My opinion about this site's purpose

One of the things I'm starting to get very tired of on this forum, is people who apparently think that its' only purpose, is coercing others into agreeing with them. The site's slogan is "Deny Ignorance." In case you're confused, that doesn't mean the enforcement of bigoted groupthink; it actually means the opposite. There are a couple of specific demographics (without naming names) that need particular mention, here.

a] The Cult of Ron Paul.

My main grievance with Ron Paul supporters, is that I never get anything from them but aggressive incoherence, if I or anyone else attempts to suggest that things with their favourite candidate may not be 100% as they seem.

You do not think. You are simply on a bandwagon, being swept along with the tide, and if anyone dares question it, the only thing you know how to do, is regurgitate the canned sound bites that you've already been given by someone else, and hope that volume and aggression will compensate for your complete lack of anything vaguely resembling a rational argument.

I for one would appreciate vastly more intelligent discussion of Ron Paul, if we have to have any at all. If you want to talk about him, tell us about his policies. Give us coherent, factual, rational information. Don't simply make yet another thread bleating about the media blackout of him. If CNN/Fox News won't tell people what he thinks, then the best thing you can do for him, is to tell people in a lucid, eloquent manner.

b] Political/economic partisanship, and narrow mindedness on either side.

I have recently started a couple of threads, and have been joined in this by eboyd, with not only an examination of Socialist theory, but with an attempt at a comparitive analysis of the virtues and failings of both Socialist and Capitalist ideology. This means that I have wanted intelligent input from both sides. (and to some extent I've had it)

It does not, however, mean that I want belligerent, single-minded, condescending trolling, from either side of the political or economic aisle. My main thread on this topic is currently being plagued by two aggressive, single-minded trolls, one from the Capitalist side of the fence, and one from the Socialist. If people want a model of what I consider intelligent input, I offer both ANOK on the Socialist side, and another poster on the Capitalist side, who gave me an example of how he has been able to successfully run a business, which has actually been a positive benefit to other people.

I will be honest in saying to the conservative/right wing demographic of this site, that to a large extent, your thinking is very alien to me. I have taken the Political Compass test intermittently for close to the last ten years, and have consistently been given an identical score to Gandhi. In other words, I am what you would identify as a Libertarian Socialist. I am not, however, unwilling to learn; which is actually what I've been attempting to do. If you want to win me over, however, I'm going to need more eloquence and less aggression, ad hominem, and trolling than I've seen from conservatives here so far.

c] The military.

As a civilian, I have long had a primary rule online. I don't take crap from soldiers. I also don't defer to you, or worship you, which a lot of you seem to think I should do. I don't mind getting Jack Nicholson's speech from A Few Good Men screamed at me; I have no problem standing my own ground and screaming just as loudly right back.

I'm going to be brutally honest. I don't support a single damn thing that you are doing, right now. I don't condone Iraq, Afghanistan, or the War on Terror in general. I believe that the entire thing is a globalist farce to make the corporate world richer, and to justify, in the minds of the public who don't know better, increasing domestic fascism in the Western world, including giving police the right to unlawfully arrest, torture, and bash civilians in custody, without question or consequence.

If you don't want to listen to me as a civilian on this topic, go and read Smedley Butler. He ended up one of the most decorated men that the US Marine Corps has ever had, and he wrote the same thing. Back in the 30s, Wall Street wanted him to lead a military coup of the country. He refused, and his book on the plutocratic farce of modern war, was his response. You have been conned. You are falling for it yourselves, but what is even worse, and what I will not stand for, is your level of aggression in insisting that we civilians close our eyes and swallow the same political manure that you are. I refuse to do it.

I don't think anyone who is participating in the GWOT, is defending anyone's freedom. The truth is, you're actually doing the opposite. Those of you involved in law enforcement, in reality are traitors to the civilian population at this point; not our protectors. You defend the corporate world when we protest because we are starving and homeless due to said corporations' excesses, and when you are told to do incredibly courageous and honourable things like invade Occupy camps in the middle of the night, employ riot ordinance against unarmed civilians, and use siege tactics against said civilians, you comply; some of you very enthusiastically.

Where is your defense of us from Monsanto's destruction of our food supply? Where are you when the traitors who are filling the sky with chemtrails, all over the planet, need to be put against a wall and shot? Where were you when Obama, with the NDAA, committed blatant, and utterly undeniable treason against the Constitution you are sworn to defend? Where are you when Occupy, who are trying to alleviate the homeless problem, as well as end the corporate threat in general, are bashed, gassed, shot with rubber bullets, and unlawfully arrested by the police?

You are there, but you are on the wrong side of the line. The bottom line here is very simple.

If you are going to behave as the enemy, you can expect to be regarded and treated as such.

We as civilians do not recognise you as our allies, because you are not behaving in that manner. We are trying desperately to defend ourselves from corporate abuse, to the point of them literally rendering this planet uninhabitable; and you are, to use your own vocabulary, providing aid and comfort to said corporations, not us.

