html)

Tywysog Cymru
11-17-2016, 01:13 PM
Rome, 50 BC, a group of Roman liberty lovers meet at the forum.

Gaius: This Julius Caesar guy is great! He's really shaking things up! He needs our support!

Titus: No, Julius Caesar is not a friend of liberty. He is an aspiring strongman and we should oppose him.

Quintus: TITUS CUCKOLDUS MAXIMUS EST!

Flavius: Purists like you are why we never accomplish anything.

Romulus: He isn't perfect, but there's this one really corrupt senator who doesn't like him.

Titus: I despair for Rome.

GunnyFreedom
11-17-2016, 01:33 PM
I have never understood this argument that "person A must be ok because person B whom I hate, hates them."

That's the very argument that almost got us into nuclear armageddon with the Soviet Union most of my life growing up.

Stalin hated Hitler, so Stalin must be okay and worthy of allying with? Yeah, that didn't work out so well.

That argument never works out well.

Occam's Banana
11-17-2016, 01:49 PM
I have never understood this argument that "person A must be ok because person B whom I hate, hates them."

That's the very argument that almost got us into nuclear armageddon with the Soviet Union most of my life growing up.

Stalin hated Hitler, so Stalin must be okay and worthy of allying with? Yeah, that didn't work out so well.

That argument never works out well.

Reported for beta cuck purism.

(And I'm pretty sure there's a MAGA violation in there somewhere, too ...)

The Gold Standard
11-17-2016, 02:03 PM
It takes a real purist, anarchist fuck to oppose a hero like Trump just because he supports stop-and-frisk, SWAT raids, caging people inside the borders, universal health care, wars for foreign oil, heavy taxes on imports, inflation, federal make work projects, eminent domain, and artificially low interest rates. No wonder they never get anything done.

Carlybee
11-17-2016, 02:09 PM
I seriously hate the word cuck

Jamesiv1
11-17-2016, 02:13 PM
It takes a real purist, anarchist fuck to oppose a hero like Trump just because he supports stop-and-frisk, SWAT raids, caging people inside the borders, universal health care, wars for foreign oil, heavy taxes on imports, inflation, federal make work projects, eminent domain, and artificially low interest rates. No wonder they never get anything done.
Damn right.

Spoken like a real American.

undergroundrr
11-17-2016, 02:28 PM
ancaps do tend to be a problem: not because of their principles, but because they tend to be purists when it comes to practical efforts to
realize those principles, to a degree that's counterproductive

I think it's down to the individual person. Methodology and end result are two different things. I'm an ancap and I would have been totally comfortable with Johnson/Weld in a transitional sense.

Some people quit cold turkey, some take a more incremental approach.

CCTelander
11-17-2016, 03:02 PM
It takes a real purist, anarchist fuck to oppose a hero like Trump just because he supports stop-and-frisk, SWAT raids, caging people inside the borders, universal health care, wars for foreign oil, heavy taxes on imports, inflation, federal make work projects, eminent domain, and artificially low interest rates. No wonder they never get anything done.


"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to The Gold Standard again."

r3volution 3.0
11-17-2016, 03:46 PM
I think it's down to the individual person. Methodology and end result are two different things. I'm an ancap and I would have been totally comfortable with Johnson/Weld in a transitional sense.

Some people quit cold turkey, some take a more incremental approach.

Absolutely

Not all libertarians (ancaps or otherwise) appreciate that distinction.

r3volution 3.0
05-11-2017, 08:04 PM
bump

enhanced_deficit
05-12-2017, 11:24 AM
There could be some positive signs though lately with disgraced DGP's PSOs (political slave owners) relatively diminished power.


Rand Paul wants to know if he was spied on, too (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?510331-Rand-Paul-wants-to-know-if-he-was-spied-on-too&)

Rand Paul: Second senator informs him he was under surveillance as well. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?510598-Rand-Paul-Second-senator-informs-him-he-was-under-surveillance-as-well&)

PierzStyx
05-12-2017, 12:12 PM
This is where you get it wrong Gunny. No one said they wanted Trump over any Liberty candidate. He's the guy we have and he seems approachable with liberty ideas. We want to take the opportunity to advance our Constitutional values. You're being a "purist" because you're shutting out any possibility of conversion. And this attitude goes towards piers as well. There's a slew of new voters who are excited about their diluted idea of Liberty but instead of welcoming them and encouraging them to learn you want to mash their heads into the dirt with all their "mistakes". I don't see how, in your position, you're so undiplomatic :d

Anyone who thinks Trump is approachable with "liberty ideas" is an idiot or a sucker. Same garbage argument made for every garbage politician. Vote Romney/McCain/Bush/Dole/Bush/ et. al beaus they're better than the alternative. In what way? No way. Same ruler, different tie color.

