----------- BEGIN EDIT --------------
I wanted to add this note because I thought it was important. I realized that I sound rather negative in this post. I am a positive person looking to making POSITIVE change in this country and this world. I thought about where my negative energy was coming from. I realized that it came from my experience with a die-hard Gravel supporter who I have been debating with. This individual is very new to the concepts of libertarianism. I personally don't feel like he is coming from the same place as most of us in "The Revolution". But I do recognize that even as a minority amoung us, each one of us has something to offer. I am not sure if I started the negative attacks with this person. I kind of doubt I did. But I do want to release myself from negativity. I DO believe this individual and Mike Gravel are not thinking the matter through to it's end point. I do hope that they will give some time to the study of the philosophy of people like Ayn Rand and G. Edward Griffin.
----------- END EDIT --------------
http://www.NorthVirginiaPatriots.com...vel%20Song.mp3
Put the nail in the coffin of Mike Gravel and his strange ideas. While he is undoubtedly a patriot, he, his ideas, and his uneducated followers do NOT belong in The Revolution.
His political career has now ended and I am not surprised. Whenever any principled and educated libertarian challenged him, he became very aggrivated and condescending. In my opinion, it was very foolish of him to think he could "fool the revolution". Mike, go fillibuster some more, at least that did some good for the people!
Those who were fooled by Gravel should be vary wary of their lack of understanding of the core values of freedom and libertarianism. Fellow revolutionaries, be very wary of these Marxist infiltrators amoungst us. DEMOCRACY IS NOT FREEDOM!
Don't take MY word for it! Even though Ron Paul is mainly writing about the Iraq war here, his views on "Democracy" are very clear. Here are his words:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul233.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We’ve all heard the words democracy and freedom used countless times, especially in the context of our invasion of Iraq. They are used interchangeably in modern political discourse, yet their true meanings are very different.
George Orwell wrote about “meaningless words” that are endlessly repeated in the political arena.* Words like “freedom,” “democracy,” and “justice,” Orwell explained, have been abused so long that their original meanings have been eviscerated. In Orwell’s view, political words were “Often used in a consciously dishonest way.” Without precise meanings behind words, politicians and elites can obscure reality and condition people to reflexively associate certain words with positive or negative perceptions. In other words, unpleasant facts can be hidden behind purposely meaningless language. As a result, Americans have been conditioned to accept the word “democracy” as a synonym for freedom, and thus to believe that democracy is unquestionably good.
The problem is that democracy is not freedom. Democracy is simply majoritarianism, which is inherently incompatible with real freedom. Our founding fathers clearly understood this, as evidenced not only by our republican constitutional system, but also by their writings in the Federalist Papers and elsewhere. James Madison cautioned that under a democratic government, “There is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual.” John Adams argued that democracies merely grant revocable rights to citizens depending on the whims of the masses, while a republic exists to secure and protect pre-existing rights. Yet how many Americans know that the word “democracy” is found neither in the Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence, our very founding documents?
A truly democratic election in Iraq, without U.S. interference and U.S. puppet candidates, almost certainly would result in the creation of a Shiite theocracy. Shiite majority rule in Iraq might well mean the complete political, economic, and social subjugation of the minority Kurd and Sunni Arab populations. Such an outcome would be democratic, but would it be free? Would the Kurds and Sunnis consider themselves free? The administration talks about democracy in Iraq, but is it prepared to accept a democratically-elected Iraqi government no matter what its attitude toward the U.S. occupation? Hardly. For all our talk about freedom and democracy, the truth is we have no idea whether Iraqis will be free in the future. They’re certainly not free while a foreign army occupies their country. The real test is not whether Iraq adopts a democratic, pro-western government, but rather whether ordinary Iraqis can lead their personal, religious, social, and business lives without interference from government.