We need you to stop making excuses for your own people, when they do the wrong thing. If soldiers commit attrocities, such as Lynndie England etc, the correct response is not to cover it up, but for said personnel to be disciplined accordingly...and publically. We also need you, more than anything else, to start to correctly identify who the enemy really is; and it is not us. It is the corrupt politicians from whom your orders are issued.

They are using you as human shields. They will take your blood, your organs, and your minds...literally all you have to give them...and throw you away when they are finished with you. They will also use you to continue destroying the environment, and to annihilate anyone who tries to stem their own psychopathic tide. Are there any of you here, with sufficient minds left, that you are able to ask yourselves whether or not this is honourable?

If you want our respect, you can have it. But you need to start earning it.

reply to post by petrus4


Can I give more than one flag and star? I think this should be mandatory reading until either the election or until the US leaves other countries alone.

reply to post by petrus4


i agree that as of lately this site has been less "above top secret" and more cnn mainstream political news bullcrap...

its sad to say ive been getting my conspiracy and or interesting news fixes from GLP

due to the sheer political/war mongering threads and topics ATS has been straying for a while...

i also agree with the soldier worshiping nonsense...the american revolutionists were actually fighting for FREEDOM and INDEPENDENCE ..these new cal of duty trained tweens in the battle fields are actually helping in pushing TPTB agenda,

america's freedoms need to be protected NOT from some afgahns thousands of miles away....no...america needs to be protected from the threats WITHIN...

now when it comes to law enforcement...there are 2 sides to the coin..yes there are police buffs that totally and completely abuse of the powers given to them, and yes they are 100% traitors to their own men...however there are those within that it is in their best interests to protect the people..yet those guys are far and few

it's supposed to be a serious discussion on unexplained phenomenon, potential conspiracies and uncovering the layers of disinformation, until you get to the truth.

using the talents, insights and experiences from people around the globe to fuel this vehicle as an alternative to the 4th estate.

instead we have bernard schnitzel and his grandmother starting threads.

And truer words were never spoken!

Unfortunately, these enforcers will realize who is truly expendable only after they have served their purpose. And then, off to the same fate as you and I.

It will be a fearful day for those with guns and a badge when they end up on this side of the line. What will they say then?

And who is expendable? Everyone except those at the top.

Peace

Yes, and thank you.

Your a and b, I don't know. I don't think there exists a politician that is not out to get us. It seems that Mr. Obama was all great and wonderful until he got into office. However, I am of the mind that elections are rigged and our vote means nothing, and TPTB are the only ones with a vote. So discussing this -ism and that -ism mean naught to me.

However, your rant about the military resonates very much with me. I don't resent these guys personally, but taken as a whole it seems to me that they are the most brainwashed people out of everyone else in the world.

Peace

Originally posted by angellicview
However, your rant about the military resonates very much with me. I don't resent these guys personally, but taken as a whole it seems to me that they are the most brainwashed people out of everyone else in the world.

Thank you. There is a particular, small group on this site, whose attitude is essentially, "the Corps, right or wrong." Said individuals know who they are, and I am not expecting a reply to this thread from them; or if there is one, it will contain the usual degree of enraged, belligerent grunting.

Excuse me... the cult of Ron Paul eh? You are really going to put out such a broad statement like that and expect high fives? Are you serious? Maybe the people you are mentioning act the way they do towards you because they don't want to waste their time talking to you when they know you will be disrespectful. You wanna talk Ron Paul policy? Let's go, right now. You start by saying what you don't like. I am ready.

EDIT: As for the rest of what you say, I can respect that you wish to have "eloquent" talks. We Ron Paul supporters (notice how I did not say cultists) talk about the media so much because it is what the people see, and the people (supposedly) have the say in who gets voted in.

Also to be noted, the people who are uninformed and talk about politics come from all parties, not just Ron Paul.

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
You wanna talk Ron Paul policy? Let's go, right now. You start by saying what you don't like. I am ready.

I actually want to know what his policy is. People don't talk about that, other than vaguely implying that he has a magic wand, and will essentially make anything that they don't like disappear.

I also want a non-aggressive answer to the question of why people are willing to believe him, if he is promising to create reform that the corporations don't want. The last two presidential candidates promised people all kinds of things. When they got into office, they did the complete opposite.

reply to post by petrus4


Well maybe you don't know what it is because you watch too much tv! Hahaha

I will be brief so that you can keep focused and look at everything first before you ask questions. Want links, videos, or whatever I will find them for you just let me know. Want me to go into details, I will try.

Ok well there is foreign policy, where he wants to move us out of the UN which is why we police the globe trying to force our opinions on everyone. This is good because we will no longer be obligated to help countries that don't deserve it, or do other country's dirty work for them. HOWEVER, most people think this will magically end our treaties with Europe, which is false. We have it on paper that they are our allies and that contract won't be breached unless something much bigger than pulling out of the UN occurs. He also wants to take out all the troops from countries that don't want us there and will put a stop to the unnecessary wars. People think he is an isolationist by doing so, but the truth is that he wants to actually strengthen the US's defense with our military, and only use them if need be (i.e. we get attacked and invaded etc.).

