Silk Road forums
Discussion => Philosophy, Economics and Justice => Topic started by: Dread Pirate Roberts on November 15, 2012, 06:51 am
-
http://youtu.be/q03cWio-zjk
A mighty hero in my book.
-
You're way more of a hero, Roberts. What has Ron Paul achieved by playing by the books and trying to win in this corrupt system? Nothing! I'm glad you didn't decide to become a politician to make drugs legal because you would have failed. Instead you said fuck it and created this wonderful site and people are getting drugs despite what the stupid laws say. I don't understand these people that run for third parties. They can't win!!! The system is rigged. The only way to win is to act outside the box like you have.
-
You're way more of a hero, Roberts. What has Ron Paul achieved by playing by the books and trying to win in this corrupt system? Nothing! I'm glad you didn't decide to become a politician to make drugs legal because you would have failed. Instead you said fuck it and created this wonderful site and people are getting drugs despite what the stupid laws say. I don't understand these people that run for third parties. They can't win!!! The system is rigged. The only way to win is to act outside the box like you have.
I respectfully disagree. Not with your statement that DPR is a hero because, well, fuck man - secure and anonymous drugs to my goddamn doorstep so, yeah, no one's debating that one :)
But Paul achieved a lot, in my opinion. For years, probably since the late 60's, the politics game was dominated by two parties who, quite frankly, are both the fucking same in the grand scheme of things. Paul raised awareness to levels it hasn't seen in 50 years. He got people TALKING. One might say that he allowed Americans their voice; perhaps the legalization of marijuana in Washington and Colorado would never have progressed past incubation if Paul hadn't planted the seeds in the everyman that the US is a country OF the people and FOR the people. Ron Paul is an American hero and, unlike Paul Bunyan, the dude is real.
Twenty years ago, if you asked the American public if even medicinal weed would be legal, let alone legal weed for recreational purposes, they'd laugh in your face (if their mouth wasn't full of ribs, cheap beer and nationalism. I kid, my American friends!) Ron Paul, in my opinion, has been a catalyst for change. I could draw similarities between Paul and DPR, but I'm neither a sycophant nor yet caffeinated enough to do so.
-
i like that ron paul wants to end all the wars, but don't you think some of the libertarian ideas are a bit dangerous?
i feel like if we lived in a libertarian society there would be even more severe environmental damage happening at the hands of big corporations. also "states rights" has typically been code for white supremacy in the past. if the usa went libertarian, i can almost guarantee that there would be an african holocaust in mississippi. and would you want stuff like the sewer system open to free enterprise? i can only imagine the awful horror that would ensue, given my experience dealing with the free enterprise cable/internet companies. its a nightmare! some things really need to be regulated by a government in order to work efficiently.
i like some of their ideas, i just fear that if they got into power they would throw the baby out with the bathwater in the name of "less government." don't take for granted all the good things government has done for our societies.
also i think Ayn Rand was a bitter, selfish, traumatized slav. libertarians talk about her like she's a prophet...my guess is they haven't known enough russians.
-
Obama looks like a baby. No wonder he needs that big fatty president welfare check.
Can you imagine him trying to do anything. I bet he cant cook, Dress himself, I bet he doesn't even know how to cook eggs. I'd say something about tying shoes but I suck at that.
As for a Libertarian future. I think it might be good. Trucking Companies need Roads, and so do car Manufacturers. Therefore I feel there will still be roads.
As for the industrial waste I worry about that. Its an issue no matter what government is in place.
-
i like that ron paul wants to end all the wars, but don't you think some of the libertarian ideas are a bit dangerous?
i feel like if we lived in a libertarian society there would be even more severe environmental damage happening at the hands of big corporations. also "states rights" has typically been code for white supremacy in the past. if the usa went libertarian, i can almost guarantee that there would be an african holocaust in mississippi. and would you want stuff like the sewer system open to free enterprise? i can only imagine the awful horror that would ensue, given my experience dealing with the free enterprise cable/internet companies. its a nightmare! some things really need to be regulated by a government in order to work efficiently.
i like some of their ideas, i just fear that if they got into power they would throw the baby out with the bathwater in the name of "less government." don't take for granted all the good things government has done for our societies.
also i think Ayn Rand was a bitter, selfish, traumatized slav. libertarians talk about her like she's a prophet...my guess is they haven't known enough russians.
Seriously what are you 12? Please go eat the barrel of a relatively large gun....
States rights = white supremacy? Are you really that fucking ignorant? It's retard fucksticks like you that are the assfuckers of the US. What free shit is it you want? Because every little fucktard that has voted for obama has basically stated (in no uncertain terms with their vote) 'I don't care how fucked the rest of the country will be as long as I get my free shit' so really go get fucked you may be the %99 but you are also part of whats wrong with the US.
African holocaust? What the fuck does that have ANYTHING to do with cable co's? I can't even believe I'm wasting my time on a fucktard like you.
Where do people come up with this shit? Seriously I wonder am I viewing the wrong page for political commentary on reddit? Or is this the direction the US is headed? How can you be that fucking dumb and still be alive?
I will defend your right to vote for obama (assuming your not some assfuck teenager) and if you can actually provide some semblance of fact backing any logical reason why thats a good idea I won't even give you that much shit, but seriously the last couple of sentences makes you look more of a retard than ANYONE in the special olympics.
-
okay, calm down for a second dude. this is just a forum and we're talking here. and don't say "fuck" so much, it really detracts from your argument. i like to say "fuck" too, but you're really overdoing it. no, i'm not 12; i'm an adult married man with a full time job.
i've given a lot of thought about libertarianism, and what i said are the product of my consideration. i voted for ron paul in the primaries because i felt he would raise the level of discourse in this country. I feel that although he makes some good points, ultimately there would be too many steps backward involved in a libertarian administration.
racism in mississippi has nothing to do with cable companies; those were two separate points I made about different issues.
1) its only through the massive social movements of the 1960's that put pressure on the federal government to stop the persecution of africans in southern states. are you aware of the situation that happened at the University of Alabama in 1963? the governor of alabama refused to allow blacks into the school alongside whites declaring "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." if the federal government hadn't stepped in and forced him to step aside, segregation would not have been overcome. and if you think popular opinion among southern whites in regards to their african neighbors has changed much in 50 years, you're gravely mistaken. the white majority in mississippi would gladly start hanging africans in droves if the federal government didn't "regulate" things like civil rights.
now, maybe this isn't important to you, but civil rights is something that is very important to me, and i don't think the libertarians would give a damn about preserving the rights of women, minorities, and workers in this nation.
