Ron Paul: US turning more fascist than socialist

[timosman]

Aug 3, 2019

Former Presidential candidate and Congressman Dr. Ron Paul (R-Texas) joins Rick Sanchez to talk about the creep of “socialistic corporatism,” the retreat of voluntarism and free market principles and Americans’ capitulation to elites who “have run roughshod over us.”

[PAF]

Ron is right again.

If I was ever forced to disagree with Ron, the only thing I could come up with is, we are not so close to fascism, we are already there.

[kona]

Ron is right again.

If I was ever forced to disagree with Ron, the only thing I could come up with is, we are not so close to fascism, we are already there.

I would think Ron agrees with your "disagreement", but perhaps there is a reason he is holding back. Idk, just speculating.

Though if I recall, you and Ron are not on the same side of the border issue.

[PAF]

I would think Ron agrees with your "disagreement", but perhaps there is a reason he is holding back. Idk, just speculating.

Though if I recall, you and Ron are not on the same side of the border issue.

The border issue is a complex one. We all know that the centralist government is the root of the problems (the anti-feds warned us).

My reasons for not requiring "legalization" / "documentation":


I support the right to privacy as outline in the 4th Amendment.

I support Contract Rights between employer/employee, not forced/mandated government minimum wage.

I do not support "Funding the Fed". Enough taxes are imposed through sales, local and state. Let the Fed beg the states for money.

If the person chooses not to work, there is no reason to "document/process" them in order to qualify/receive government benefits.

I am a free man, and individual, born with Natural Rights. Unless I have committed a crime against Person or Property (there are already laws to address that), it is NOBODY'S business where I go or what I do. This "papers please" mentality will be the undoing of a free people.

Sacrificing liberty for security ALWAYS leads to loss of freedom. The only logical solution is to End Welfare/Incentives. If that cannot be achieved by this corrupt government, at least I still have my freedom. Others may see it differently, that is on them.

[Cap]

Ron must be reading the forum.

[Cap]

Yup, nobody does it like Ron Paul.

[PAF]

Ron must be reading the forum.

Yup, nobody does it like Ron Paul.

[Swordsmyth]

The border issue is a complex one. We all know that the centralist government is the root of the problems (the anti-feds warned us).

My reasons for not requiring "legalization" / "documentation":


I support the right to privacy as outline in the 4th Amendment.

I support Contract Rights between employer/employee, not forced/mandated government minimum wage.

I do not support "Funding the Fed". Enough taxes are imposed through sales, local and state. Let the Fed beg the states for money.

If the person chooses not to work, there is no reason to "document/process" them in order to qualify/receive government benefits.

I am a free man, and individual, born with Natural Rights. Unless I have committed a crime against Person or Property (there are already laws to address that), it is NOBODY'S business where I go or what I do. This "papers please" mentality will be the undoing of a free people.

Sacrificing liberty for security ALWAYS leads to loss of freedom. The only logical solution is to End Welfare/Incentives. If that cannot be achieved by this corrupt government, at least I still have my freedom. Others may see it differently, that is on them.

Tell me if this sounds right to you.

If China sends an army to the US we should:

1 Let them in cuz open borders=liberty
2 Let them keep their weapons cuz 2ndA
3 Only attempt to arrest and prosecute individual soldiers for specific crimes like murder, theft or kidnapping

[kona]

The border issue is a complex one. We all know that the centralist government is the root of the problems (the anti-feds warned us).

My reasons for not requiring "legalization" / "documentation":


I support the right to privacy as outline in the 4th Amendment.

I support Contract Rights between employer/employee, not forced/mandated government minimum wage.

I do not support "Funding the Fed". Enough taxes are imposed through sales, local and state. Let the Fed beg the states for money.

If the person chooses not to work, there is no reason to "document/process" them in order to qualify/receive government benefits.

I am a free man, and individual, born with Natural Rights. Unless I have committed a crime against Person or Property (there are already laws to address that), it is NOBODY'S business where I go or what I do. This "papers please" mentality will be the undoing of a free people.

