The Secret Behind the Promise: A Libertarian Dictatorship

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 10 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
While Conservative talking heads and television pundits are worried about whatever is going on inside crazy Obama's head, not one person in the MSM (as pointed out here on ATS) is worried about what is going on with the Young People here in America. Oh, of course the Democrats would say they have young people's best interests at heart, but really they just want to control them and gain their support. What really is going on with young people is that they are fed up with the right and the left and our seeking out other ways, to manipulate the government weather through anti-anything protests like OWS or libertarian king Ron Paul. People are pissed!

Barack Obama gained massive support, in 2007 and 2008 when young people of every race and religion came out in support of him and voted him into office. The first African American President of the United States of America. I felt a little sense of pride in our country that day, nearly four years ago, when Obama stood there on stage thanking the American people and promising a better tomorrow! We all know that didn't happen...

The same thing appears to be happening with the fringe side of the far right this election season with Ron Paul and his fanatical and very noisy supporters. Even though, Mitt Romney, IS the Republican front runner, Ron Paul still manages to scrape some undecided delegates off the bottom of the political spectrum and sway crowds of young people at colleges and universities across the country!

But does, Ron Paul have the same empty promises Barack Obama did in 2008? In the following analysis of Ron Paul's plans and promises the only conclusion you will be able to make is a resounding yes! Despite being different on constitutional matters (shame on you Obama being a constitutional lawyer and all) and fiscal responsibility. Ron Paul's movement is a smaller mirror image of the Obama Change Movement. Both Obama and Ron Paul want to change the system, they may want to do it differently, but nobody talks about how they are going to do it, they just talk about the end result! And how everything will be better in the end.

I find dealing with many of Ron Paul's supporters very irritating and annoying. Granted, I agree that government has grown too large, too intrusive, and expensive over the course of the last century. I also understand my liberal friends when they say we need certain government agencies and programs, and that having them, is completely legal, completely constitutional, and the American People are completely fine with it! But it is consistently the case that the majority of Paul's supporters -- as well as Congressman Paul himself -- have no realistic plan to implement any of their high ideals. It is one thing to be fanatical about an idea or world view. But at the end of the day reality sinks in and someone has to run the government. (which they apparently hate)

If Ron Paul somehow honestly wins the GOP nomination, and beats Obama in the election, and these are two big IFS than as far as I can tell, the only way that Ron Paul-style libertarianism could ever be implemented through the establishment is through some sort of dictatorship.

I keep asking questions about how Ron Paul will set up such a system that ends corruption in the government completely. And it goes unanswered. I have asked Ron Paul supporters how he realistically plans to end the fed. and all I get is silence, or more claims that he will just do it, and I should vote for him. I also doubted one of the very many points of Ron Paul's plan that I like-- The $1 trillion budget cuts-- and how he could realistically get that to pass congress. No answer. But when I do ask these questions I get demonized by his noisy supporters as a troll, and that my ATS account should be banned, for asking perfectly logical questions--if it was any other candidate.

Without huge federal mandates or executive orders it is impossible for Ron Paul to get any of his laws or plans enacted. Otherwise he would be working hard to do that now. Why does he need to be President to end the fed? Try to Return to the Gold Standard? Or Abolish most of the Federal Government overnight? In Year One? Even though some of these things might be good for America-- in the long run. Ron Paul's fast tracked plan will be deadly to America and its way of life.

If we do return to this era of fiscal responsibility, in the 21st century how would that impact all of the corporations big and small businesses alike who currently run on the establishment model? Would that not cause another great depression? We have seen government take-over of Fannie and Freddie Mac which promised low interest rate housing loans to just about anybody! That was nothing compared to what a complete overhaul to the economic system would do! Mandated by a President Paul! Being a centrist Republican I know that The Free Market will fix everything does not work. So what happens when one corporation does become more powerful than all the others and maintains a monopoly on the market? We have certain limits on corporations today when they get too powerful. The DOJ watched Microsoft for years!