2) the cable companies....they suck, and i don't have to explain this if you live in USA. i'm asking you to imagine if companies like comcast and verizon operated privately run sewer systems in the country, with no government regulation. it would be a nightmare without publicly elected officials overseeing their operation and implementation. it just works better that way. i'm not saying i think the government should operate a state run cable company, because controlling information is a touchier subject than controlling sewage. its just the best example i can come up with to explain why i'm in favor of government regulation in some circumstances.
i am a bit cynical at times, but i'm not so cynical that i think the government is worthless and should be dismantled, which is what i understand to be the ultimate goal of libertarians. the fundamentals of libertarianism seems to be focused on the individual, and to me that is a step backwards in human evolution. in my opinion, the way forward is through unity, brotherhood, and a common good. i think the world would be a much better place if we all helped each other instead of helping ourselves.
you're obviously very upset that obama got reelected, so i'll be brief on this point: though his faults are many, he's a great diplomat, he's not trigger happy or war hungry (like the republicans), and his very existence is a slap in the face to the racist, white, religious majority that has been holding this country back for as long as i can remember. i've voted for the green party my whole adult life, but made an exception this time because for me, the obama administration is a baby step forward for progressives like myself. i'm assuming your not a Romnulan, because i would have wrote you off as a moron and not written this much of a response if you were, but on the off chance that he was your man i'll say this: really? the republicans are ruled by hegemony and illogic: denying climate change, wanting to make restrictive laws based on religious beliefs, claiming that social programs cost too much money yet carelessly spending trillions on the military which just perpetuates the violence in this world. america needs to purge these ideas and this neo con incarnation of the republican party.
and as for the ayn rand thing....i'm guessing that you too have not known very many russians.
-
Personally, I have always been a fan of Ron Paul. He's always been right about the state rights issue. What happened in our country that changed to lead the states to become less powerful? It's no one's fault, perhaps a mix of the states becoming "lazier" if you will, forcing the federal government to "step-up" and and an over-stepping of federal powers.
Regardless, Ron Paul was a truly smart economist and politician. While some of his ideas can be viewed as extreme, it is a healthy extremity needed in a society that will be watered down through the checks and balances of the political system of the United States.
Sorry you never got a chance at running the country Ron Paul, but at least you were an honest politician that followed your beliefs and the Constitution, something that we don't often see in the politicians of our modern day.
-
Problem with Paul's speech is yet again we have another U.S politician clinging on to the "Forefathers" like they are the inspiration for all moral wisdom.
This might be a bit unpopular but the whole "Ohhhh it be what our forefathers wanted" in the U.S.A is such a crock of fucking shit. The people who signed the Declaration were all geared up to argue the toss and fight not to pay tax on tea but they were quite happy to personally deprive black people of any liberty at all and then after that go and jack land that they never had any claim to from the Mexicans and the Native Americans.
You can talk shit about liberty and your forefathers all you like but the fact is they we're just a bad as the people they shook off and people the world then is just as shitty as it is now but in very different ways. Clinging to a bunch of ideals in this way just makes you blinkered to the realities of human existence.
-
i like that ron paul wants to end all the wars, but don't you think some of the libertarian ideas are a bit dangerous?
i feel like if we lived in a libertarian society there would be even more severe environmental damage happening at the hands of big corporations. also "states rights" has typically been code for white supremacy in the past. if the usa went libertarian, i can almost guarantee that there would be an african holocaust in mississippi. and would you want stuff like the sewer system open to free enterprise? i can only imagine the awful horror that would ensue, given my experience dealing with the free enterprise cable/internet companies. its a nightmare! some things really need to be regulated by a government in order to work efficiently.
i like some of their ideas, i just fear that if they got into power they would throw the baby out with the bathwater in the name of "less government." don't take for granted all the good things government has done for our societies.
also i think Ayn Rand was a bitter, selfish, traumatized slav. libertarians talk about her like she's a prophet...my guess is they haven't known enough russians.
The libertarian solution to environmental destruction depends upon liability for quantitative harm done to another party. We layman can debate the science of climate change all day long, i think its crap, but libertarianism does not give carte blanche to destroy the Earth. If you damage someone's property, you are liable.
Libertarianism recognizes equality of rights for all humans. A libertarian government would not have tolerated the wanton murder of blacks in Mississippi. The notion of state's rights is more of a realistic argument than a theoretical one for dealing with the situation today. It is desirable to decentralize power, but the power to use law such that you empower some party over another is not libertarian at any level of government.
When the government regulates an industry it either protects some party unfairly from competition, or it distorts price signals in the market, and it creates boom bust cycles and amounts to large scale robbery. Even if you accept that in an "ideal circumstance" a central authority could more efficiently operate some industry through regulation, it would still in my opinion be morally reprehensible because you have a coercive force treating people unequally.
I don't think government has done much good. It is a shame that society and government are widely understood to be bi-conditional entities.
If you look at Ayn Rand at face value than sure shes a mean old hag and shes ugly and is mean for no reason. But that's not what she is talking about at all. Someone so simplistic would never amass a following of any sort. Read Atlas Shrugged, its awesome and even if you disagree it is still an entertaining story about the unwitting descent of civilization.
Also Ayn Rand is not a libertarian. Objectivists take great offense to being called libertarian, because they criticize libertarians for advocating laissez faire without any philosophically valid ethical basis to defend it. They think libertarianism without the underlying objectivist ethos is as whimsical and arbitrary as altruism.
Ron Paul is the most interesting public person I have encountered in my lifetime. For the first time someone in politics echoed my moral position, and the world didn't seem so totally and utterly absurd. It's a shame he was ostracized by the media, he really should be president right now. I really wish I could meet him.
-
http://youtu.be/q03cWio-zjk
A mighty hero in my book.
Amen to that! I sure wish this guy would have been our President. But we all know the "People with all the money" aka "The people who rule the world" would never let a true patriot in that position because it would be the end of them! Remember, remember the 5th of November!
