Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 68

Thread: Help Needed with Arguments Made by Former RP Supporter

  1. #1

    Help Needed with Arguments Made by Former RP Supporter

    Hello this is my very first thread, and I might need some of your help. I'm a fairly recent convert (middle of last year) and I was wondering if any of you with better and more experienced insight into the issue of Ron Paul's ideology could help me develop a strong argument for what I see as an equally strong argument against. I'm not sure about this forums policy regarding linking to other forums, so I'll just copy paste (for lack of knowledge i'll use) "their" argument. I put a paragraph break for every question he answers that I pose.

    ME: hey i brought up Ron Paul in this thread a while back, and i got the typical response from most people I try to engage in a thoughtful political discussion with; disregard. And many arguments for that are that he's a waste of time to even speak of. But it would be against my character to not question things that i am told to believe. I'm wondering if anyone has any weight to their argument against. tell me, because everything this guy is saying makes sense to me. Tell me what is wrong with paleoconservatism? what is wrong with libertarianism? What is wrong with giving the state back it's power over federal intervention? Why does it seem alright to every liberal and neoconservative that we give the federal government so much power? Is it hard to believe that the 17th amendment basically ruined the bicameral legislature we have? If you have good answers to these that i can't refute i'll shut up and admit i'm wrong, but just saying that ron paul people are crazy is not a very fruitful argument. oh, and before anyone gets into the whole "he's racist" thing, his voting record should be all I need to point to to prove that logically weak argument wrong. *note* he did vote against the civil rights act because it had provisions telling people who they could and couldn't accept as patrons, though he was against the jim crow laws. He doesn't want to vote for legislation that is contradictory to the constitution. If you want to change the constitution, amend it. declare wars. end the fed that steals money from your wallet by artificially inflating the money supply.

    THEM: Let me just say that my journey through libertarianism began with Ron Paul, so I am very sympathetic towards him. That being said, much of what he believes I no longer adhere to. I know many new Paulites find their way to Lew Rockwell's site, where this term really comes to fruition. I will answer this in a pithy manner: Even right libertarians like Rothbard (at least pre 1980 anyways), Hayek, and Kinsella have stated clearly that conservatism is not the torch bearer for freedom, nor has it ever been. I know that the forefathers of paleo-conservatism, Menken, Chodorov, Read, etc. never really embraced "conservatism". They were considered leftists before FDR's administration, and were only thrusted rightward by external forces (A major victim of this was Henry Hazlitt). Why anyone would title themselves "conservative" (as Paul does), is beyond me, since conservatism is the modern day version of tyranny, oppression, and inequality.

    Nothing, though I don't believe anyone here is suggesting that. Of course, this is a vague question, since libertarianism is a vast political philosophy.

    Why would you want 50 rulers? This is only a difference in degree, not in principle.

    Why is alright to give any external entity any power?I don't believe a bicameral legislature could have saved us. It certainly helped to pass the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Indian Removal Act, the Fugitive Slave Act, and hey, even the 16th Amendment (which libertarians abhor much more). But more fundamentally, why would going backwards (a very conservative stance) be progress? Why not something more radical, like, say... abolish the state altogether?

    I believe the problem is more fundamental than this. Yes, the Fed does inflate the money supply. But the federal government, under constitutional rule, legally allowed such a thing to happen. So Paul's solution is to...keep the Constitution? I don't see how this makes sense. I suggest you read Lysander Spooner's "No Treason". The Constitution is meaningless.

    I know you're referring to the state itself, but corporations/banks are just as much to blame, if not more.

    Competing currencies mean Gold and Silver. And if you've read any of the gold bugs that support Paul, yes, he wants a gold standard. But once again, why should the state be involved in monetary affairs whatsoever? I think agorism and counter-economics are a worthwhile effort to undermine the state. But for me, there's no particular options. Anything that's non-violent works for me. Unfortunately, voting is ultimately based on the same force as any other hierarchical entity. As the bumper sticker on my car reads, "Voting is just changing the paint job of your prison cell."
    Last edited by CHOCOLATEsteven; 02-20-2012 at 04:31 AM. Reason: needed clarity



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    I have one video for you that will shut him up.

    Ron Paul isn't a conservative. He isn't even a right-libertarian.

    Ron Paul is an anarcho-capitalist. Rothbard post-1980. He's just trying to work within the political process, and thus, must adopt a right-libertarian / "constitutional conservative" platform to fit within the GOP.

    Last edited by BrittanySligar; 02-20-2012 at 04:46 AM.

  4. #3
    Does that guy not know that Ron Paul touts Lysander Spooner in national interviews? And recommends his books in his reading lists?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.
    The epitome of libertarian populism

  5. #4

  6. #5
    Misunderstanding is a huge problem. The Constitution is important... especially the "Bill of Rights." The Constitution limited government's role in people's lives as long as it was respected. It did not allow for paper money to be created. Before that, America was a land of opportunity and freedom for most.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by CHOCOLATEsteven View Post
    link would be great (=
    linked

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by BrittanySligar View Post
    I have one video for you that will shut him up.