Is the Ron Paul Movement good for society like its members would like you to believe? Or is the Ron Paul Movement just another distraction polarizing this country into new and different dimensions?

The great wisdom of the Founders was that they created a government for man of reality After all, there was no abortion, no homosexual marriage, no electronic technology around at that time. So government has to evolve and grow with the changes of the country and the world. Indeed, the government of the United States was designed to be, to quote Lincoln, "of the people, by the people, and for the people." For all of their seductive talk of liberty, the Paul camp seems to be fundamentally opposed to this. If you listen closely to their ideas, they seem to have developed some strange form of libertarianism whereby they will seize the central levers of the government and deliver freedom from above in the hope that it will result in the creation of some sort of New World Order! It's funny that this is the very thing they claim to be fighting against.

Instead of providing an important libertarian voice against the creeping expansion of the regulatory state and the criminalization of most facets of everyday life and business -- issues where libertarians could quickly create genuine change -- Paul has diverted millions of dollars and countless hours of labor to an impossible crusade for absurd policies. He seems to leave the real work to people like his son Rand Paul and Geraldo Rivera. Two libertarians that I admire greatly. That brings other questions, Why doesn't Ron Paul has his own TV Show? And are these other libertarians not real libertarians? Because they do not line up with Ron Paul's beliefs?

The cause of liberty would be much better served if, instead of howling about the Federal Reserve and advocating economic plans that could be implemented only by a dictator, the money and energy presently being wasted on Ron Paul were instead diverted to finding good libertarians and getting them elected to city councils and state legislatures all across the nation. That's how you transform America!

And the reason I keep posting these things which may be against your ideals, because I want my questions answered and you have not delivered them. Please try to keep this discussion civil!




posted on May, 10 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   
Except Ron Paul campaigns on a platform of leaving people the hell alone.

Nice post though.
Very well thought out and written.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   
Awesome post.

I agree with what you are saying. The way the political system is set up in the United States nothing gets done. Ron Paul will be able to blame congress for his lack of change in his first term. I dont think he will have a second term because he is more likely to die from old age than be assassinated. And yeah,people should remember the tears of joy when Obama was elected. Ron Paul does not deserve a free pass. Most Ron Paul supporters will ignore any criticism of Paul.

Ron Paul is the best of a bad bunch. There is alot to like about Ron Paul. The worst thing about Ron Paul are his cultish lemming supporters.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Im not really that big a supporter of any presidential candidate because none of them show they want everything I believe I want in a president. So it just comes down to weighing each candidate on a scale against each other. I believe that Ron Paul ranks the highest on this scale.

I will admit there are several things he needs to work on refining into a more complete idea. But the point is that the base of his idea is something we need in this country.

I would also like to point out he doesn't have as big a "god complex". If you don't know what I mean by that look up god complex Ted talks on youtube. That could usually be interpreted as not having as much resolve or being poor at thoughtful planning.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I think the way he's planning to end war and corruption implies some deep changes that he indeed doesn't talk much about. But I think also that Ron Paul voters aren't dumb and know the wind of change involves a short period of troubles. Like all the troops going back home. Who's gonna pay the soldiers if the middle east isn't plundered anymore? There will be job losses but America will restore itself over the long-term.

There has to be a change. Just look how the whole world is going on. Not just America's prosperity. Its freedom should end where other earthlings freedom begins. There's no respect right now, Villainous acts are justified with a great ROI but what about the world misery it brings forth?

True freedom and peace have their price. And I'm all for it.

