Ron Paul and Invisible Lines Drawn by Government Thugs

liberty student:

ryanpatgray:

The term "neocon" means different things to different people. What positions do they take that you disagree with?

You're right.  I should have said, globalist.  http://www.fraserinstitute.org/Commerce.web/publication_details.aspx?pubID=2512

Btw, the Fraser is a beautiful river.  Majestic.

 

The irony is that the Luny is now worth more than the Buck. But, I'd like to play the role of Devil's advocate for a moment. Note: This is just for discussion. If the NAFTA member countries formed a monetary union like the "Euro" would that not make it harder for the member countries to "print" their way out of debt? Just asking. I am not saying I support this but it is something to consider.

ryanpatgray:

The irony is that the Luny is now worth more than the Buck. But, I'd like to play the role of Devil's advocate for a moment. Note: This is just for discussion. If the NAFTA member countries formed a monetary union like the "Euro" would that not make it harder for the member countries to "print" their way out of debt? Just asking. I am not saying I support this but it is something to consider.

I'm partial to the Twoonie myself.  :)

I understand you are playing Devil's advocate, but the idea of a super FED sickens me.  I think libertarians are too-US centric, and really missing the boat on the larger statist plan to form global unions, and to eliminate democracy all together, as everything is done by technocrats and bankers.  While we have "states" we can hope for anarchy, a super global state, or series of super-global collaborative unions would absolutely crush any anarchy and restore a statist order.

Not to mention, I oppose government currencies.  In Canada, technically, we OWN our FED.  The Bank of Canada is owned by the government, although it was not always so.  I cannot imagine that the US FED would merge with the Bank of Canada, and allow for public ownership and accountability.

 

Byzantine:

If you have immigration in the context of welfare, public roads, public education, birthright citizenship, and anti-discrimination laws, then that is what you are doing.

The only one of those things the Reason Foundation supports is birthright citizenship.

Byzantine:

Back at ya.  Let me know about all those libertarians crossing the Rio Grande, holding their Spanish editions of Human Action aloft to keep them dry.

http://www.hacer.org/

Byzantine:

Window dressing for political purposes. The government continues to pursue a policy of mass, indiscriminate immigration and weak border enforcement.

So no one is actually getting deported? So there have not actually been raids on farms and factories? Hmm, they must be spending one hell of a lot of money on this "window dressing". 

Byzantine:

Do you seriously contend that there has been LESS immigration post-1965?

Do you seriously think Latin American countries have had fewer laws that strangle their economies post-1965?

Byzantine:

Roger Pilon's disingenuous letter is here:  http://www.reason.com/news/show/120946.html.

So apparently you did not read the actual letter. Two points: 1. This was something that, in the journalism business, they call a LETTER TO THE EDITOR. and 2. Near the end of the letter it contains the following:

Roger Pilon:

Free marketers like myself have urged lifting the ban universally, or at least with regard to the developed world.

Byzantine:

Then I guess you'll be stuck with all the liberal white people, wandering around with no place to go.

So your definition of "liberal" is "not racist or xenophobic"? This speaks volumes.

 

liberty student:

Of course you would say that.  You don't produce or pay taxes.  It's easy for you to give away that which is not yours.

Of course I don't pay or produce taxes. Hence the Agorism.

 

By the way, my parents don't either, so... Nah, nah on that bollix.

liberty student:

I'm talking about income and payroll taxes.

 

You want people to pay those thus sustaining the government?

liberty student:

No, if production paid for welfare, then libertarianism wouldn't be able to mount an economic defense against the state.  Really, you're being goofy now and pulling #s out of your behind like you tried to do in the Agorism thread.  Spare us the BS.

What? Production does not create wealth? 

liberty student:

How so?

 

Race traitor is pretty self-explanatory.

liberty student:

What land have they homesteaded?  They are migrant workers.  Employees.  Again, you said Paul had completely turned them off.  Where is proof of that statement?