    Ron Paul isn't a conservative. He isn't even a right-libertarian.

    Ron Paul is an anarcho-capitalist. Rothbard post-1980. He's just trying to work within the political process, and thus, must adopt a right-libertarian / "constitutional conservative" platform to fit within the GOP.
    Ron Paul is not out to deceive people. Ron Paul is the "Champion of the Constitution." He says it all the time and he doesn't lie. Ron's goal, if you read his books, is to reestablish the rule of law as written in the Constitution and return to the States their rightful power and to the people the power of sound money. He makes it very clear.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by BrittanySligar View Post
    I have one video for you that will shut him up.

    Ron Paul isn't a conservative. He isn't even a right-libertarian.

    Ron Paul is an anarcho-capitalist. Rothbard post-1980. He's just trying to work within the political process, and thus, must adopt a right-libertarian / "constitutional conservative" platform to fit within the GOP.
    He most certainly is NOT. What in hell is wrong with you?
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    He most certainly is NOT. What in hell is wrong with you?
    That video didn't convince you? Watch this clip from a few days ago, at 40:00. He "slipped up" in his seattle speech

    "If you had a perfectly ideal world, and you had liberty passed back to the individual, it would be self-government".

    Not sure where a state comes into play in a society of "self-government". Self-government is synonymous with voluntaryism / anarcho-capitalism.

    Last edited by BrittanySligar; 02-20-2012 at 05:11 AM.

  12. #10
    wait, you're telling me he's using getting back to constitutional basics as a means to an end?

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by BrittanySligar View Post
    He most certainly IS. Watch this clip from a few days ago, at 40:00. He "slipped up" in his seattle speech
    No, he isn't. I've supported the man over 20 years. I think I know what he is.

    I don't know what your agenda is, but stop lying about the man.

    Note: You seem to think that when he said "self government" that this was some kind of code for anarcho-capitalism. It wasn't. Small government conservatives have been preaching that song since the dawn of time. We were always supposed to be largely self-governed. That doesn't mean that we wouldn't have any government whatsoever.
    Last edited by LibertyEagle; 02-20-2012 at 05:13 AM.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by CHOCOLATEsteven View Post
    wait, you're telling me he's using getting back to constitutional basics as a means to an end?
    Yes. He said that in his own words in the first video i posted.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    No, he isn't. I've supported the man over 20 years. I think I know what he is.

    I don't know what your agenda is, but stop lying about the man.

    Note: You seem to think that when he said "self government" that this was some kind of code for anarcho-capitalism. It wasn't. Small government conservatives have been preaching that song since the dawn of time. We were always supposed to be largely self-governed. That doesn't mean that we wouldn't have any government whatsoever.
    I don't think Ron said "largely self-governed"...

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by BrittanySligar View Post
    He most certainly IS. Watch this clip from a few days ago, at 40:00. He "slipped up" in his seattle speech

    "If you had a perfectly ideal world, and you had liberty passed back to the individual, it would be self-government".

    And at 39:40 he says we need local government and to limit the Federal government. That's what the Constitution does. You can not take one or two sentences of Ron Paul's life and claim that that is the sum of his philosophy. He knows we don't live in a perfect ideal world. You have to listen carefully and read his books.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by BrittanySligar View Post
    Yes. He said that in his own words in the first video i posted.
    That video was not produced by Ron Paul. It distorts the truth.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by BrittanySligar View Post
    I don't think Ron said "largely self-governed"...
    You seem to think it is all or nothing, I see. Let's look at what he said, Brittany.

    "If you had a perfectly ideal world, and you had liberty passed back to the individual, it would be self-government".

    You don't seem to get that Dr. Paul was talking about some future la la libertarian utopia in which the nature of mankind would have changed. Until that time, he advocates a constitutional government. Even going so far as to call himself the Champion of the Constitution.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    You seem to think it is all or nothing, I see. Let's look at what he said, Brittany.

    "If you had a perfectly ideal world, and you had liberty passed back to the individual, it would be self-government".

    You don't seem to get that Dr. Paul was talking about some future la la libertarian utopia in which the nature of mankind would have changed. Until that time, he advocates a constitutional government. Even going so far as to call himself the Champion of the Constitution.
    I will agree with you there.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    That video was not produced by Ron Paul. It distorts the truth.
    Ron's own words:



    He's also cited "government can't do anything individuals can't do" as the basis of law at the Huckabee forum, "all government is, is force," in a debate before Iowa, and in an interview with ABC, said "the government has nothing; the only thing it can do is steal at the point of a gun". All from this cycle. I'm not saying Ron is running as an open ancap or voluntaryist, but he is sounding the dogwhistle fairly frequently.