Economically, he wishes to end (or AT LEAST audit) the federal reserve, which is the sole reason for the bankruptcy of the country and the non-bankruptcy of the corrupt banks. There is no reason to have this reserve of money where high-ups and social elitists can just take money from. The country needs to be able to learn from natural consequences, and every company and corporation, person or business would have to deal with money in the same manner.

Ron Paul is a libertarian which means he strictly follows the Constitution. He does things by the books and wants to retain all the freedoms you and I love as expressed in the Bill of Rights. He believes in process as well as morality. There is much more I can get into, but the popular topics that people generally focus on are the economy and foreign policy. Just remember: when faced with a political problem and you want to know what Ron Paul would do, just look at the Constitution for answers. I want my freedoms to be protected. The government exists to be limited and protect the people-- that's what Ron Paul is about.

Want to know more?

I was gonna give you a star and agreed with everything you said until you started the rant against the military, the police and the War On Terror.

Shame but there we go. Star withheld.

reply to post by petrus4


Also, if you wish to talk about him actually doing the things he says-- look at his voting records. Ron Paul has been the same in his ideology for 35+ years. The other candidates and the past presidents you mention were always flip-floppy. But remember, the media liked them so the people voted for them.

Originally posted by curious7
I was gonna give you a star and agreed with everything you said until you started the rant against the military, the police and the War On Terror.

Shame but there we go. Star withheld.

Am I honestly supposed to care? As though I'm a dog who isn't being given a biscuit, because I've done something you don't approve of? This sort of attitude, was precisely what I was talking about.

Get over yourself.

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by petrus4

 

Well maybe you don't know what it is because you watch too much tv! Hahaha

I will be brief so that you can keep focused and look at everything first before you ask questions. Want links, videos, or whatever I will find them for you just let me know. Want me to go into details, I will try.

Ok well there is foreign policy, where he wants to move us out of the UN which is why we police the globe trying to force our opinions on everyone. This is good because we will no longer be obligated to help countries that don't deserve it, or do other country's dirty work for them.

It's a great idea, but Paul would be shot before he could implement it. I hope you are aware of that. The people who actually run this planet would not allow it.

Truthfully, I think that is probably the other thing I object to, where Paul supporters are concerned; the assumption that the executive branch has any power whatsoever, other than to do what the people behind the curtain say. They were only talking about the "unitary executive," with Bush, because he wanted to do as he was told. I think Obama was possibly a little restive initially, but the NDAA clearly demonstrated him having fallen into line. Alex Jones' The Obama Deception, is a good film to watch, where that is concerned; which makes me curious as to why Alex now thinks that Ron Paul could do anything.

I would love it if he could; but Presidents who attempt to do things which powerful people don't want, get shot. It has happened three times.

He also wants to take out all the troops from countries that don't want us there and will put a stop to the unnecessary wars.

Again, it's a great idea, but attempting to implement it would earn him a plane crash or lead poisoning.

reply to post by petrus4


Ok fine, so you would rather get someone else in there with worse ideas that don't matter? I mean I don't think you know how much I and other (not all) Ron Paul supporters see. I understand very well that on the slim chance that Paul does make president that his stuff will not be implemented. However, it is the people that are likely to change. The ideology of a new nation emerges under the presidency of Ron Paul. He himself may not be able to change everything he wants to, but he will help the process along-- which is why I would still "waste" my time voting and advocating for him. Not because I am a cultist mind you, because I am a patriot and a humanist.

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
The ideology of a new nation emerges under the presidency of Ron Paul. He himself may not be able to change everything he wants to, but he will help the process along-- which is why I would still "waste" my time voting and advocating for him. Not because I am a cultist mind you, because I am a patriot and a humanist.

I do think people being exposed to the older form of Libertarianism is a good thing, which does seem to be happening as a result of Paul's candidacy. So it's true that something good may come of his candidacy alone, even if he isn't actually elected or can implement any of what he is planning.

I would, however, try and do some research into whether or not Ron Paul has been a member of Skull and Bones, the Freemasons, or other such groups. I'm not saying he is; I don't know whether he is or not. It is worth finding out whether or not he is, though. That could definitely be considered a warning sign.

Hi there! I just peeked back in to your thread to see where the conversation went. Since I'm here I'll put my two cents in.

With the way things are now, as I see them, it is impossible for Ron Paul to be the runner against Obama - because of the voting system being rigged, as I believe it is. However, IF he did make it that far I would vote for him. He does stand for pretty much everything I believe. Now, and this is all just my opinion so take it or leave it, if Ron Paul did get to the point where he was running against Obama, then that tells me something. That would tell me that something has shifted in our "elite rulers" that they are no longer in power. That would be something we could all celebrate!

Peace

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about the purpose of ATS and not a Ron Paul 2012 debate ?

reply to post by petrus4

One of the things I'm starting to get very tired of on this forum, is people who apparently think that its' only purpose, is coercing others into agreeing with them.

And then you proceed to do exactly that.

Well done.

reply to post by k1k1to

america's freedoms need to be protected NOT from some afgahns thousands of miles

Yah.. and Ron Pauls foreign policy has nothing to do with getting out of all the wars... so lets just bag on him for having so much support by so many people, and label them all "Paul Bots".