Sacrificing liberty for security ALWAYS leads to loss of freedom. The only logical solution is to End Welfare/Incentives. If that cannot be achieved by this corrupt government, at least I still have my freedom. Others may see it differently, that is on them.

Actually, the way you framed your position is basically congruent with Ron, except for the implementation. You state that besides your stance, the only other logical position is to end welfare/incentives. Which, along with ending the war on drugs, are Ron's first two and sole solutions for the situation. Yet you realize these solutions have zero shot of ever becoming reality. So your stance defaults to open borders.

Ron is like you but reverse. He wants open borders, but first we need a libertarian/ancap society. He also realizes this will never be a reality. So in this disgustingly dumb and crony system, he's *open* to a wall, enforcing the border, and documentation.

Ultimately you both want the same thing. You just differ on what band-aid you want to throw on a wound that can never heal.

[Danke]

Actually, the way you framed your position is basically congruent with Ron, except for the implementation. You state that besides your stance, the only other logical position is to end welfare/incentives. Which, along with ending the war on drugs, are Ron's first two and sole solutions for the situation. Yet you realize these solutions have zero shot of ever becoming reality. So your stance defaults to open borders.

Ron is like you but reverse. He wants open borders, but first we need a libertarian/ancap society. He also realizes this will never be a reality. So in this disgustingly dumb and crony system, he's *open* to a wall, enforcing the border, and documentation.

Ultimately you both want the same thing. You just differ on what band-aid you want to throw on a wound that can never heal.

+rep. how many times does this need repeating on RPFs?

[PAF]

Actually, the way you framed your position is basically congruent with Ron, except for the implementation. You state that besides your stance, the only other logical position is to end welfare/incentives. Which, along with ending the war on drugs, are Ron's first two and sole solutions for the situation. Yet you realize these solutions have zero shot of ever becoming reality. So your stance defaults to open borders.

Ron is like you but reverse. He wants open borders, but first we need a libertarian/ancap society. He also realizes this will never be a reality. So in this disgustingly dumb and crony system, he's *open* to a wall, enforcing the border, and documentation.

Ultimately you both want the same thing. You just differ on what band-aid you want to throw on a wound that can never heal.

If the choice is between:

1. "Funding the Fed", build a Wall, mandate people "sign up" with the Fed, and continue Welfare.

and

2. Promote Defunding the Fed, Retain the Bill of Rights and freedom to travel freely (natural rights apply to ALL people) and motivating others to see how Destructive Welfare actually is.

I opt for Option 2.

Option 2 is not a Band-Aid approach. Option 1, however, is. Option 1 continues to Grow, as our individual and private property rights become eradicated.


Political Decentralization As A Road To Anarcho-Capitalism


Unconstitutional Government Power and the Problem of Obedience

[Swordsmyth]

If the choice is between:

1. "Funding the Fed", build a Wall, mandate people "sign up" with the Fed, and continue Welfare.

and

2. Promote Defunding the Fed, Retain the Bill of Rights and freedom to travel freely (natural rights apply to ALL people) and motivating others to see how Destructive Welfare actually is.

I opt for Option 2.

Option 2 is not a Band-Aid approach. Option 1, however, is. Option 1 continues to Grow, as our individual and private property rights become eradicated.


Political Decentralization As A Road To Anarcho-Capitalism


Unconstitutional Government Power and the Problem of Obedience

Option 2 is wrong.

The real Option 2 is "Let millions of communists invade and and impose a communist dictatorship".

Option 1 doesn't have to be what you said either.

[Swordsmyth]

Tell me if this sounds right to you.

If China sends an army to the US we should:

1 Let them in cuz open borders=liberty
2 Let them keep their weapons cuz 2ndA
3 Only attempt to arrest and prosecute individual soldiers for specific crimes like murder, theft or kidnapping

@PAF, you never answered the question.

[Swordsmyth]

Tell me if this sounds right to you.

If China sends an army to the US we should:

1 Let them in cuz open borders=liberty
2 Let them keep their weapons cuz 2ndA
3 Only attempt to arrest and prosecute individual soldiers for specific crimes like murder, theft or kidnapping

@PAF