Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
C-Pac
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 692051" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>D,</p><p></p><p>As for having a "PR" problem, no arguement in many respects and some of the things you say are at the heart of it. As for embracing the "right-wing fringe" it is also equally true that some "left wing fringe" was attracted to Paul as well. In fact, between Bush's 8 years and Paul 08' run a bridge between the so-called "non Statist left" and "non Statist right" has been building and although they have their arguements, they agree in varying non state solutions going forward. Even supporting and voting for Ron Paul is a big debate topic among so-called libertarians as more and more libertarians via Murray Rothbard are discovering folks like Proudhon, Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner who in some cases like Proudhon had a big influence on Marx (as did John Locke and Adam Smith) and let's not forget, perfect Marxism dissolves the State as well so the endgame of libertarian/anarchists, libertarian/left, libertarian/socialist and the libertarian Anarcho/capitialist all want to dissolve the state. Why then should we work in any way to support a repair to the State when the whole idea is to completely dissolve it? Also if you take the non-aggression axiom (see wikipedia Non-aggression principle) to it's conclusion, elective politics is a violation to that belief.</p><p></p><p>Lew Rockwell was just recently interviewed by <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20131207183328/http://thedailybell.com/830/Lew-Rockwell-Ludwig-von-Mises-Ron-Paul-Free-Markets.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">The Daily Bell</span></a> and I won't pretend you'll agree with his comments in this broad Q&A but I do think you'll get a perspective across a broad spectrum and specifically about Ron Paul and what his political effort is about. I think his goal in this case was achieved in 2008' and therefore a run in 2012' IMO is not the right way to go unless the true motive has now become something else. I therefore oppose such efforts going forward. The afterthoughts at the end are also interesting too so give them some consideration.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 692051, member: 2189"] D, As for having a "PR" problem, no arguement in many respects and some of the things you say are at the heart of it. As for embracing the "right-wing fringe" it is also equally true that some "left wing fringe" was attracted to Paul as well. In fact, between Bush's 8 years and Paul 08' run a bridge between the so-called "non Statist left" and "non Statist right" has been building and although they have their arguements, they agree in varying non state solutions going forward. Even supporting and voting for Ron Paul is a big debate topic among so-called libertarians as more and more libertarians via Murray Rothbard are discovering folks like Proudhon, Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner who in some cases like Proudhon had a big influence on Marx (as did John Locke and Adam Smith) and let's not forget, perfect Marxism dissolves the State as well so the endgame of libertarian/anarchists, libertarian/left, libertarian/socialist and the libertarian Anarcho/capitialist all want to dissolve the state. Why then should we work in any way to support a repair to the State when the whole idea is to completely dissolve it? Also if you take the non-aggression axiom (see wikipedia Non-aggression principle) to it's conclusion, elective politics is a violation to that belief. Lew Rockwell was just recently interviewed by [URL='https://web.archive.org/web/20131207183328/http://thedailybell.com/830/Lew-Rockwell-Ludwig-von-Mises-Ron-Paul-Free-Markets.html'][COLOR=red]The Daily Bell[/COLOR][/URL] and I won't pretend you'll agree with his comments in this broad Q&A but I do think you'll get a perspective across a broad spectrum and specifically about Ron Paul and what his political effort is about. I think his goal in this case was achieved in 2008' and therefore a run in 2012' IMO is not the right way to go unless the true motive has now become something else. I therefore oppose such efforts going forward. The afterthoughts at the end are also interesting too so give them some consideration. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
C-Pac
Top