Many own property. They've bought that property through contract. Many more work side jobs individually. Some run drugs. Some cultivate their own produce - many are farmers. Given that I don't believe most large companies legitimately own their property, the ones that work in their stores own them.

 

Paul has completely turned off Hispanics by taking a position that is anti-hispanic. When talking about immigration the issue is hispanic immigration. A friend of mine who is an "illegal" immigrant from Serbia is never bothered because he's... guess it, white.

 

Proof? I don't believe in such a thing. Evidence, however, there is plenty of. If an issue effects hispanics negatively, it is likely that they will dislike policy that causes negative effects on them.

 

Byzantine:

 

Well, the next time you rail about racist white Americans, spare a thought for the fact that the mestizos and indigenous peoples are clamoring to live in the US with me than under the Spanish-descended ruling class down there.

Believe me, B. No one wants to live with you.

LibertyStudent:

I do not believe this is nonsense. I do believe that border security is lax and ineffective, and anyone can cross the border unannounced, and unrestricted if they want to.

Too bad that's not true. Immigration is outlawed, just like drugs. Which means there's a black market for immigration, just like for drugs. To describe the situation as 'open borders' is incorrect.

Again, I can't speak for Paul if he supports the use of violence.

Well, how will the paleocons enforce their restrictions on immigration, if it's not using guns ?

Do I think state officials can lawfully use violence? Yes. They write and define the laws. I don't like it, but they do.

I used the wrong word. Of course they can write any 'law' to grant themselves immunity. But that's merely positive legislation.

Are you going to drop everything and place your soft mellon between an innocent immigrant and the policeman's baton?

I won't go that far. But at least I won't advocate the restriction of immigration based on phony economic 'theories' about welfare. And if I 'sell' a system, I'll try to make it sound as consistent as possible.

liberty student:

I think libertarians are too-US centric, and really missing the boat on the larger statist plan to form global unions, and to eliminate democracy all together, as everything is done by technocrats and bankers.  While we have "states" we can hope for anarchy, a super global state, or series of super-global collaborative unions would absolutely crush any anarchy and restore a statist order.

I do not know if such an organization exists in Canada but in the United States there is an organization called the John Birch Society, they are concered about that issue. Their membership is mostly what one might call "far right" but there are a few libertarian members.

liberty student:

Not to mention, I oppose government currencies.

On this we agree.

ryanpatgray:

I do not know if such an organization exists in Canada but in the United States there is an organization called the John Birch Society, they are concered about that issue. Their membership is mostly what one might call "far right" but there are a few libertarian members.

I know all about the Birchers.  Some lose the plot and get a little out there, but I do believe the threat they are concerned with (global super government) is real.  You only have to follow what has happened with the EU, in it's inception and now the issues arising from it, then look at the African Union with their AFRO, talks of a NAU, with the Amero and just recently an Australian friend of mine was mentioning there is serious talk of an Asian or Pan-Pacific Union.

We can bicker and argue, complain and defend Ron Paul, but the statists don't get hung up on minor details, they aren't worried about ideological purity, mythical techniques, or classification of every minor deviation in philosophy.  They just keep amassing wealth, power and marching towards their goals, generation after generation.  That is why liberty has gotten scarcer and scarcer.  The liberty oriented folk are not long term planners, they aren't collaborative and they are predisposed to limit their actions in the now, at the expense of the later.

For example, Juan has been on my case about the NAP and borders.  Well, what if closing the border, and violating the NAP would later create a massive advance towards liberty?  Would libertarians do it?  That is essentially the reason we have non-confrontational strategies like the Liberty Colony or Agorism.  We don't want to participate in politics because it reinforces the notion of legitimacy, and yet as Plato wrote, if you don't involve yourself in politics, you risk being ruled by lesser men, which I wholeheartedly believe.