-
5th of November is a U.K thing mate..... ::)
-
okay, calm down for a second dude. this is just a forum and we're talking here. and don't say "fuck" so much, it really detracts from your argument. i like to say "fuck" too, but you're really overdoing it. no, i'm not 12; i'm an adult married man with a full time job.
i've given a lot of thought about libertarianism, and what i said are the product of my consideration. i voted for ron paul in the primaries because i felt he would raise the level of discourse in this country. I feel that although he makes some good points, ultimately there would be too many steps backward involved in a libertarian administration.
racism in mississippi has nothing to do with cable companies; those were two separate points I made about different issues.
1) its only through the massive social movements of the 1960's that put pressure on the federal government to stop the persecution of africans in southern states. are you aware of the situation that happened at the University of Alabama in 1963? the governor of alabama refused to allow blacks into the school alongside whites declaring "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." if the federal government hadn't stepped in and forced him to step aside, segregation would not have been overcome. and if you think popular opinion among southern whites in regards to their african neighbors has changed much in 50 years, you're gravely mistaken. the white majority in mississippi would gladly start hanging africans in droves if the federal government didn't "regulate" things like civil rights.
now, maybe this isn't important to you, but civil rights is something that is very important to me, and i don't think the libertarians would give a damn about preserving the rights of women, minorities, and workers in this nation.
So this is why I don't live in the south, and refuse to ever live there again. Sorry to say as much as I'm sure there are a lot of great people there, it's fucked and thats just the simple truth. You don't even have to go that far south to see it, Virginia is far enough south to see that racism and the good old boys club is still alive and well.
However, with regard to libertarianism, the doctrine I've seen/read (Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy definition) does not in any way identify race, as in, no mention of it, nor does it specify women. Therefore the concept that race plays a role will be the result of the people, not the underlying philosophy so if they are practicing it based on standard doctrine civil rights would be equal for any/everyone and if someone should impose on anothers rights people would need to decide for themselves whether or not to associate with that individual, or business etc.
So this is where social justice plays a role and should in theory right these wrongs. In that myself, if I knew a particular business was hostile to a particular race, I would refuse to support it. Others I would recommend that they do the same however it's not my right to prevent or otherwise force that individual or business or organization to comply with what I believe is right. As a society or as part of a local economy I'm limited to either supporting or not supporting a business or individual. So I don't think your view related to libertarianism stands up to criticism based on standard and otherwise accepted doctrines. Does that mean if we became a libertarian society tomorrow that racism would go away? No absolutely not, but you also can't regulate it out of society either. The only thing that truly will get rid of racism is the people in the society we live in.
2) the cable companies....they suck, and i don't have to explain this if you live in USA. i'm asking you to imagine if companies like comcast and verizon operated privately run sewer systems in the country, with no government regulation. it would be a nightmare without publicly elected officials overseeing their operation and implementation. it just works better that way. i'm not saying i think the government should operate a state run cable company, because controlling information is a touchier subject than controlling sewage. its just the best example i can come up with to explain why i'm in favor of government regulation in some circumstances.
So this tells me that you really aren't interested or clear about how a genuinely libertarian society would actually operate since this really is no different than the previous point I made. The only reason in the US that cable co's have small monopolies in areas (i.e. often if there is comcast there is no other cable provider offered) in the US is because of government agreements. So your example ironically is exactly what allows the cable co's to be less competitive and provide shittier service. Not the other way around as you would suggest.
i am a bit cynical at times, but i'm not so cynical that i think the government is worthless and should be dismantled, which is what i understand to be the ultimate goal of libertarians. the fundamentals of libertarianism seems to be focused on the individual, and to me that is a step backwards in human evolution. in my opinion, the way forward is through unity, brotherhood, and a common good. i think the world would be a much better place if we all helped each other instead of helping ourselves.
Libertarianism is focused on maximum personal freedoms for the individual, this is not the same as being focused on the individual and shouldn't be misconstrued as such. More personal freedoms in ANY society I have a hard time saying is ever a step backwards. What people do with that freedom however is an entirely different issue and it's not the aim of libertarianism to prevent people from abusing their freedom, there are other philosophies that deal specifically with the 'What if X does Y' situations.
you're obviously very upset that obama got reelected, so i'll be brief on this point: though his faults are many, he's a great diplomat, he's not trigger happy or war hungry (like the republicans), and his very existence is a slap in the face to the racist, white, religious majority that has been holding this country back for as long as i can remember. i've voted for the green party my whole adult life, but made an exception this time because for me, the obama administration is a baby step forward for progressives like myself. i'm assuming your not a Romnulan, because i would have wrote you off as a moron and not written this much of a response if you were, but on the off chance that he was your man i'll say this: really? the republicans are ruled by hegemony and illogic: denying climate change, wanting to make restrictive laws based on religious beliefs, claiming that social programs cost too much money yet carelessly spending trillions on the military which just perpetuates the violence in this world. america needs to purge these ideas and this neo con incarnation of the republican party.
and as for the ayn rand thing....i'm guessing that you too have not known very many russians.
Actually again, incredibly incorrect. To be honest I wholly expected Obama to be elected and not upset in the least as I am not able to vote in US elections so I have no say in the matter. There would be no reason for me to get upset at his election, or anyone elses because of this. I was however admittedly already pissed about something wholly unrelated to politics in general and related to a few immature 20 somethings who'm I'd quite joyusly beat to a fucking pulp if thought I could get away with it. I'd of course want them to live, but only so I could repeat the beating at my whim and desire.
Now that we have that out of the way. You may think he is a great diplomat, which to me says he's great at kissing ass. Well fantastic, but kissing ass doesn't necessarily get things done so that is of little value to me. If you are a crappy diplomat but you get reasonable policies passed that make the US a better country then great thats what I care about.
Republicans these days seldom exist, Ron Paul is one of an exceptionally small number of people I would call a true republican. The majority are just self important asshats who are out to line their wallets and any pockets they can stuff your money into provided they can find a way to separate you from it. Which is what most politics come down to at the end of the day money. This is because money, in the real world, trumps nearly all other things. You don't have something? Money will get it. You did something wrong and got caught? Money will fix it. Someone pissed you off and you'd like revenge? Money can help with that too. At the end of the day, those with money will always have some level of power and privelege over those who do not have it. How they choose to use that is a different discussion all together. Empirical data however suggests that I'm pretty accurate on that, just ask anyone who's avoided conviction of a crime because they had the money to afford them an excellent legal defense and weren't a complete fucktard. If you actually read the definition of republican it's very close to libertarianism in many ways. Democrats on the other hand both by party and by policy are NOT supporters of libertarian society, they are consistent with socialism which is not the same as communism etc. I'm not going to actually write a book on how this is true for you because frankly I'm not interested enough to take the time to explain it.