EDIT: 'Dictatorship' is an exagerated misleading word if you ask me. It sounds more like you just want to darken the picture with subjective terms.
And BTW look at the corrupted governement: how is this not a hidden but proven dictatorship?
There's no charge at all against RP as he hasn't been in the white house yet...
edit on 10-5-2012 by CityFarmer because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-5-2012 by CityFarmer because: (no reason given)


+4 more 
posted on May, 10 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


The obsession with Ron Paul continues. You are one scarey dude, every post you make is about one person. I think everyone knows Dr Paul would face resistance in everything he wants to do and would be unlikely to enact many of his ideas, but he could veto the crap out of bills that take away our liberties, no CISPA, no NDAA ect ect ect ect ect ect. He would also be on the peoples side, I don't mind if the president gets blocked or can't pass his agenda as long as you know he's trying. With Obama, he never tried, he lied, and lied again and again, and again.

Ron Paul has a 30 year long record, find him lying or taking different stances in order to benefit himself politically? You can't do it. He is nothing like Obama, Obama was and is a big bank puppet.

The troops would be on their way home. I have no doubt about it.
edit on 10-5-2012 by macaronicaesar because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   
I have always liked Ron Paul, but I am from the UK, so my reasons for liking him are mainly based on his foreign policy platform. However, I would be slightly concerned with how Paul would actually target a Global financial crisis.

It appears to me that Politics is a failure the world over. No longer can one nation state stand up to a Global market. It is now Global Markets that decide the fate of a nation, rather than the politicians elected by the citizens of that nation.

A politician will promise to make things better, but once they take the reigns of power, they are still subject to the whims of Global Markets and the speculators and rating agencies.
So Politicians promises will always fail. Citizens then realise that all politicians make promises they can't keep and lose faith in the whole system.

I hope Paul wins, I just can't see it. the establishment does not like a Maverick and will do all in it's power to stop it.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 06:05 AM
link   
It's funny how your screen name says 'annoy a liberal' and then you say how annoying it is talking to ron paul liberTARIANS, maybe that should be a sign to not try and annoy your opposites. The reason you don't get answers is because you ask ridiculous straw man questions like "how will ron paul defeat the evil corporations" when in fact 1. Ron Paul does not think corporations are evil and 2. He never planned on stopping corporations to begin with.

-Ron Paul plans to end the fed with competing currencies.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Lord Jules because: (no reason given)


-Ron Paul will write basically two executive orders: 1. Bring the troops home, and 2. Repeal all unconstitutional EOrders from past administrations.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Lord Jules because: (no reason given)


-the "too big to fail banks" will fail as they should. No reason to keep funding corporations that run on a deficit.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Lord Jules because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by macaronicaesar
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


The obsession with Ron Paul continues. You are one scarey dude, every post you make is about one person.



Again with the insults, I said, keep the discussion civil. How much of the OP did you read? You didn't even try to answer any of my questions, like most Ron Paul people, you are upset that I keep questioning him!

I didn't even talk about how many consequences his foreign policy will have for America. That is an entire post altogether, but I will be happy to make one for you



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lord Jules
It's funny how your screen name says 'annoy a liberal' and then you say how annoying it is talking to ron paul liberTARIANS, maybe that should be a sign to not try and annoy your opposites. The reason you don't get answers is because you ask ridiculous straw man questions like "how will ron paul defeat the evil corporations" when in fact 1. Ron Paul does not think corporations are evil and 2. He never planned on stopping corporations to begin with.

-Ron Paul plans to end the fed with competing currencies.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Lord Jules because: (no reason given)


-Ron Paul will write basically two executive orders: 1. Bring the troops home, and 2. Repeal all unconstitutional EOrders from past administrations.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Lord Jules because: (no reason given)


-the "too big to fail banks" will fail as they should. No reason to keep funding corporations that run on a deficit.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Lord Jules because: (no reason given)


But he does plan on ending so-called corruption. And government oversight inside corporations. So that will make corporations that much more powerful, since they will no longer be obligated to care about their workers. Do you see how dangerous that is to society today? Remember the 1920s?

And for his executive orders, you proved my point. That is being a dictator. But I guess that's ok since those laws are the ones you want even though others in America may not want that!



