The U.S. Goverment

[jorb]

I am agreeing with you when it comes to the fact that the world is a mysterious place and that it's bad to assume that you know everything there is to know. However, when someone doesn't abide by the rules of inquiry that goes along with reality (e.g. someone who claims to know something because the Sun God told him about it) and you know that you have followed the proper rules of inquiry, shouldn't you blow your own horn as loud as possible to make it clear that your competence is better than the other person's ignorance?

The point being precisely that I do not always know that I have, in fact, followed "the rules of inquiry". It is not certain that such rules even exist, or, if they do, precisely what they are or how they are best formulated, or how conclusions drawn by following them should best be expressed. Even foul-mouthed people sometimes make a lot of sense. If I do not like the way someone talks, I always have the option to refrain from talking with him.

I would also like to make the point that if one is to engage in a debate, it is often more constructive to not be as assertive as one could perhaps be. If you try to force people into agreeing with you by hitting them over the head with your arguments, they will often respond by shutting down completely and remove any chance of a meaningful exchange of ideas.

Thereby not implying that I always follow said advice.

[ArvinJA]

But you can't be in Ron's posse if you don't have a high horse.

Ron Paul is the only one of the candidates who is even remotely capable of speaking with even an ounce of humility in his voice. Like any sane person I do not give much for his fan-club and the enthusiasm (in the worst, most religious sense of that word) of the same, but the man himself is a paragon of humility compared to the others.

Really? You applaud the man but not those who highlight his importance? People are enthusiastic about him for a reason and they have all right to be. He's the only politician who calls the establishment out on their BS and wants to give liberty back to the people. You don't think he deserves the appreciation he's getting? Some of the people who support him are people who have first-hand experience with the horrors of war, for them what he's talking about isn't just abstract concepts, but it is of real import to them. His following shouldn't be dismissed and I am proud to be a Ron Paul junkie, because that means I actually care about the success of the man fighting hardest to stop World War 3.

[jorb]

Really? You applaud the man but not those who highlight his importance? People are enthusiastic about him for a reason and they have all right to be.

I can understand the excitement, but political enthusiasm generally scares me. I believe him to be a good guy, but, really, no politician deserves to be hailed as the second coming of Christ, because all politics is bad. The spectacle that is democratic elections is generally quite nauseating, and also serves as an important reminder as to why the American founding fathers never intended the presidential election to be democratic in the first place.

[ArvinJA]

Really? You applaud the man but not those who highlight his importance? People are enthusiastic about him for a reason and they have all right to be.

I can understand the excitement, but political enthusiasm generally scares me. I believe him to be a good guy, but, really, no politician deserves to be hailed as the second coming of Christ, because all politics is bad. The spectacle that is democratic elections is generally quite nauseating, and also serves as an important reminder as to why the American founding fathers never intended the presidential election to be democratic in the first place.

I hate politics as well, but I feel like that sentiment is shared by most of RP's supporters, they named it the "Ron Paul Revolution" after all. Also, people are very skeptical of the whole thing and most people see RP as a messenger of liberty first, a politician second. Do you really think people who donated money to him last election thought they'd get him elected? No, this is about ideas and that's why people are excited, because finally there is a man who's standing up for liberty.

[jorb]

WoT

So, if I am to distill what you wrote it'd go something like this.

Ron Paul is bat-shit crazy because:

1) He supports people who stand up to the IRS. Even if they do so by violent means. Do you consider obedience to government a moral imperative?

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

Because that seems rather unpatriotic.

2) He is concerned about the transfer of power from national governments to centralized, anonymous world bureaucracies hidden behind fancy acronyms like UN, WTO, EU or NAFTA. These organizations make perfect sense to you, and you are unconcerned about extending their mandates?

3) Some finer point about the tax code. (I could mention, in passing, that a sales tax is a tax on consumption, which I spontaneously find more convincing than a tax on production, and I vehemently oppose progressive income taxes, because there is no surer way of wedding the poor to their poverty than a progressive income tax.)

4) The ghost of right-wings past.

I don't believe that it can be properly considered a right to get married, adopt children or serve in the military. I don't think the government should be in the business of running schools in the first place, so school prayers is a complete non-issue for me. Also, it is worth noticing that -- whatever views Paul may hold for himself personally -- his agenda is not to enforce mandatory prayer on everyone, but rather to leave that decision to the people actually running the school. To the extent that I give a hoot about Roe v. Wade....