The fact is, nearly everything you've stated or otherwise alluded to is very inaccurate and not actually supported by actual facts, it's merely ramblings of someone who really hasn't bothered informing themselves and coming to conclusions without data that would be otherwise considered valid. This is to say, you are effectively displaying an opinion based on information that clearly hasn't been fact checked in some meaningful and agreed upon way.
So yeah I said fuck a lot and was overall offensive, but that doesn't really change what I was driving at which still stands, but I'll clean it up so it sounds nicer:
'i like that ron paul wants to end all the wars, but don't you think some of the libertarian ideas are a bit dangerous?'
Guns are dangerous, drugs (illicit or otherwise) are dangerous, philosophies that espouse freedoms are not, it is the abuse of those freedoms that causes danger. If you actually understood what true libertarianism was you would understand this. This is not an opinion. It's based on a well documented and acknowledged definition from a reliable and credible source.
'I feel like if we lived in a libertarian society there would be even more severe environmental damage happening at the hands of big corporations. also "states rights" has typically been code for white supremacy in the past.'
States Rights has nothing to do with color, it has everything to do with the state having the authority to enact policies that are set at the federal level locally either consistent with federal ones, or ignore them (as some do i.e. CO and WA legalizing recreational use of MJ is an excellent example) or make them stricter. Different states had different definitions of what makes someone 'drunk' i.e. Florida in 99-01-02 the DWI limit was .10 whereas other states it was .08 and .08 was required to recieve various federal funding for roads/highways and the like. The premise of states rights therefore applies to all individuals and not one race over the other. Unless you have some documenation from a credible source supporting otherwise thats nothing more than speculation or bullshit.
'if the usa went libertarian, i can almost guarantee that there would be an african holocaust in mississippi.'
Refer to abuse of freedom(s) remarks previously. Libertarianism is not a mechanism for controlling abuse, it's a mechanism for allowing freedoms.
some things really need to be regulated by a government in order to work efficiently.
'i like some of their ideas, i just fear that if they got into power they would throw the baby out with the bathwater in the name of "less government." don't take for granted all the good things government has done for our societies.'
For as many good things as government has done for societies it has done at minimum 2 things detrimental to that same society. One will always be 'Restricting freedom' because that is simply a function of government and whatever other collateral damage various policies cause so if you do the math, that makes it 2x as bad as it is good. High scoring marks in this game does not make you a winner.
'also i think Ayn Rand was a bitter, selfish, traumatized slav. libertarians talk about her like she's a prophet...my guess is they haven't known enough russians.'
She's no profit, but she certainly has written quite a bit about how governments and those that seek to take personal freedoms away do nothing but attempt to control people and regulate things for greed and power collectively and place it under the control of the few. It's really that simple.
So there, not as much fuck'ing but I still think you are either willfully ignorant or very poorly informed. Both you have the option to do something about. But people are lazy and generally adverse to change so I don't have any expectation that you will do anything to change that.
-
Joey Terrifying, you have a little cry about black civil rights, saying that up until the 60s is was just awful for them. Well statistically, that couldn't be further from the truth. Lefties need to learn to assess situations with their analytical brain not their emotions.
The black community in the US these days is a fucking disaster. Single motherhood is off the charts since the sixties and so is the black unemployment rate. Blacks under segregation actually had LESS unemployment and LESS single motherhood than whites - they were really being oppressed huh? I think this is because under segregation blacks were forced to be prominent members of their own community - you had to have black doctors, business owners, etc. where as these days black doctors, businessmen etc are competing in the same community as whites, jews and east asians who have a higher average IQ so they tend to take all the prominent positions. I also think feminism is a big part to play in the rise in single motherhood and breakdown of the family structure among blacks.
-
Joey Terrifying, you have a little cry about black civil rights, saying that up until the 60s is was just awful for them. Well statistically, that couldn't be further from the truth. Lefties need to learn to assess situations with their analytical brain not their emotions.
The black community in the US these days is a fucking disaster. Single motherhood is off the charts since the sixties and so is the black unemployment rate. Blacks under segregation actually had LESS unemployment and LESS single motherhood than whites - they were really being oppressed huh? I think this is because under segregation blacks were forced to be prominent members of their own community - you had to have black doctors, business owners, etc. where as these days black doctors, businessmen etc are competing in the same community as whites, jews and east asians who have a higher average IQ so they tend to take all the prominent positions. I also think feminism is a big part to play in the rise in single motherhood and breakdown of the family structure among blacks.
In a few generations we're all just going to be of varying degrees of brown anyway so who cares?
-
Joey Terrifying, you have a little cry about black civil rights, saying that up until the 60s is was just awful for them. Well statistically, that couldn't be further from the truth. Lefties need to learn to assess situations with their analytical brain not their emotions.
The black community in the US these days is a fucking disaster. Single motherhood is off the charts since the sixties and so is the black unemployment rate. Blacks under segregation actually had LESS unemployment and LESS single motherhood than whites - they were really being oppressed huh? I think this is because under segregation blacks were forced to be prominent members of their own community - you had to have black doctors, business owners, etc. where as these days black doctors, businessmen etc are competing in the same community as whites, jews and east asians who have a higher average IQ so they tend to take all the prominent positions. I also think feminism is a big part to play in the rise in single motherhood and breakdown of the family structure among blacks.
In a few generations we're all just going to be of varying degrees of brown anyway so who cares?
I don't think so. Racial mixing isn't the norm, most people have children with people of their own race. Racial gaps are still widening (in terms of total genetic difference), so we aren't all becoming one race in fact the races are becoming more distinct.
As to whether or not we will have mostly white countries in a few generations, not likely if many countries continue their current immigration/birth rates.