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by CityFarmer
I think the way he's planning to end war and corruption implies some deep changes that he indeed doesn't talk much about. But I think also that Ron Paul voters aren't dumb and know the wind of change involves a short period of troubles. Like all the troops going back home. Who's gonna pay the soldiers if the middle east isn't plundered anymore? There will be job losses but America will restore itself over the long-term.

There has to be a change. Just look how the whole world is going on. Not just America's prosperity. Its freedom should end where other earthlings freedom begins. There's no respect right now, Villainous acts are justified with a great ROI but what about the world misery it brings forth?

True freedom and peace have their price. And I'm all for it.

EDIT: 'Dictatorship' is an exagerated misleading word if you ask me. It sounds more like you just want to darken the picture with subjective terms.
And BTW look at the corrupted governement: how is this not a hidden but proven dictatorship?
There's no charge at all against RP as he hasn't been in the white house yet...
edit on 10-5-2012 by CityFarmer because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-5-2012 by CityFarmer because: (no reason given)


I'm not charging Ron Paul with anything, I'm just asking how he realistically plans to do it all! Yes, peace and change needs to happen in the world, but what you are insisting is that a President Paul should force his vision around the entire world! Paul's policies will be even more dangerous to other cultures! You talk about implementing your idea of freedom upon everyone, even though they may not want it. That's considered dictatorship!



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Germanicus
Awesome post.

I agree with what you are saying. The way the political system is set up in the United States nothing gets done. Ron Paul will be able to blame congress for his lack of change in his first term. I dont think he will have a second term because he is more likely to die from old age than be assassinated. And yeah,people should remember the tears of joy when Obama was elected. Ron Paul does not deserve a free pass. Most Ron Paul supporters will ignore any criticism of Paul.

Ron Paul is the best of a bad bunch. There is alot to like about Ron Paul. The worst thing about Ron Paul are his cultish lemming supporters.
edit on 10-5-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)


Big of you to admit, not many Paul supporters would have said that about themselves



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


You honestly do not understand. He is nothing like Barack Obama in the fact that he stands by his principles and morals. He is, with a very sure certainty if given the presidency, not going to swing on any of the issues.

Now Obama built his campaign on a series of "promises" and stances that soon became skewed after he took office until they just became outright lies. His platform, much like Bush Jr's initial platform, was a glorious one to stand behind, but when they finally took office their record and their past came back to prove their colors.

Instead of preventing things that would go against Obama's "promises" to the people, he has helped Congress to pass things that deliberate spits in the face of some of the promises. Ron Paul, much like he has done in Congress, would be a veto king with these issues. And you can argue until the cows come how as to whether or not it would be satisfactory to stay where we are with the hope of Paul making some beneficial changes, which he is guaranteed to make, while preventing further harm - or we can allow Obama and Romney to continue with the same path of fundamental harm and accepting the whims of everything Congress comes to pass.

As I said before, I would much rather see an end to the war and a halt in furthering the fiscal crisis and hurting our liberties and THAT'S IT - then to see more liberties taken away, war continue, and continued fumbling over ridiculous financial woes that our government is too afraid to face head on.




There will be no "Libertarian Dictatorship". The two words together struggle to not be an oxymoron in and of themselves. Quite simply, there will be very little progress to start and maybe, if the American people LIKE what they see - when mid term elections come they will elect in a congress that will very realistically be able to help pass some of the legislation that you deem "impossible" right now. Do remember, those Senators and Representatives get cycled out every now and then, and when they do - things tend to change dramatically for whomever is in office.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


And as for your comment "forcing his vision around the world".

Ron Paul is a non-interventionist. I don't even know where this idea stems from. Reading his book "The Revolution", he states that he doesn't want anything to do with the politics of other nations around the world and he is also not fond of the UN at all.

