It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul, Ralph Nader agree on 'progressive-libertarian alliance'

page: 1
23
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Ron Paul, Ralph Nader agree on 'progressive-libertarian alliance'


www.rawstory.com

One might think the two men, seemingly ideologically opposed to one another, would rather argue than help one another.

However, on Wednesday's broadcast of Freedom Watch on the Fox Business channel, Judge Napolitano sat down for an amiable interview with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) and Ralph Nader to discuss a progressive-libertarian alliance in the 112th session of respective chambers in Congress.

Nader, who has recently called this coalition "the most exciting new political dynamic" in the US today, explained that it works well because both groups stand against corporatists who believe gov
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
This is a big win for those who claim to be true progressives, constitutionalists, and populists. Their alliance completely opposes the corporatocracy that is the United States, and I think it could lead to something big.

The key here is that it goes against the corporations and lobbyists that run the country behind the scenes. I wonder how this is going to play out...




www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 22-1-2011 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
This is like a Dream Team. Paul and his principles and knowledge of the Constitution and Ralph is a Suuuuuper Genius....

Yay this is very good news.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
OP, thank you.

I wondered where Nader Had scurried off to.

He keeps getting the shaft.

This is big news.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Hey, if they keep pounding on that "corporatist" issue it might actually enter the mainstream consciousness. I think 3rd party candidates always seemed like odd-balls to mid america, but just maybe there is a crack big enough in american confidence for these guys to walk right through.

You guys could sure use a different tune for the masses to march to.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Paul's brand of libertarianism and Nader's brand of progressivism have a lot in common. Personally, I've been a fan of both of these men for years, and my political views are a mix of both of their schools of thought. At this point in the game, all non corporatist groups and individuals need to stand together, or fall apart. It's that simple. We can debate the nuances of health care etc. after we get our government back from the crooks who own it currently.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


Well, things just keep getting more and more interesting, don't they? ...A natural alliance, to my mind, and absolutely wonderful news.

Finally, something I'm inclined to support.

S&F&



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   
If I was to.try to think about this critically I.would say Paul said he was.powerless against Geithner and Bernanke (bedfellows) and Nader is for keeping the Fed around, just put them on cabinet level? Yeah all the other cabinet level bureaucracies seem to doing great because they are so transparent.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
This just proves the oldsaying..............

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

The two groups have really little in comman other than there discust at the way things are going, I am a Libertarian and disagree with Nader on many points but if it will help topple the so-called two party system I say...........welcome brother Nader


The reason third party candadates are seen as nutcases is because the media protrays them as such...........often they will only interview the fringe idiots that every party has



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


You might find the below video even more surprising. During Ron Paul's 2008 campaign he formed this alliance with 4 parties (Green Party, Constitutional Party, Libertarian Party, and whatever party Nader is with lol). Is it not funny that the most popular 4 parties that are not republicans and democrats actually share so many common beliefs? Is it not funny though that if combined under one initiative they might actually perform better against the other two? We are powerless because we are kept divided over a label, when we actually mostly agree on the big ticket items.




posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 


Problem is, most of the similarities are superficial. Some aren't even similar. When libertarians and Constitutionalists debate about a "return to the consititution," they're actually both talking about two completely different documents that don't much resemble the actual US constitution.

Progressives oppose war because it's a waste of human life. Libertarians oppose war because the military isn't 100% privatized yet.

And the only reason the Greens resemble the Constitution party at all is because the Greens have been funded by the Republican party for well over a decade now, under the reasoning that they're a "spoiler" for the Democrats.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 


Progressives oppose war because it's a waste of human life. Libertarians oppose war because the military isn't 100% privatized yet.
.


You are wrong............Libertarians do not believe in war except as a dirrect attack against our country



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by lastrebel
 


Maybe you and I speak to different libertarians? 'Cause all I ever hear falling from between their gums is extremist freemarketeerism.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Could this be the beginning of Paul/Nader 2012, or just wishful thinking on my part?

Stranger things have happened. People still flock to hear Sarah Palin(which baffles the heck out of me).



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
I like both Ron Paul and Ralph Nader. Two people to look up know and be amazed by their views, I believe in the past Ralph Nader has done some good in making vehicles more safer to drive. What people from grass roots communities need to do is unite. I could care less who is what.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by lastrebel
 


Maybe you and I speak to different libertarians? 'Cause all I ever hear falling from between their gums is extremist freemarketeerism.


Maybe you should go to the source this is from our platform

www.lp.org...

3.1 National Defense

We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression.
The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as
policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   
Paul/Nader would be epic. The MSM would shoot them down... but you never know.


Originally posted by TheLoony
Could this be the beginning of Paul/Nader 2012, or just wishful thinking on my part?

Stranger things have happened. People still flock to hear Sarah Palin(which baffles the heck out of me).




posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by lastrebel
 


Maybe you and I speak to different libertarians? 'Cause all I ever hear falling from between their gums is extremist freemarketeerism.


There is a Grand Canyon of a difference between inductive reasoning and leaps of logic, and making a leap of logic over a Grand Canyon of this difference only ensures a big splat. I do not like free market advocates, therefore free market advocates who defend the right to keep and bear arms are war mongers who want the military to be privatized is an opinion, but is also a fallacious argument.



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by lastrebel
 


Maybe you and I speak to different libertarians? 'Cause all I ever hear falling from between their gums is extremist freemarketeerism.


Many libertarians are just as confused as most people in any political party. Libertarians though generally feel a strong national defense is important. However, the operative word there is Defense. That means someone attacks us...we go in set their country back 10 years and leave without rebuilding. Maybe just send them some food to make sure the citizens don't starve, but outside of that we would not rebuild their roads or anything. Yes libertarians believe in guns. Nothing wrong with guns. However, some like any political party take it too the extreme. Libertarians and those that lean toward social justice are very similar in their goals. Both want a community that is fair and conducive to living in freedom as each individual chooses. The political parties that want to control individual choices through government is where they part ways.



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Paul and Nader are both decent politicians but this merger I don’t think would break up the two-party duopoly.

Unfortunately, the way this alliance would turn out would be a continuation of the two party system . . . because Nader would garnish the outer-liberal progressives and Paul would garnish what I call the somewhat sane element of the Tea Party. That would amount to still having the two parties corporate slave system—dems and repubs—with their traditional numerical demographics to fight for.

The same dynamic . . . the left wing versus the right wing of each party with the middle always determining the winner will still be intact.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<<   2 >>

log in

join