[quote]Beowolf wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Do I think he is in any way shape or form sane or in his mind? Hell… fucking… no.
Why? If he’s out of his mind then who in this race can we consider sane?
All of the republicans except Paul want to continue exerting our military presence around the globe (insane in my book). All of the democrats want universal managed health care (which is beyond insane). Who do we have left to choose from?
I never said any of the other candidates were sane, but I wouldn’t want a bunch of Ron Paul’s in congress + the presidency. They’d cut our government into shreds. The guy doesn’t just want out of Iraq, he wants out of everything. Anything starting with the work “Department” would be disbanded.
The man’s an intellectual, no doubt, but he’s a statist to the extreme. The reason I think he’d make a good President, is that he’d be limited in his radical movements, and would at least set the US on a less ‘war setting’ path.[/quote]
It’s called “libertarianism”. Or, traditional conservatism. It comprises a relatively small but dedicated faction of the political right which has existed for decades. At one point in time, it was the prevailing ideology on the right.
It always amazes me how someone’s views are separated from his ideology in order to attack his person. That just isn’t proper form.
If you call Ron Paul a nut because of what he wants to do, then that statement must be logically extended to all traditional conservatives, and consequentially, you taken upon yourself the massive burden of proof that comes with such a claim.
You don’t really believe him to be a statist, do you? I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt and assume that “anti-statist” was your intended choice of wording. If that was the case, you’d be totally correct.
You’re right, he doesn’t just want us out of Iraq. He does, indeed, want us out of “everything”. That’s what separates him from the pretenders. You have the privilege of choosing between statism and minarchism. However, you don’t have the ability to pick your preferred form of statism.
That’s because you lack the influence of powerful lobbying groups and corporations. Under statism, the factions with the most power and money exert the most influence on the system, and that will never be you or me (Harry Browne explained this first).
Nobody openly advocates increasing the size and scope of federal government (using those terms, at any rate). Small government is somewhat of a mom-and-apple-pie issue. So, why don’t libertarians fare better in elections? It’s a question that has been pondered many times. The answer is simple: consistency.
While most people can identify with the libertarianism on a limited basis, they also have certain government programs which they would not be willing to go without. Basically, they support reducing the government insomuch as it wouldn’t affect them. They want to cut other people’s pet projects, not their own. That is the nature of the hypocrisy which underlies the entire political system.
Only libertarians are consistent in their opposition to statism across the board. That’s precisely the reason why they are deemed “moonbats” by the ignorant and malicious alike.
Just think:
There are special interest groups in this country who benefit from the Iraq war and other military interventions, from the War on Poverty, the War on Drugs, the FDA, business subsidies, and every other government program on the books. In each case, somebody is benefiting from that program and probably has a lot of wealth tied into it.
It is in that person or group’s best interest to do whatever they can to ensure the continuation of their pet program.
So, you don’t like the Iraq War? Too bad. Halliburton and Blackwater are just as American as you, and they like it just fine. Why should anyone in the government listen to your opinion over theirs? They have power, while you are a nobody to them.
Statism inevitably turns into corporatism. Most people can see that that’s where we’re headed now. Unfortunately, the widespread notion propagated by the left (to which the right wing establishment offers no rebuttal) is that this system is the result of unbridled capitalism and the free market. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Laissez-faire and free markets are the antithesis of the corporatist system. Corporations can do no harm unless and until they are empowered by the government.