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.
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 04-27-2021 at 07:17 PM.
^^^^Someone's got a serious crush on Smith....
If he's any real threat to the establishment he won't be allowed the nomination. The national LP will give it to whoever is lukewarm, ineffectual and unlikely to gain traction. They proved it last election (as one example) by stealing the nomination from Hornberger and handing it to Jorgenson. Hornberger kicked her ass in practically every nominating contest held across the country but since Hornberger openly talks about topics like the CFR (Deep State, collectively), he wasn't allowed the nomination. She was handed it and did exactly what she was supposed to. Not much of anything.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
Damn right, I do!
Putting an end to the milquetoastery of the LP "establishment" is one of the main reasons the LP Mises Caucus was formed in the first place.
Another reason is to put emphasis on state and local races and give greater support to the candidates in those races - all while using the (otherwise irrelevant, IMO) POTUS race as a platform from which to marshal greater support for the ideas of liberty by breathing fire on relevant topical issues (lockdowns, wars, police abuses, gun rights, etc.), instead of indulging in the lukewarm rhetoric, Woke-pandering and "respectability"-seeking exhibited by Johnson, Sarwark, et al.
I quit the LP back in the '90s (and the Perry Willis scandal that ensued thereafter only served to confirm to me that I had made the right decision) - but now I'm joining again as part of the Mises Caucus.
And it's all because of Dave Smith (), Tom Woods, et al. ... (YMMV, and that's okay, too ...)
ETA 1: Also, the executive committee of the Mises Caucus unanimously endorsed Jacob Hornberger.
ETA 2: Hornberger is also on the advisory board of the Mises Caucus.
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 04-27-2021 at 06:48 PM.
The Creature from Jekyll Island:
We're being governed ruled by a geriatric Alzheimer patient/puppet whose strings are being pulled by an elitist oligarchy who believe they can manage the world... imagine the utter maniacal, sociopathic hubris!
THREAD: Support the Mises Caucus
Hornberger might have been the purest libertarian in the race. But if IIRC, during the LP debate, Hornberger opened up with the full uncontrolled, mass immigration position. IMHO, all of the candidates jumped on the open borders train, apparently in an attempt to outdo each other in catering to the woke “no borders, no wall” leftist crowd.
I don't know where Smith stands on that issue.
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
Dave Smith’s Part of the Problem – Ep. 578 – Immigration With Jen Monroe
webpage: https://namelyliberty.com/dave-smith...th-jen-monroe/
mp3 file: https://rss.art19.com/episodes/caa56...05e36ea004.mp3
Smith @ 13:50: "... I think that as long as government is controlling the borders, immigration is more or less a government program, whether it's open borders or closed borders, or what we have now, which is a disastrous combination of the two. [...] To me, I think it is no more libertarian or less libertarian to want open borders or closed borders. [...] That doesn't mean I support either. I hate government programs in general. I'd rather see them abolished ..."
Also @ 36:40: " ... This is probably, of all the issues, the one I get the most heat from, from libertarians and from my own audience, which is very divided on this issue. And I manage to piss both [...] sides of them off whenever I talk about immigration ..."
Based on this, I suspect that Smith might at least broadly agree with my own position on the immigration issue, which is as follows:
I refuse to support any "public" immigration policy (whether "open" or "closed"). There is nothing in libertarian theory that supports any such policy. Ideally, all property would be private, and such matters would be settled by (1) property owners deciding for themselves how "open" or "closed" they want their property to be, and (2) whatever system of easements, rights-of-way, etc. organically evolves out of those decisions. Sadly, though, we don't live in an ideal world. As is so often demonstrated, the state only truly excels at preventing optimal solutions from being implemented, leaving everyone to squabble hatefully with each other over whatever suboptimal pick-your-poison "solutions" the state is willing to entertain. So if the state is going to interfere in such matters, it should at least be confined to doing so only on the most local and decentralized scale possible. Regardless of what government-enforced policy one might prefer - "open", "closed", or "mixed" - it is just insanely absurd for places as different (demographically, economically, environmentally, etc.) as Montana and Florida to be subjected to "One Immigration Policy to Rule Them All."
https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...76282947551233
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
I agree with all of that. The sentiments Dave expressed in his tweets are entirely compatible with everything he said during his discussion with Monroe (including the statements I quoted), as well as with everything I said in my own comments on the issue. And something else Dave said during the interview with Monroe - something with which I also agree completely - was that whichever policy one might prefer on this issue, the one thing you can be certain of is that the (federal) government will $#@! it up badly.
Deciding upon which variety of "public" immigration policy ("open", "closed", or "mixed") is to be artificially imposed upon everyone is a "pick your poison" scenario. It comes down to a matter of which poison one regards as being least deadly. This is ultimately a subjective evaluation of the respective pros and cons of each variety - but this fact is only problematic because of the public nature of the issue. So long as the issue remains one of public (rather than private) immigration, the problem will persist, regardless of which variety happens to be in effect at any given moment. (In previous discussions on this topic at RPFs, I have pointed out that exactly the same dynamic manifested in the controversies over teaching creationism vs. evolution in public schools. It is instructive to note that, in relative comparison, private schools were blessedly undisturbed by such disputes.)
"Public" immigration policy is an issue over which libertarians can reasonably disagree while still remaining libertarians. This is why the Mises Caucus platform does not take any position on the issue - and why Smith, despite his own reservations, could endorse Hornberger for LP POTUS nominee in 2020 even though Hornberger is solidly in the "open borders" camp.
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 04-28-2021 at 09:16 PM.
The Bastiat Collection · FREE PDF · FREE EPUB · PAPER Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)
- "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
-- The Law (p. 54)- "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
-- Government (p. 99)- "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
-- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)- "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
-- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)· tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·
In addition to previously posted material, Dave is going to debate Spike Cohen on the issue in a few days.
I'll try to remember to update this thread (and the Dave Smith / PotP thread) when links become available (early next year, if not sooner).
https://twitter.com/Reed_Coverdale/s...61310371807235
Dave Smith vs. Spike Cohen: The Borders Debate
@ lionsofliberty.com: https://www.lionsofliberty.com/episo...vs-spike-cohen
@ Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/11t05jEKJJ5MGBRrytqECr
https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...08108675780621
Dave Smith vs. Spike Cohen: The Borders Debate
It's the long awaited debate between Dave Smith and Spike Cohen on everyone's favorite liberty subject to argue about - Borders! Dave and Spike had quite possibly the best conversation ever on the subject, all filtered through their shared perspective on the ethics of liberty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2hcFxdae7M
Connect With Us