Simply put, freedom is the absence of government coercion. Our Founding Fathers understood this, and created the least coercive government in the history of the world. The Constitution established a very limited, decentralized government to provide national defense and little else. States, not the federal government, were charged with protecting individuals against criminal force and fraud. For the first time, a government was created solely to protect the rights, liberties, and property of its citizens. Any government coercion beyond that necessary to secure those rights was forbidden, both through the Bill of Rights and the doctrine of strictly enumerated powers. This reflected the founders’ belief that democratic government could be as tyrannical as any King.
Few Americans understand that all government action is inherently coercive. If nothing else, government action requires taxes. If taxes were freely paid, they wouldn’t be called taxes, they’d be called donations. If we intend to use the word freedom in an honest way, we should have the simple integrity to give it real meaning: Freedom is living without government coercion. So when a politician talks about freedom for this group or that, ask yourself whether he is advocating more government action or less.
The political left equates freedom with liberation from material wants, always via a large and benevolent government that exists to create equality on earth. To modern liberals, men are free only when the laws of economics and scarcity are suspended, the landlord is rebuffed, the doctor presents no bill, and groceries are given away. But philosopher Ayn Rand (and many others before her) demolished this argument by explaining how such “freedom” for some is possible only when government takes freedoms away from others. In other words, government claims on the lives and property of those who are expected to provide housing, medical care, food, etc. for others are coercive – and thus incompatible with freedom. “Liberalism,” which once stood for civil, political, and economic liberties, has become a synonym for omnipotent coercive government.
The political right equates freedom with national greatness brought about through military strength. Like the left, modern conservatives favor an all-powerful central state – but for militarism, corporatism, and faith-based welfarism. Unlike the Taft-Goldwater conservatives of yesteryear, today’s Republicans are eager to expand government spending, increase the federal police apparatus, and intervene militarily around the world. The last tenuous links between conservatives and support for smaller government have been severed. “Conservatism,” which once meant respect for tradition and distrust of active government, has transformed into big-government utopian grandiosity.
Orwell certainly was right about the use of meaningless words in politics. If we hope to remain free, we must cut through the fog and attach concrete meanings to the words politicians use to deceive us. We must reassert that America is a republic, not a democracy, and remind ourselves that the Constitution places limits on government that no majority can overrule. We must resist any use of the word “freedom” to describe state action. We must reject the current meaningless designations of “liberals” and “conservatives,” in favor of an accurate term for both: statists.
Every politician on earth claims to support freedom. The problem is so few of them understand the simple meaning of the word.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Ron Paul Quotes (source):
"Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy."
"Without precise meanings behind words, politicians and elites can obscure reality and condition people to reflexively associate certain words with positive or negative perceptions. In other words, unpleasant facts can be hidden behind purposely meaningless language. As a result, Americans have been conditioned to accept the word "democracy" as a synonym for freedom, and thus to believe that democracy is unquestionably good."
"The emphasis on democracy in our modern political discourse has no historical or Constitutional basis. Yet we have become obsessed with democracy, as though any government action would be permissible if a majority of voters simply approved of it."
"Our country is not a democracy. Our nation was founded as a Constitutionally limited republic, as any grammar school child knew just a few decades ago."
"Our Founders instituted a republican system to protect individual rights and property rights from tyranny, regardless of whether the tyrant was a king, a monarchy, a congress, or an unelected mob."
"The Founders had no illusions about democracy. Democracy represented unlimited rule by an omnipotent majority, while a Constitutionally limited republic was seen as the best system to preserve liberty. Inalienable individual liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights would be threatened by the 'excesses of democracy.'"
"Democracy has become a sacred cow, a deity which no one dares question. Democracy, we are told, is always good. But the founders created a Constitutionally limited republic precisely to protect fundamental liberties from the whims of the masses, to guard against the excesses of democracy."
"The problem is that democracy is not freedom. Democracy is simply majoritarianism, which is inherently incompatible with real freedom."
GOOD RIDDANCE MIKE GRAVEL!
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us