It's very frustrating.  I have to finish arranging my personal affairs in a manner conducive to allowing me to take risks and to try different strategies.  Maybe I will run for office.  Maybe I will become an educator.  Maybe I will join the Liberty Colony.  Maybe I will tax resist and practice Agorism for real, possibly going to jail.  I don't know at this point.  I only know that talking, is getting us nowhere, while our enemies (those who want perpetual statism and total human slavery) never stop to rest.  And they have no morals or ethics to get hung up on.  Violence at the border?  HA!  They'd murder a million and not think twice about it.

 

liberty student:

Maybe I will join the Liberty Colony.  Maybe I will tax resist and practice Agorism for real, possibly going to jail.  I don't know at this point.  I only know that talking, is getting us nowhere, while our enemies (those who want perpetual statism and total human slavery) never stop to rest.  And they have no morals or ethics to get hung up on.  Violence at the border?  HA!  They'd murder a million and not think twice about it.

The Free State Project is less risky than Liberty Colony IMHO. http://www.freestateproject.org/

I'm not trying to re-arrange my life so I can do something low risk.  I think the FSP is a joke, and besides, who the hell wants to immigrate to an emerging police state?  Your country is seriously screwed up, not that mine isn't, but in Canada, people are complacent and docile, not stupid.  A lot of the rank and file, Joe Publics in the US actually think a Russian invasion of Georgia means that Putin has come for your peaches.  That's really damn sad.

What attracts me to the LC, is that if you can try it, and live, even if it collapses, you can learn a lot, and you can gain a lot of attention for the effort.  I'm talking about at worst, being able to lecture, interview and write about it, and if it works, even for a shortwhile, wow, there is so much Libertarians can learn, so many people might be inspired, it's like a Ron Paul campaign.  Big risk, big reward.

So, nothing ventured, nothing gained in my opinion.  I want to interact with people, not get a degree or 4 and write books and have an academic blog.  I respect some of the people who do that, but it's not enough for all of us to blog and write articles, to discuss on liberty oriented message boards.  We're kidding ourselves if we think that is going to get it done.

liberty student:

I want to interact with people, not get a degree or 4 and write books and have an academic blog.  I respect some of the people who do that, but it's not enough for all of us to blog and write articles, to discuss on liberty oriented message boards.  We're kidding ourselves if we think that is going to get it done.

The point of the Free State Project is that New Hampshire (one of the smallest of U.S. States) is small enough that if a large number of people move there they will BE ABLE to interact with one another. Moving a large number of people to a small state has a number of advantages. For one, many different experiments can be tried at once and we can figure out which ones work and which ones don't. Are acts of civil disobedience more effective than handing out ISIL pamphlets? Does running for office generate more support for liberty than demonstrating about an issue? Do people respond better to arguments from the left or arguments from the right? There is so much that we can learn from. I want to STOP the U.S. from becoming a police state and the way representation works in the U.S. gives small population states a per-capita advantage in terms of representation. For example, in the U.S. Senate all states, regardless of population have 2 U.S. Senators. A big impact could be made in a small area. And if you are a non-voter you are welcome too. The main idea is to get lots of libertarians in a small area so that we can exchange ideas, work together and learn from one another.

 

Liberty student... You are cool.. I really hear you. I am in my mid 30's. I have some very intelligent, well educated colleagues in my field. However, I am frustrated by a an overall lack of willingness - among many of them - to discuss (at the very least through articles/emails) these tough philosphical issues that we have been focusing on in these forums. The talk right now at my work place is about how it willl be so awesome when the democrats recapture the American throne in November. But the democrats seem to be as anti liberty as the republicans. For example, with the next democratic administration we may get more fair cocaine sentencing laws. But that is all we will get in terms of "improved" drug law policy! I want an end to the drug war. I do not want these peanuts and crumbs from our U.S. monarchy.

I wrote a long reply, and scrapped it.  The FSP might be for you, it's not for me.  I wish you the best of luck with everything you try to do.  Your forum idea in your signature field clued me in that you're a doer and a thinker.

liberty student:

I wrote a long reply, and scrapped it.  The FSP might be for you, it's not for me.  I wish you the best of luck with everything you try to do.  Your forum idea in your signature field clued me in that you're a doer and a thinker.