-
Man am I disappointed to read the responses in this thread. I really thought more of you would look up to and have the deepest, utmost respect for Dr. Paul. It literally breaks my heart to see him retire. We have NOBODY else left in congress to carry the weight that man carried on his back for the last 30 plus years. All by himself, he fought tooth and nail to carry the weight of the message of freedom on his back, and it wasn't until his last few years that he got the recognition he deserved. Sadly that recognition didn't come from any of his peers or colleagues, but from the entire generation of youth who were smart enough and intellectually free enough to understand how much of a hero he really was and is. There has NEVER been another politician who stuck by his principles and what he believed in like Ron Paul did. Not ONCE did he change positions, contradict himself, or vote against his libertarian ideals. You will NEVER find another statesman like him who really cared that much about his countrymen and the fundamental universal rights of man, and not about power or money. He was a one-of-a-kind man, and personally I believe he deserves to go down as an equal to the likes of MLK and Ghandi. He had no other motivation for spending his entire career standing by himself against the rest of congress, other than to fight for our freedom. This is going to offend many of you, but I truly believe he has done more for defending my freedom than any soldier in the US military. The man deserves nothing but praise, love, and admiration. He has earned the right to go down as a legend, a true American hero, and most likely the last true statesman we'll ever have.
-
Man am I disappointed to read the responses in this thread. I really thought more of you would look up to and have the deepest, utmost respect for Dr. Paul. It literally breaks my heart to see him retire. We have NOBODY else left in congress to carry the weight that man carried on his back for the last 30 plus years. All by himself, he fought tooth and nail to carry the weight of the message of freedom on his back, and it wasn't until his last few years that he got the recognition he deserved. Sadly that recognition didn't come from any of his peers or colleagues, but from the entire generation of youth who were smart enough and intellectually free enough to understand how much of a hero he really was and is. There has NEVER been another politician who stuck by his principles and what he believed in like Ron Paul did. Not ONCE did he change positions, contradict himself, or vote against his libertarian ideals. You will NEVER find another statesman like him who really cared that much about his countrymen and the fundamental universal rights of man, and not about power or money. He was a one-of-a-kind man, and personally I believe he deserved to go down as an equal to MLK and Ghandi. He had no other motivation for his long hard career standing by himself against the rest of congress than to fight for our freedom. This is going to offend many of you, but I truly believe he has done more for defending my freedom than any soldier in the US military. The man deserves nothing but praise, love, and admiration. He has earned the right to go down as a legend, a true American hero, and most likely the last true statesman we'll ever have.
WOW--- Well said.
And true!
Sad actually
-
Man am I disappointed to read the responses in this thread. I really thought more of you would look up to and have the deepest, utmost respect for Dr. Paul. It literally breaks my heart to see him retire. We have NOBODY else left in congress to carry the weight that man carried on his back for the last 30 plus years. All by himself, he fought tooth and nail to carry the weight of the message of freedom on his back, and it wasn't until his last few years that he got the recognition he deserved. Sadly that recognition didn't come from any of his peers or colleagues, but from the entire generation of youth who were smart enough and intellectually free enough to understand how much of a hero he really was and is. There has NEVER been another politician who stuck by his principles and what he believed in like Ron Paul did. Not ONCE did he change positions, contradict himself, or vote against his libertarian ideals. You will NEVER find another statesman like him who really cared that much about his countrymen and the fundamental universal rights of man, and not about power or money. He was a one-of-a-kind man, and personally I believe he deserved to go down as an equal to MLK and Ghandi. He had no other motivation for his long hard career standing by himself against the rest of congress than to fight for our freedom. This is going to offend many of you, but I truly believe he has done more for defending my freedom than any soldier in the US military. The man deserves nothing but praise, love, and admiration. He has earned the right to go down as a legend, a true American hero, and most likely the last true statesman we'll ever have.
Lol I'm sorry to say Inigo that I'm just too cynical for the forefathers shit. Every time I hear a U.S politician saying "Oh this isn't what the forefathers would have wanted rah rah, blah blah" it just sounds like white-noise or of people grabbing on to ideals that they skew to fit an idealized picture that just isn't true.
-
Man am I disappointed to read the responses in this thread. I really thought more of you would look up to and have the deepest, utmost respect for Dr. Paul. It literally breaks my heart to see him retire. We have NOBODY else left in congress to carry the weight that man carried on his back for the last 30 plus years. All by himself, he fought tooth and nail to carry the weight of the message of freedom on his back, and it wasn't until his last few years that he got the recognition he deserved. Sadly that recognition didn't come from any of his peers or colleagues, but from the entire generation of youth who were smart enough and intellectually free enough to understand how much of a hero he really was and is. There has NEVER been another politician who stuck by his principles and what he believed in like Ron Paul did. Not ONCE did he change positions, contradict himself, or vote against his libertarian ideals. You will NEVER find another statesman like him who really cared that much about his countrymen and the fundamental universal rights of man, and not about power or money. He was a one-of-a-kind man, and personally I believe he deserved to go down as an equal to MLK and Ghandi. He had no other motivation for his long hard career standing by himself against the rest of congress than to fight for our freedom. This is going to offend many of you, but I truly believe he has done more for defending my freedom than any soldier in the US military. The man deserves nothing but praise, love, and admiration. He has earned the right to go down as a legend, a true American hero, and most likely the last true statesman we'll ever have.
Lol I'm sorry to say Inigo that I'm just too cynical for the forefathers shit. Every time I hear a U.S politician saying "Oh this isn't what the forefathers would have wanted rah rah, blah blah" it just sounds like white-noise or of people grabbing on to ideals that they skew to fit an idealized picture that just isn't true.
I agree with the latter part of your statement; there's no doubt these weasels employ methods of propoganda, using everything from Jefferson to their mothers to get what they want. But the forefathers of the US were a pretty fucking kickass group of men. A group of men who said "fuck this. Freedom or death, and nothing else" and went out there and fucking did it. The right to bear arms made a lot of sense when the possibility of an enemy knocking down your door and taking what he wanted by force was VERY real. And despite the somewhat paranoid, tinfoil-hat wearing comments I sometimes read on these forums, this just isn't happening today. Funny how no one ever seems to make a big deal about the THIRD amendment. Not yet anyway. It's only a matter of time before some fuckers start using that one to get what they want.
But yeah, this bullshit that modern US politicians use to associate themselves with the forefathers is just silly and transparent.
-
2nd ammendment is to protect against tyranny, whether foreign or domestic.
The US government today is more tyrannical than the British rule the founders revolted over; NDAA and patriot act are worse than anything the British imposed.
So I'd say 2nd ammendment still applies just fine.