PierzStyx
05-12-2017, 12:19 PM
I appreciate the sentiment, but I am not disappointed in Ron Paul at all. I am proud of him. Righteousness is never wrong.

Agreed. I am a voluntaryist. I am so because of the ideas that Ron Paul introduced me to. And he has been the only politician I know of who I honestly believe would trying and shrink the government, reduce federal power, and end foreign wars. He proved this again and again with his record and his reasoning. Therefore, even when I disagreed with him, I trusted him and could vote for him. There isn't a similar politician in all of government who I trust in that same way and therefore I won't vote for them.

Saint Vitus
05-12-2017, 12:42 PM
You're missing the part in the cartoon where Rand ran an absolutely abysmal campaign, polled at less than 1%, couldn't win a single state, sold out the grassroots and abandoned his fathers rhetoric in favor of appealing to neocons.

Anti Federalist
05-12-2017, 02:51 PM
Covered.



LOL. Sure. Okay ... "Please don't throw us into the briar patch, Brer Fox!" LOL ...




"I've got you this time, Brer Rabbit," said Brer Fox, jumping up and shaking off the dust. "You've sassed me for the very last time. Now I wonder what I should do with you?"

Brer Rabbit's eyes got very large. "Oh please Brer Fox, whatever you do, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

"Maybe I should roast you over a fire and eat you," mused Brer Fox. "No, that's too much trouble. Maybe I'll hang you instead."

"Roast me! Hang me! Do whatever you please," said Brer Rabbit. "Only please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

"If I'm going to hang you, I'll need some string," said Brer Fox. "And I don't have any string handy. But the stream's not far away, so maybe I'll drown you instead."

"Drown me! Roast me! Hang me! Do whatever you please," said Brer Rabbit. "Only please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch."

"The briar patch, eh?" said Brer Fox. "What a wonderful idea! You'll be torn into little pieces!"

Grabbing up the tar-covered rabbit, Brer Fox swung him around and around and then flung him head over heels into the briar patch. Brer Rabbit let out such a scream as he fell that all of Brer Fox's fur stood straight up. Brer Rabbit fell into the briar bushes with a crash and a mighty thump. Then there was silence.

Brer Fox cocked one ear toward the briar patch, listening for whimpers of pain. But he heard nothing. Brer Fox cocked the other ear toward the briar patch, listening for Brer Rabbit's death rattle. He heard nothing.

Then Brer Fox heard someone calling his name. He turned around and looked up the hill. Brer Rabbit was sitting on a log combing the tar out of his fur with a wood chip and looking smug.

"I was bred and born in the briar patch, Brer Fox," he called. "Born and bred in the briar patch."

And Brer Rabbit skipped away as merry as a cricket while Brer Fox ground his teeth in rage and went home.


-- from "Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby" as retold by S.E. Schlosser (http://americanfolklore.net/folklore/2010/07/brer_rabbit_meets_a_tar_baby.html)

How it was first told...

HOW MR. RABBIT WAS TOO SHARP FOR MR. FOX

"Uncle Remus, " said the little boy one evening, when he had found the old
man with little or nothing to do, "did the fox kill and eat the rabbit when
he caught him with the Tar-Baby?"

"Law, honey, ain't I tell you 'bout dat?" replied the old darkey, chuckling
slyly. "I 'clar ter grashus I ought er tole you dat, but ole man Nod wuz
ridin' on my eyelids twel a leetle mo'n I'd a dis'member'd my own name, en
den on to dat here come yo' mammy hollerin' atter you.

"W'at I tell you w'en I fus' begin? I tole you Brer Rabbit wuz a monstus
soon beas'; leas'ways dat's w'at I laid out fer ter tell you. Well, den,
honey, don't you go en make no udder kalkalashuns, kaze in dem days Brer
Rabbit en his fambly wuz at de head er de gang w'en enny racket wuz en han',
en dar dey stayed. 'Fo' you begins fer ter wipe yo' eyes 'bout Brer Rabbit,
you wait en see wha'bouts Brer Rabbit gwineter fetch up at. But dat's needer
yer ner dar.