    There's nothing really threatening about admitting that Ron might have goals beyond the Constitution, we won't get to that point for a long while.
    Last edited by Feeding the Abscess; 02-20-2012 at 05:28 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.
    The epitome of libertarian populism

  22. #19
    I agree. They got Ron Paul in a "gotcha" moment. Why don't you anarchists at least read what Ron writes? If you can prove to me that Ron Paul has written anywhere that his goal is to abolish the State, then post it. Until then, let Ron Paul promote Ron Paul.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=YKiyOpKhUI4#!

  23. #20
    Steven, your friend is ill-informed on so very many points. Where to start... He doesn't seem to realize what the term "liberal" used to mean and how it was taken over by leftists. He also doesn't seem to realize that much the same thing happened to the "conservative" movement, as leftist Trotskyite Progressives from the Democratic Party saw an opportunity to take over the conservative movement, so they did it. These are the neo-conservatives.

    After I wake up, I'll start on how your friend was flat out wrong with regard to what he believes to be Paul's stance on currency.

    So far, it really sounds to me that he was overall pretty clueless about Dr. Paul.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  24. #21
    thank you. any help would be greatly appreciated.

  25. #22
    Advocating self-government = bad for campaign

    9/11 Truth = good for campaign


  26. #23
    I knew the style of that video and remembered I'd commented on another of grahamwright's called 'where do Ron Paul's ideas come from'.Clear attempted smear in my opinion.

  27. #24
    Lying about Ron Paul = bad.

    Not understanding how obeying the Constitution, the rule of law, and sound money principles creates a virtual voluntary society for the protection of liberties for all = sad.
    Last edited by Travlyr; 02-20-2012 at 06:15 AM.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    For $#@!'s sake.
    Maxed out to ALL of Ron Paul's campaigns.

    Listen to Liberty Tree Radio! ::

    Pro-Liberty, Pro-Gun, Pro-Militia Radio 5 days a week, 10 LIVE HRS TALK RADIO PER DAY!

    http://www.libertytreeradio.4mg.com

    http://www.themicroeffect.com (8A - 11A EST daily)

    http://www.live365.com/stations/edtheak47 (3 PM- 9 PM EST daily)


    Organize, Arm, Equip, and Train as a Militia !


  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by CHOCOLATEsteven View Post
    Hello this is my very first thread, and I might need some of your help. I'm a fairly recent convert (middle of last year) and I was wondering if any of you with better and more experienced insight into the issue of Ron Paul's ideology could help me develop a strong argument ...
    I'm going to be glib and say "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good"

    You may find your self one day moving from Ron Paul to an Anarco-somthing-ism. Its a rather logical progression. Which things must the government do? The more you think about it, the less things you find are required to be governmental. Eventually you realize its arbitrary, and you turn into him.

    Ian Freeman, the host of Free Talk Live used to share the "why vote" view. Until one election cycle something like 16 liberty activists were elected to NH legislature. That changed his tune.

  31. #27
    After a while, it wears on you hearing all the arguments about what a certain term means. It's sort of like "term collectivism". Maybe we should dig up the old "Ven of Paul" from 2007 and use that as a starting point. http://centeredlibrarian.blogspot.co...-ron-paul.html
    Now I don't think Ron would be "anti-immigration" if we were in good enough economic shape to support more of it. But this is an interesting way of visualizing things.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by CHOCOLATEsteven View Post
    Why would you want 50 rulers? This is only a difference in degree, not in principle.
    This point is an empty soundbite. A resident of Delaware is not subject to the rules of Kentucky. It's much easier to carry a torch and pitchfork to your Statehouse than to that Swamp on the Potomac. Of course the 17th amendment eviscerated the states, anyway.

  33. #29
    You don't recommend and endorse Lysander Spooner and not hold voluntarism at the core of your beliefs....

  34. #30
    this belongs in political philosophy. When people who are anarcho capitalists start claiming Ron as one of them, and every other group start saying, no Ron is one of them, it isn't helpful in discussing Ron's position, but it may be interesting in discussing the philosophical differences between the groups.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.Ē -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2012, 10:04 PM
  2. Jon Huntsman New Supporter Made Ad Crushes Ron Paul [Satire]
    By tylerc217 in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-07-2012, 11:22 PM
  3. [Nice!] CFL Supporter-made HR 1207 Cartoon
    By Knightskye in forum Audit The Fed
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-25-2009, 09:35 PM
  4. How I made a citizen arrest of a Ron Paul supporter.
    By hillbilly123069 in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-28-2009, 02:26 AM
  5. Some conversion arguments... needed
    By Lord Xar in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-31-2008, 07:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •