reply to post by captaintyinknots
I do think most Paul supporters need to learn what a real libertarian is.
When I first registered as a Libertarian, years ago, it didn't take me too long at all to conclude that the worst thing that could ever happen to the
Libertarian Party was that it gain political power. Power corrupts. If the Libertarian Party were to gain political power, the next logical strategy
would be to protect and maintain that power, even expand it. Libertarians could not do such a thing without first sacrificing the principles they
adhere to. Sacrifice is insane.
Of course, Ron Paul is not in the Libertarian Party, and is instead a long time Republican attempting to infuse Libertarian principles into his own
party. Then, naturally, there are the self proclaimed "libertarians" who know little of the platforms of the Libertarian Party and seek to
distinguish themselves from that party either by refusing to be clear on what they mean by libertarian, or actually having a clear idea of what they
mean by libertarian.
The live and let live motto is a nice simplistic explanation of libertarian attitudes in general, but the reality is that this motto encompasses many
topics that remain sources of heated debate. Taxes are quite naturally odious to a libertarian, but just as odious as taxes may be, the sweet smell
of rationalism tends to be easily recognized by the libertarian as well. Libertarians are not advocating no government, and because of this the
rationally minded ones understand that some taxes are necessary. The problem most libertarians are confronted with often is even when uttering a
phrase such as "some taxation", the tax advocates and big government sycophants get all apoplectic threatening to have a seizure immediately if it
isn't acknowledged that we need to tax the crap out of - at the very least the rich - in order to have "economic justice".
These tax advocates may nod their heads approvingly when hearing utterances such as "live and let live" as long as these utterances remain
comfortably ambiguous in their meanings, but dare to suggest that taxation is being used to violate peoples right to earn a living, and suddenly these
tax advocates have a different idea of what "live and let live" means and the debate gets heated.
Of course, I would like to believe the genuine libertarians are individualists first. As such, these people may support Ron Paul's campaign, but
these libertarians are likely not the campaign junkies who support Ron Paul. Campaign junkies are a different breed altogether, and their love for
the bureaucracies of elections is stronger than any political ideology they may harbor.
There seems to be many Ron Paul supporters who are under the impression that a Ron Paul election will some how magically fix the corrupt system that
We the People have allowed to sink into corruption and decay. It is an appearance, and may or may not be indicative of an actual thought that all
they have to do is vote for Ron Paul, get him elected and then their job is done.
Genuine libertarians know better.