"W'en Brer Fox fine Brer Rabbit mixt up wid de Tar-baby, he feel mighty
good, en he roll on de groun' en laff. Bimeby he up'n say, sezee:

"'Well, I speck I got you did time, Brer Rabbit,' sezee; 'maybe I ain't but
I speck I is. You been runnin' 'roun' here sassin' atter me a mighty long
time, but I speck you done come ter de cen' er de row. You bin currin' up
yo' capers en bouncin' 'roun' in dis naberhood ontwel you come ter b'leeve
yo'se'f de boss er de whole gang. En der youer allers some'rs whar you got
no bixness,' ses Brer Fox, sezee. 'Who ax you fer ter come en strike up a
'quaintence wid dish yer Tar-Baby? En who stuck you up dar whar you iz?
Nobody in de 'roun' worril. You des tuck en jam yo'se'f on dat Tar-Baby
widout waintin' fer enny invite,' sez Brer Fox, sezee, 'en dar you is, en
dar you'll stay twel I fixes up a bresh-pile and fires her up, kaze I'm
gwinteter bobbycue you dis day, sho,' sez Brer Fox, sezee.

"Den Brer Rabbit talk mighty 'umble,

"'I don't keer w'at you do wid me, Brer Fox,' sezee, 'so you don't fling me
in dat brier-patch. Roas' me, Brer Fox,' sezee, 'but don't fling me in dat
brier-patch,' sezee.

"'I ain't got no string,' sez Brer Fox, sezee, 'en now I speck I'll hatter
drwon you,' sezee.

"'Drown me des ez deep es you please, Brer Fox," sez Brer Rabbit, sezee,
'but do don't fling me in dat brier-patch, ' sezee.

"'Dey ain't no water nigh,' sez Brer Fox, sezee, 'en now I speck I'll hatter
skin you,' sezee.

"'Skin me, Brer Fox,' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee, 'snatch out my eyeballs, t'ar
out my yeras by de roots, en cut off my legs,' sezee, 'but do please, Brer
Fox, don't fling me in dat brier-patch,' sezee.

"Co'se Brer Fox wnater hurt Brer Rabbit bad ez he kin, so he cotch 'im by de
behime legs en slung 'im right in de middle er de brierpatch. dar wuz a
considerbul flutter whar Brer Rabbit struck de bushes, en Brer Fox sorter
hang 'roun' fer ter see w'at wuz gwinter happen. Bimeby he hear somebody
call im, en way up de hill he see Brer Rabbit settin' crosslegged on a
chinkapin log koamin' de pitch outen his har wid a chip. Den Brer Fox know
dat he bin swop off mighty bad. Brer Rabbit wuz bleedzed fer ter fling back
some er his sass, en he holler out:

"'Bred en bawn in a brier-patch, Brer Fox--bred en bawn in a brier-patch!'
en wid dat he skip out des ez lively as a cricket in de embers."

Occam's Banana
05-12-2017, 04:03 PM
How it was first told...

HOW MR. RABBIT WAS TOO SHARP FOR MR. FOX

"Uncle Remus, " said the little boy one evening, when he had found the old
man with little or nothing to do, "did the fox kill and eat the rabbit when
he caught him with the Tar-Baby?"

"Law, honey, ain't I tell you 'bout dat?" replied the old darkey, chuckling
slyly. "I 'clar ter grashus I ought er tole you dat, but ole man Nod wuz
ridin' on my eyelids twel a leetle mo'n I'd a dis'member'd my own name, en
den on to dat here come yo' mammy hollerin' atter you.

"W'at I tell you w'en I fus' begin? I tole you Brer Rabbit wuz a monstus
soon beas'; leas'ways dat's w'at I laid out fer ter tell you. Well, den,
honey, don't you go en make no udder kalkalashuns, kaze in dem days Brer
Rabbit en his fambly wuz at de head er de gang w'en enny racket wuz en han',
en dar dey stayed. 'Fo' you begins fer ter wipe yo' eyes 'bout Brer Rabbit,
you wait en see wha'bouts Brer Rabbit gwineter fetch up at. But dat's needer
yer ner dar.