 

Thank you, I wish you the best of luck with what you try. Perhaps the two organizations can learn from each other as well. We need to try many expirements and find out what works and what does not.

Thanks for the compliment, not sure it is deserved.  

Yes, both parties are a joke.  In fact, the 3rd parties are also jokes.  You're starting to get it.  They all collude to rape the citizenry through taxation and to dominate them through legislation.  For every "good politician" who means well, you have 30 or 40 total sellouts to humanity.

Ryan, just so we're clear, I didn't say you shouldn't criticize Paul's positions, and I thought I made it clear I disagreed with him on several issues.  I just think he does more good than harm, which you can't say about most of the politicians.  Obviously Nic would disagree on that, and I honestly hadn't thought of latinos as a strong base for libertarian ideas before, so I'll be thinking about it. 

From the HACER website:  "Lacking traditions that consistently uphold the rule of law, the free society remains a work-in-progress throughout the Spanish-speaking countries of the Western hemisphere."  Also, by your own admission, Latin American countries continue to pursue socialist policies.

Byzantine:

From the HACER website:  "Lacking traditions that consistently uphold the rule of law, the free society remains a work-in-progress throughout the Spanish-speaking countries of the Western hemisphere."  Also, by your own admission, Latin American countries continue to pursue socialist policies.

Oddly enough, LewRockwell.com had something today that is very applicable here.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022320.html

One-fifth of adult Americans still believe in government by consent, i.e., the right of secession, according to a Zogby/Middlebury Institute poll. The highest percentage of believers in peaceful secession was among Hispanics (43%) and African-Americans (40%).

Interestingly, the more time one spends in government schools (which is to say, all but a small handful in the entire country)the less likely one is to support government by consent. The unspoken corollary here is that if the people do not have the right to secede, then the state assumes the "right" to invade, murder, and destroy them and their state, all the while calling it "the glory of the coming of the Lord" or some other Lincolnite slogan.

 

Stolz2525:

One-fifth of adult Americans still believe in government by consent, i.e., the right of secession, according to a Zogby/Middlebury Institute poll. The highest percentage of believers in peaceful secession was among Hispanics (43%) and African-Americans (40%

The poll reflects the ethnic loyalties of the respondents.  The US government and electorate is dominated by whites, and so they perceive their self-interest in the preservation of this polity.  Hispanics and African-Americans see themselves as on the outs with the US government, and thus would be more willing to transfer their loyalties to their own ethnic nations.  After all, Hispanics aren't coming here to pay Social Security for a bunch of stupid white people who can't reproduce themselves, and African-Americans remain eternally and bitterly resentful of the white-dominated US polity.

These are the centrifugal forces that will bring the American Experiment to its end.  The trend worldwide is dissolution of the market-states along ethnic and cultural lines, and the US is no more immune to this trend than was the old USSR.

liberty student:

I'm not trying to re-arrange my life so I can do something low risk.  I think the FSP is a joke, and besides, who the hell wants to immigrate to an emerging police state?  Your country is seriously screwed up, not that mine isn't, but in Canada, people are complacent and docile, not stupid.  A lot of the rank and file, Joe Publics in the US actually think a Russian invasion of Georgia means that Putin has come for your peaches.  That's really damn sad.

What attracts me to the LC, is that if you can try it, and live, even if it collapses, you can learn a lot, and you can gain a lot of attention for the effort.  I'm talking about at worst, being able to lecture, interview and write about it, and if it works, even for a shortwhile, wow, there is so much Libertarians can learn, so many people might be inspired, it's like a Ron Paul campaign.  Big risk, big reward.

So, nothing ventured, nothing gained in my opinion.  I want to interact with people, not get a degree or 4 and write books and have an academic blog.  I respect some of the people who do that, but it's not enough for all of us to blog and write articles, to discuss on liberty oriented message boards.  We're kidding ourselves if we think that is going to get it done.

Please! Do the koolaid thing! It will give everyone on this forum a break from having to see your avatar pop up.