-
Man am I disappointed to read the responses in this thread. I really thought more of you would look up to and have the deepest, utmost respect for Dr. Paul. It literally breaks my heart to see him retire. We have NOBODY else left in congress to carry the weight that man carried on his back for the last 30 plus years. All by himself, he fought tooth and nail to carry the weight of the message of freedom on his back, and it wasn't until his last few years that he got the recognition he deserved. Sadly that recognition didn't come from any of his peers or colleagues, but from the entire generation of youth who were smart enough and intellectually free enough to understand how much of a hero he really was and is. There has NEVER been another politician who stuck by his principles and what he believed in like Ron Paul did. Not ONCE did he change positions, contradict himself, or vote against his libertarian ideals. You will NEVER find another statesman like him who really cared that much about his countrymen and the fundamental universal rights of man, and not about power or money. He was a one-of-a-kind man, and personally I believe he deserved to go down as an equal to MLK and Ghandi. He had no other motivation for his long hard career standing by himself against the rest of congress than to fight for our freedom. This is going to offend many of you, but I truly believe he has done more for defending my freedom than any soldier in the US military. The man deserves nothing but praise, love, and admiration. He has earned the right to go down as a legend, a true American hero, and most likely the last true statesman we'll ever have.
Lol I'm sorry to say Inigo that I'm just too cynical for the forefathers shit. Every time I hear a U.S politician saying "Oh this isn't what the forefathers would have wanted rah rah, blah blah" it just sounds like white-noise or of people grabbing on to ideals that they skew to fit an idealized picture that just isn't true.
It's okay Lim, I would only have a grudge against you for that if you were a fellow American. ;)
But none-the-less, if you ever get curious about why he's so idolized, I encourage you to read his book Liberty Defined sometime, and really try to get a feel for what he stood for. His message was SO much deeper than just rambling about American forefathers. While he does use that point in debate sometimes, his real inspirations and sources of principles came from the likes of Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, etc. He cites them WAY more often than any of the forefathers. You'd be hard pressed to find anything deeper and more intellectually stimulating on the philosophy of liberty than the works of Mises and Rothbard. He was a damn smart old man, way more intelligent than any other politician I've ever seen.
-
Joey, THANK YOU for being so completely upside-down re: black people and 1965. In 1965, 94% of black births were to a mother and father living in the home. 96% Employment in Harlem, NY. The ERA had passed and everyone expected blacks to walk the road that Jews, Italians and Irish had strode into middle class America. 1965 Enter the Liberals: "Hey little girl, how would you like to have your own apartment? Watch TV all day instead of having to go to school and listen to parents? Eat ice cream and cookies all day? Receive rent, food, medical and if only those damn Republicans get out of the way, even more cash every month, and then, once a year - like Santa Claus - an "Earned Income Credit" for earning nothing, and receive about $3,000 for each kid?" Now that 94% mom & dad in the home has turned to 10%; with 90% of black births to Single black female children looking for a welfare check.
Joey, when I was a teen, I woulda bent over in a heartbeat if i coulda got pregnant and bailed out on life. This isn't a judgment on every unmotivated, confused or lazy teen. Its a condemnation of liberal pols who set this temptation in front of CHILDREN. The result is - as a famous Democrat once said, a NEW RACE of people. One brought up on something this world had never seen before: a family unit devoid of a father, led by a mostly unmotivated, inexperienced young woman, who is given financial power within that structure. The father, who should be in that position is made irrelevant, and the offspring seemingly cursed by all your compassion. Note to Joey: the ghetto is not a good thing.
Also, this idea that Mississippi whites are only held back from massacring blacks by the Feds is something you picked up at Matt Damon Middle School no doubt, but if so, riddle me this, Batman: Idaho is 95% white and rural. They went for the Obamanation in 2008.
-
What seduced me about Ron Paul is his anti-establishment attitude. Unlike many truth seekers and activists, RP was able to rally a terrific huge amount of people actually discussing the real issues of both the american life and the global economic system. He started something that, imo, isn't going to end very soon.
The peak of his fighting is when he addresses Bernanke, Chairman of the FED. You gotta come to appreciate the rivalry between these two guys but god damn Ron Paul destroys him everytime aha.
Not being american myself, here are the main points that would have made the world a better place:
1- The most obvious...end the fuckin Federal Reserve
2- Get the USD back on either a gold standard or any other valuable asset. Re valuefor the dollar, not filthy debts
3- End the CIA which is a pain in the ass of this whole planet (their vicious black ops all around the world)
Ultimately, Ron Paul have created something we might come to appreciate only years for now.
As for the IRS and other domestic issues, I'll let you americans discuss on that as you are more knowledgeable than me on that.
-
Joey, THANK YOU for being so completely upside-down re: black people and 1965. In 1965, 94% of black births were to a mother and father living in the home. 96% Employment in Harlem, NY. The ERA had passed and everyone expected blacks to walk the road that Jews, Italians and Irish had strode into middle class America. 1965 Enter the Liberals: "Hey little girl, how would you like to have your own apartment? Watch TV all day instead of having to go to school and listen to parents? Eat ice cream and cookies all day? Receive rent, food, medical and if only those damn Republicans get out of the way, even more cash every month, and then, once a year - like Santa Claus - an "Earned Income Credit" for earning nothing, and receive about $3,000 for each kid?" Now that 94% mom & dad in the home has turned to 10%; with 90% of black births to Single black female children looking for a welfare check.
Joey, when I was a teen, I woulda bent over in a heartbeat if i coulda got pregnant and bailed out on life. This isn't a judgment on every unmotivated, confused or lazy teen. Its a condemnation of liberal pols who set this temptation in front of CHILDREN. The result is - as a famous Democrat once said, a NEW RACE of people. One brought up on something this world had never seen before: a family unit devoid of a father, led by a mostly unmotivated, inexperienced young woman, who is given financial power within that structure. The father, who should be in that position is made irrelevant, and the offspring seemingly cursed by all your compassion. Note to Joey: the ghetto is not a good thing.