"W'en Brer Fox fine Brer Rabbit mixt up wid de Tar-baby, he feel mighty
good, en he roll on de groun' en laff. Bimeby he up'n say, sezee:

"'Well, I speck I got you did time, Brer Rabbit,' sezee; 'maybe I ain't but
I speck I is. You been runnin' 'roun' here sassin' atter me a mighty long
time, but I speck you done come ter de cen' er de row. You bin currin' up
yo' capers en bouncin' 'roun' in dis naberhood ontwel you come ter b'leeve
yo'se'f de boss er de whole gang. En der youer allers some'rs whar you got
no bixness,' ses Brer Fox, sezee. 'Who ax you fer ter come en strike up a
'quaintence wid dish yer Tar-Baby? En who stuck you up dar whar you iz?
Nobody in de 'roun' worril. You des tuck en jam yo'se'f on dat Tar-Baby
widout waintin' fer enny invite,' sez Brer Fox, sezee, 'en dar you is, en
dar you'll stay twel I fixes up a bresh-pile and fires her up, kaze I'm
gwinteter bobbycue you dis day, sho,' sez Brer Fox, sezee.

"Den Brer Rabbit talk mighty 'umble,

"'I don't keer w'at you do wid me, Brer Fox,' sezee, 'so you don't fling me
in dat brier-patch. Roas' me, Brer Fox,' sezee, 'but don't fling me in dat
brier-patch,' sezee.

"'I ain't got no string,' sez Brer Fox, sezee, 'en now I speck I'll hatter
drwon you,' sezee.

"'Drown me des ez deep es you please, Brer Fox," sez Brer Rabbit, sezee,
'but do don't fling me in dat brier-patch, ' sezee.

"'Dey ain't no water nigh,' sez Brer Fox, sezee, 'en now I speck I'll hatter
skin you,' sezee.

"'Skin me, Brer Fox,' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee, 'snatch out my eyeballs, t'ar
out my yeras by de roots, en cut off my legs,' sezee, 'but do please, Brer
Fox, don't fling me in dat brier-patch,' sezee.

"Co'se Brer Fox wnater hurt Brer Rabbit bad ez he kin, so he cotch 'im by de
behime legs en slung 'im right in de middle er de brierpatch. dar wuz a
considerbul flutter whar Brer Rabbit struck de bushes, en Brer Fox sorter
hang 'roun' fer ter see w'at wuz gwinter happen. Bimeby he hear somebody
call im, en way up de hill he see Brer Rabbit settin' crosslegged on a
chinkapin log koamin' de pitch outen his har wid a chip. Den Brer Fox know
dat he bin swop off mighty bad. Brer Rabbit wuz bleedzed fer ter fling back
some er his sass, en he holler out:

"'Bred en bawn in a brier-patch, Brer Fox--bred en bawn in a brier-patch!'
en wid dat he skip out des ez lively as a cricket in de embers."

LOL. Though it is not used in the above, I remember back when I encountered the word "oncet" in a variety of places. I tried to read it phonetically as "onset" or "onket," neither of which made any sense. I couldn't figure out what the hell it was supposed to mean. Context didn't matter much - more often than not, omitting the word didn't seem to make any difference to the sense of the sentences in which it appeared. [Example: "Oncet I went to New York City" - or "I went to New York City oncet."]

It drove me nuts until I finally encountered it spelled more phonetically as "wunst," Then a light bulb went off - "oncet" was just a transcription of "once" as pronounced with a terminating plosive. Perhaps I might have "gotten" it sooner if a "d" had been used instead of "t" ... (and this was back before you could look up things like "oncet" on Wiktionary (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oncet) or the like ...)

Anyway, ever since then, I have absolutely detested idiosyncratic dialect mimicry - not because of "political correctness" or any such thing, but just because it's so damn hard to parse (especially when it's smeared on as thickly as it is above).

Anti Federalist
05-12-2017, 05:14 PM
LOL. Though it is not used in the above, I remember back when I encountered the word "oncet" in a variety of places. I tried to read it phonetically as "onset" or "onket," neither of which made any sense. I couldn't figure out what the hell it was supposed to mean. Context didn't matter much - more often than not, omitting the word didn't seem to make any difference to the sense of the sentences in which it appeared. [Example: "Oncet I went to New York City" - or "I went to New York City oncet."]

It drove me nuts until I finally encountered it spelled more phonetically as "wunst," Then a light bulb went off - "oncet" was just a transcription of "once" as pronounced with a terminating plosive. Perhaps I might have "gotten" it sooner if a "d" had been used instead of "t" ... (and this was back before you could look up things like "oncet" on Wiktionary (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oncet) or the like ...)

Anyway, ever since then, I have absolutely detested idiosyncratic dialect mimicry - not because of "political correctness" or any such thing, but just because it's so damn hard to parse (especially when it's smeared on as thickly as it is above).

LOLOLOLOL...oh I'm dying over here...:D

One of my favorites from this passage:

kalkalashuns = calculations