And once again, the vision is not being "forced" on anyone. You can only open the cage doors for the prisoners. You can't force them to leave. Let them sleep in the cell the rest of their lives with the world in front of them.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
bravo, you said a mouthful my friend.

how is he going to get rid of the IRS and the income tax in this economy ?

he'd put millions of people into foreclosure and end the economy as we know it. soooooooo many families are on the brink that just paying for medications they were getting through medicare would put them over the edge. and there are low income folks paying very little in taxes , if not downright nothing, so they would not benefit from the income tax being eliminated. so who would ? hmmmmmm......

ron paulites reply with : "freedom !!!"

it's sad in a way, the cult of personality surrounding him

good post, his supporters answer questions for details with typical campaign slogans

his campaign slogan should be : "lets end the income tax for doctors, who cares if you parents will have to choose between their meds and food"

he's no different than any other politician



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
i ifnd it facinating that the OP says that Obama doesn't care about the youth...only ron paul does...really...would ron paul have tried to keep the low interest rate on government school loans, in which the republicans in the senate just voted to double? would ron paul have extended parents medical coverage for their kids up to the age of 26, in which the republicans voted against?
this ron paul love fest needs to end, with a deeper examination of the details regarding his implied policies. in other words, the grass is not always greener on the other side.
edit on 10-5-2012 by jimmyx because: added info



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
No, he does have plans.

Some things will be able to be carried out by executive order and some things will only be possible if he can garner the support of the House and Senate. But he has plans.

Such as:

Investigate the Federal Reserve, bring troops home, stop paying foreign countries to be our "buddies" when they actually hate us. Make people be responsible for their bad decisions...or allow them to bask in the rewards of "good" decisions. Return citizen and civil legislation to the states...up to and including...legalization of drugs, legal drinking ages, gay rights and the ability to marry, etc.

The fed does not need to be involved in these things as it creates a gigantic and impotent bureaucracy that bleeds tax revenues from the coffers and rarely accomplishes anything productive.

You keep talking about "How irritating" those of us that support Ron Paul are. Not all of us are fanatics and as I have explained to you before, some of us don't agree with everything he has to say. But there are some of the things he says that are just obvious common sense and yet no one else was talking about them or relaying their importance.

Not all of his platform will be supported, those of us capable of rational thought know this. What we also know is that we must make a hard and focused effort to return to the basic principles of the Constitution. it is what defines us and it is what allowed us to grow and prosper.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
i ifnd it facinating that the OP says that Obama doesn't care about the youth...only ron paul does...really...would ron paul have tried to keep the low interest rate on government school loans, in which the republicans in the senate just voted to double? would ron paul have extended parents medical coverage for their kids up to the age of 26, in which the republicans voted against?
this ron paul love fest needs to end, with a deeper examination of the details regarding his implied policies. in other words, the grass is not always greener on the other side.
edit on 10-5-2012 by jimmyx because: added info


I said the youth loved obama, not that Obama loved the youth. They are different! But I agree with your post.



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by gwydionblack
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


And as for your comment "forcing his vision around the world".

Ron Paul is a non-interventionist. I don't even know where this idea stems from. Reading his book "The Revolution", he states that he doesn't want anything to do with the politics of other nations around the world and he is also not fond of the UN at all.

And once again, the vision is not being "forced" on anyone. You can only open the cage doors for the prisoners. You can't force them to leave. Let them sleep in the cell the rest of their lives with the world in front of them.


But that's where Ron Paul people are really wrong. We are not leaving the UN. To do so, would break various international laws, military laws, and dangerous for America. We are a global society thanks to globalization. Forcing America to not care about anybody, is still forcing people and its a far cry from freedom!



posted on May, 10 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damrod
No, he does have plans.

Some things will be able to be carried out by executive order and some things will only be possible if he can garner the support of the House and Senate. But he has plans.


Haha I know what his plans are believe you me. How will he effectively gain support of the congress when no one there likes him now? "Without putting them all in a room and telling them you better vote for my ideas or else." As one ATS poster told me he should do. Sure, government is corrupt, but that isn't going to change much. And Ron Paul probably has morals to not do that anyway.





top topics
 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join