Also, this idea that Mississippi whites are only held back from massacring blacks by the Feds is something you picked up at Matt Damon Middle School no doubt,
yeah, if that damn commie Martin Luther King Jr hadn't come along and shaken things up, things would be just super for africans in the united states today. who knew that segregation was such a blessing for the african minority? if only there were guys like ron paul back then who would have rallied to "leave it to the states to decide" then there wouldn't be all these fatherless niggers running around smoking crack and mugging honest white americans. ::) ::) ::)
i'm sure all your black friends agree with this sentiment
but if so, riddle me this, Batman: Idaho is 95% white and rural. They went for the Obamanation in 2008.
thats not a riddle, thats a statement. there's lots of even whiter states that went for obama. why are you talking about idaho? all you're doing is telling me that you're a white guy from idaho.
i was using mississippi as an example, because it has the strongest anti-black sentiments in the country. ask your black friends....oh wait, you live on a potato farm in idaho. :P
okay, done talking to you. enjoy this big fat black liberal dick in your ass for the next four years
good points brought up by other people in this thread, but i still can't get behind the libertarian ideal or the legendary status that has been given to the "forefathers" as all knowing geniuses of how a government and society should operate.
-
i guess i should elaborate a little...that last post was a little heated.
this guy and the other one are arguing that life for africans in the united states was better before desegregation. regardless of all the horrible things that have happened in the last 50 years, i still strongly disagree. in fact, i think that desegregation is so important that life for EVERYONE in the usa is better post-segregation.
i believe that in a desegregated society there is a cross-cultural exchange that happens which is invaluable. we trade ideas and perspectives and are ultimately all more learned people as a result. i can't imagine what my life would be like if i hadn't had the opportunity to know and talk in depth with people from very different backgrounds than myself. i can't imagine a world of academics and medicine where the blacks have to stay over 'here' and the whites have to stay over 'here.' both sides would miss out on amazingly brilliant and talented individuals for the sake of staying segregated. i don't know about you, but i LOVE my indian doctors and jewish accountants, lol.
its very convenient for the white man to look at the data and say "the family unit was stronger and the blacks-only businesses thrived so life was better for them." but do you think black people are so easily manipulated that a few white liberal politicians could convince 90% or more of the african-american population of the 1960's to push with every ounce of their strength for equal rights?
pssst! (the answer is 'no!')
-
Joey, I am not w/Idaho, and I've NEVER said - nor has anyone else here - that Blacks were better off in segregation. So it's just the Southern whites who are bad people, not Idaho whites. Could you be any more of a tool for the enemy of black people? What has DESTROYED the African American is liberalism, which has turned the 'poor-but-proud' into a mutilated, twisted generation of beggars with hostility born of low self-esteem, having much in common with the kidnapped puppies in Animal Farm.
Im not from Idaho, but Ive been around people-of-color my whole life, and its amusing to me that people who have not had that experience are always lecturing those of us who've shot up w/black people, gotten in bed with black people, and worked with black people how we should act. Personally, I think its whites who treat black people as if they're the retarded cousin you 'have to make allowances for' are the real racists. Michelle Obama speaks like a borderline psychotic, but libtards have their tongues so far up the Obamanation buttock that they dont dare repeat the foolish things she says. I guess they - like you? - feel, 'oh well, she's black. What can you expect?'
-
What has DESTROYED the African American is liberalism, which has turned the 'poor-but-proud' into a mutilated, twisted generation of beggars with hostility born of low self-esteem, having much in common with the kidnapped puppies in Animal Farm.
Im not from Idaho, but Ive been around people-of-color my whole life, and its amusing to me that people who have not had that experience are always lecturing those of us who've shot up w/black people, gotten in bed with black people, and worked with black people how we should act. Personally, I think its whites who treat black people as if they're the retarded cousin you 'have to make allowances for' are the real racists. Michelle Obama speaks like a borderline psychotic, but libtards have their tongues so far up the Obamanation buttock that they dont dare repeat the foolish things she says. I guess they - like you? - feel, 'oh well, she's black. What can you expect?'
and here's one of your typical Ron Paul supporters, folks!
on the one hand, you've got brilliant, motivated idealists like DPR, but 90% of them are like this self-righteous douchebag. i just can't hang at that kinda party....real exclusive, non-compromising, uncompassionate, and all around shitty vibe. plus, its a white sausage fest.
RP got one vote out of me because I felt he earned it and deserves to be heard, but my interest in libertarianism and "true republicanism" is totally squashed. some good ideas in there, but left unchecked they would be a living nightmare.
i'll get out of this thread now
-
Hey Joey, on your way out could you buy Mrs. Obama a pair of shoes for Mr. Obama? It seems that before the election she insisted that they walked the "Tobacco Road" of 'Barak was too poor to even afford shoes that fit." IN REALITY, - according to his own bio - Barak went to PRIVATE SCHOOL, and before that lived in the upper class neighborhood in Indonesia. Isn't that a little psychotic? Oh, I forgot. She's black...
-
Hey Joey, sorry to hear you got such a negative impression of libertarian ideals. But I assure you most of us are more like the DPR type you claim to have respect for. I absolutely respect your right to an opinion and I think we have the same goals and values in terms of freedom for all. I would really love to see you join us in DPR'S Book Club sometime, and actually read a little bit of libertarian literature with us. You may actually be surprised at how practical and sensible it becomes when broken down and explained by the greatest minds behind this ideology. There is a reason that many of the greatest minds in history have come to our philosophical team. :)
In fact, we just started a new book today, and I'd love to see you just check it out and try to follow along with us for a few weeks and really give your thoughts in the book club thread, even if you completely disagree. You'll have a chance to explain why you still don't buy their reasoning. What do you have to lose?
-
Yeah Joey, c'mon! I'm gonna drag my knuckles on over there too. ::) Maybe you could help rehabilitate an old confederate like me with your elevated insight:-X
-
i guess i should elaborate a little...that last post was a little heated.
this guy and the other one are arguing that life for africans in the united states was better before desegregation. regardless of all the horrible things that have happened in the last 50 years, i still strongly disagree. in fact, i think that desegregation is so important that life for EVERYONE in the usa is better post-segregation.
i believe that in a desegregated society there is a cross-cultural exchange that happens which is invaluable. we trade ideas and perspectives and are ultimately all more learned people as a result. i can't imagine what my life would be like if i hadn't had the opportunity to know and talk in depth with people from very different backgrounds than myself. i can't imagine a world of academics and medicine where the blacks have to stay over 'here' and the whites have to stay over 'here.' both sides would miss out on amazingly brilliant and talented individuals for the sake of staying segregated. i don't know about you, but i LOVE my indian doctors and jewish accountants, lol.
its very convenient for the white man to look at the data and say "the family unit was stronger and the blacks-only businesses thrived so life was better for them." but do you think black people are so easily manipulated that a few white liberal politicians could convince 90% or more of the african-american population of the 1960's to push with every ounce of their strength for equal rights?
pssst! (the answer is 'no!')