If we set aside the merits of the abortion issue itself, Roe v. Wade stands as an especially clear case of the Court's imposing a novel minority agenda, a liberal fad, under the pretense of pursuing the intimations of the Constitution itself. I repeat: constitutional objections were practically never hear in America until the advocates of legal abortion decided on the strategy of smuggling their cause into law via the judiciary.

http://www.wildwestcycle.com/f_pensees.htm

I shall only refer you to the same text I just quoted.

Generally, Paul's views on these "life-style issues" seems to quite consistently be that the people affected by the decisions should be the ones making them. I agree with that sentiment. All in all I do not really find that the things you bring up are quite enough to qualify anyone as "bat-shit crazy". A proud citoyen of the European super-state, I myself am just as concerned about, for example, the centralization of power to anonymous, unchecked power-conglomerates as Doctor Paul is.

With regards to the whole race-issue nonsense -- and I hate myself for posting this... vulgarly democratic piece of propaganda -- I quite simply do not believe that he is much of a racist.

On the whole, though, all that crap pales in comparison to the fact that Ron Paul is the only candidate who actually wants to balance the budget, and actually uphold his oath of office. There is *one* issue in the upcoming election, and it is, will always be and remain, the budget. If you do not slash spending dramatically and balance the federal budget there will soon not be any schools left for you to not pray in, nor any army for any homosexuals to serve in.

[jorb]

Stuff

I'm skeptical of idolatry, and some people in his fan-club are quite obviously engaging in precisely that. Not all, not everyone, but a loud and vocal minority at the very least. I would be much more convinced if they held silent vigils mourning the Republic, sound money or the constitution. All the screaming and yelling makes my head hurt.

EDIT: I have a hard time falling in with herds, quite simply.

[Vigilance]

goddamn jorb, you really like our politics don't you?

[Tonkyhonk]

gah, i only had time to read some of the posts before work >.< loving WoTs, will get back to them later.

RuPaul to Republicans - don't be a drag
^ this was the first hit when i searched for "Ron Paul" lol

[ArvinJA]

WoT

You use harsh language but at least you make an effort to back it up, you've gained my respect.
I know your WoT was directed at Jorb, but I feel like he didn't answer everything, so I will try to add what I can.

1) Jorb explained this. If you're a libertarian you believe that taxation theft, most libertarians defend the right to self-defense, then it would be logical to defend those who defend their rightful property against aggressors. If you have a problem with this you should attack the ethical system (NAP) that the assessment is based upon.

2) I don't know enough about this to neither neglect it nor defend it, what I do know is that all big empires tend to more and more centralization of power. It might be a wacky conspiracy theory, it might not be, I don't think we should be so fast to draw any conclusions.

3) Well to Ron Paul income tax implies that the government has a higher claim to the fruit of your labor than you do. There's also another problem with income tax and that is due process. It's virtually impossible to have effective enforcement of an income tax system and still have due process. If the burden of proof when it comes to tax cases was on the government, collecting taxes would quickly become very inefficient and costly. This might not seem like a big problem until you get hit in the face with a tax case (even if you're innocent you will probably lose, because the burden of proof is on you and your assets will be frozen pending trial). Fair point about the VAT, a tax on consumption does hurt the poor the most. Finding a good way of taxing people is unfortunately very hard, and I think it might be impossible, that's why I'm one of those trendy and hip anarcho-capitalists, because however you tax people, it's still immoral.

4) Don't buy what the media tells you about this. Yes, he did publish some newsletters that contained some racially insensitive content. However, the quotes you are using belong to James B. Powell (who now works for Forbes) and was published at a time where a lot of similar things were written. However, those things were vile and disgusting and Ron Paul really did a poor job of managing those newsletters. My personal theory is that he put too much trust in Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, who at the time had an idea of a "paleo coalition" where they would win the hearts and minds of the Pat Buchanan people. It turned out to be a big mistake, and I think most people involved realized that before Rothbard died (Rothbard included, but perhaps not Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who loftar and jorb seem to really like, lol). Anyway, Lew Rockwell was the guy in charge of those newsletters and Ron Paul was busy working as an MD, Lew fucked up, but it's old news and I forgive him, even if I wished he was a bit more cosmopolitan.

[WarpedWiseMan]

So what I now understand about jorb is that violence is acceptable as long as it supports your demented political beliefs.

He believes in a crazy conspiracy to make North America a single hodge-podge entity.

He believes that the rich deserve to keep their money and the poor should pay more in taxes. (I'm strangely okay with that one)

I can respect the fact that you don't subscribe to the PC of today's world, jorb, and I agree with quite a bit of what Paul says, but these are not his only crossings into the land of make believe. Ron Paul is a nutty fucker.

Along with all the penises in the artwork of the game these new revelations have forced me to form the following new hypothesis about the devs: They are honey badgers!