I think we may have a bit of a misunderstanding here.. Libertarians don't believe in segregation; they believe in equal treatment of all races BY THE GOVERNMENT. Now, that does not have any provisions for however people may act when given the freedom to do so, but as someone (very eloquently) mentioned earlier, you cannot legislate equality. Any attempt to do so is just artificial equality at best, no different in concept to putting a band aid on a cancerous tumor.
We don't necessarily hate black people and hope for their continued disadvantage, we simply respect their intelligence enough to refrain from giving them a handicap for "historical disadvantages" (read: inherent stupidity). We don't believe in subsidizing failure, because when you subsidize anything, you naturally get more of it. Besides, if you think about it, every non-white race in the United States today has been "historically disadvantaged" at some point, and for the most part are fairly successful, without any liberal bleeding hearts forcing everyone else to hand it to them on a silver platter.
If you want people to act like adults, you need to treat them like adults. This won't result in the overnight end of bigotry and income equality everyone seems to expect, but the way we are going about it today simply prolongs the problem and hides its symptoms. It is a fix for those to weak and cowardly to face reality
-schmuck
-
Man am I disappointed to read the responses in this thread. I really thought more of you would look up to and have the deepest, utmost respect for Dr. Paul. It literally breaks my heart to see him retire. We have NOBODY else left in congress to carry the weight that man carried on his back for the last 30 plus years. All by himself, he fought tooth and nail to carry the weight of the message of freedom on his back, and it wasn't until his last few years that he got the recognition he deserved. Sadly that recognition didn't come from any of his peers or colleagues, but from the entire generation of youth who were smart enough and intellectually free enough to understand how much of a hero he really was and is. There has NEVER been another politician who stuck by his principles and what he believed in like Ron Paul did. Not ONCE did he change positions, contradict himself, or vote against his libertarian ideals. You will NEVER find another statesman like him who really cared that much about his countrymen and the fundamental universal rights of man, and not about power or money. He was a one-of-a-kind man, and personally I believe he deserved to go down as an equal to MLK and Ghandi. He had no other motivation for his long hard career standing by himself against the rest of congress than to fight for our freedom. This is going to offend many of you, but I truly believe he has done more for defending my freedom than any soldier in the US military. The man deserves nothing but praise, love, and admiration. He has earned the right to go down as a legend, a true American hero, and most likely the last true statesman we'll ever have.
Lol I'm sorry to say Inigo that I'm just too cynical for the forefathers shit. Every time I hear a U.S politician saying "Oh this isn't what the forefathers would have wanted rah rah, blah blah" it just sounds like white-noise or of people grabbing on to ideals that they skew to fit an idealized picture that just isn't true.
It's okay Lim, I would only have a grudge against you for that if you were a fellow American. ;)
But none-the-less, if you ever get curious about why he's so idolized, I encourage you to read his book Liberty Defined sometime, and really try to get a feel for what he stood for. His message was SO much deeper than just rambling about American forefathers. While he does use that point in debate sometimes, his real inspirations and sources of principles came from the likes of Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, etc. He cites them WAY more often than any of the forefathers. You'd be hard pressed to find anything deeper and more intellectually stimulating on the philosophy of liberty than the works of Mises and Rothbard. He was a damn smart old man, way more intelligent than any other politician I've ever seen.
You know it does sound quite interesting from your description, I'm going on holiday soon so I may buy it and take a butchers. :)
-
I changed parties to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries, and then changed back. He'll always be a hero to me. I've read a lot of what he has written, and of course, this site, to me, is an obvious libertarian kick in the pants to those who don't believe...a great thinker--along these lines, for those who like to read--is Thomas Szasz...he's written lots, one of the best is "Our Right to Drugs:The Case for a Free Market."
Weirdly enough, I was listening to Rush today, and even he mentioned this classic speech by Ron Paul...the thing about Paul, is that he acted on his beliefs, and knows that it's just not the government's damned business what we put in our bodies. And ,he's seen this terrible slippery slope the government's been on, especially when they went after doctors, hard to believe they once could prescribe what they wanted, but they got weak too...
Ah, shit, this is a depressing topic, but thanks to Ron Paul for standing up for people like us. And since WWII we keep getting into one useless war after another, so nice that he also says *that* isn't our business either: we're supposed to be a 'beacon' of democracy, not an enforcer of it, as the neo-cons wanted...and got...look at the ill will we've created in this world due to Iraq...what the fuck were we doing *there?* Somebody remind me again....
-
I had a lot of mixed feelings during/after his address. I also checked Expedia briefly. I also made a drink.
-
5th of November is a U.K thing mate..... ::)
is there any significance of that date beyond the movie?
-
Ron Paul is an amazing man and I think he would be a much better president than Obama. The sad part is that during the election almost all of my friends were disappointed with both Romney and Obama, we mostly went with Obama but no one was really thrilled. The funny thing was that we all liked Ron Paul. Everyone I know liked Ron Paul and I feel like he has progressive views on drugs and because of that he was black balled.
-
Libertarians are largely anarchists, which is why in times of civil strife they are the easiest to round up and execute, which they would deserve.
For anyone who still hasn't been able to see how a 'rights-based' worldview leads to increasing state control over the individual, kill yourself.
-
Libertarians are largely anarchists, which is why in times of civil strife they are the easiest to round up and execute, which they would deserve.
For anyone who still hasn't been able to see how a 'rights-based' worldview leads to increasing state control over the individual, kill yourself.
care to elaborate on such a bold statement?
-
Oh wow. A book club with Walter Block and a thread about RP's fantastic farewell address on the front page. Clearly I should have joined this forum earlier.
That speech was the best made by any politician of the modern era imo. It seemed to me that he finally left constitutionalism behind him (Lysander Spooner anyone?) and publicly displayed some anarchocapitalist tendencies -- which to a Mises-Rothbard-junkie like me is a good thing.
Btw, love how a few posts above, someone says ancaps deserve to get executed. For what exactly? For wanting to protect your freedom from the violent interference of a gang of thieving and murdering thugs?
-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ what the previous user said!