Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher (who were only rhetorically neo-liberal but not in practice) have become the perfect boogeymen for leftist types in their arguments against the failures of "free market capitalism" and "neo-liberalist policies" which never existed in the first place.
I fear this will happen with Ron Paul if he ends up having to veto all his proposed bills due to congress ruining them.
I feel like a purging event is coming and, to me, being there on the other side to influence the future is almost a greater incentive to make it than mere self-preservation.
You and I see eye to eye on a lot of things. I really hope that more people like you make it through the oncoming storm than others.
the left lib talking point isnt that wealth is bad, but wealth concentrated in the hands of a small minority. and im not against transport or markets., but against price system distortion.
What I am referring to is neither of those claims, but rather the idea that what is bad about government has its genesis in some aspect or other of "business" This is total bullshit. It contradicts both history and the actual mechanisms of even modern governments.
Awesome insight. I've heard Tom Woods make the same argument about the industrial revolution, and also extend it to outsourced labor in certain 3rd world countries.
Can't we all give em a chance tho even tho I a agree about the end part of begging to be saved by cult mentality, Almost y Satan type loyalty make no sense told need repent for others doing and most ask for more.
What do you find uncompelling about mutualist critiques of the industrial revolution? Ie that the reason the peasantry was wiling to work for cheap in factories was because their land was expropriated from them via things like the enclosure acts.
Also, yes people believe things because their opinions are rough copies of things they hear from second hand dealers of ideas. Have you ever read Hayek's essay "The Intellectuals and Socialism", or heard of "The Institute for Humane Studies"?
I don't deny that as a factor, but based on the knowledge I have it doesn't seem to explain the entirety of it. For instance, I am unaware of any large-scale closing/transfer of previously used land in North America during this time.
@blackacidlizzard True, the North American land grants were of mostly unused land (except by native americans, but thats basically impossible to figure out now). But there were large scale land grants to european aristocrats, land barons, and later on railroad barons. Charles Beard has written on this.
@nightpotato Maybe because their objections do not apply equally to the United States and their BS about roads being a subsidy for corporations is retarded. Roads benefit everyone. There is nothing parasitical about them.
And their reasons for why worker co-ops do not exist are completely uncompelling. Bankers being "baised" against the idea sounds like BS.
believing is seeing. Libertarianism and free markets are already being blamed even as bush and obama rule over us. If ron paul were to be elected it would ipso facto mean at least a large segment of the population understood, at least in part, his ideology. True many would still disagree, but if many millions understood reality, it will be basically impossible for scapgoating libertarianism even if the claim is made.
Does ron paul have access to a propoganda machine? Does he have an army of libertarian intellectuals and historical revisionists at his command capable of combating the present 'intellectual consensus'? Will people at the time say that Ron Paul's non intervention 'gave them hope' in the same way FDR's heavy intervention did?
I consider it more likely that the economic collapse will take much of the MSM media and college industrial complex along with it than ron paul winning the presidency AND enacting his platform.
Right. If Ron Paul slashed the state there would be riots in the streets. Therefore I'm the Right/Left Nietzschean Insurrectionist. Eh, kidding (sort of)
I will gladly know of the violence and chaos and hope I have sufficient supplies and skills by the time it comes. The masses will never choose anything even as nice as what we have now. I will not fight alongside the idiot scum. Let them die shouting empty slogans. I just hope they destroy society enough to give me some breathing room.
A lot of people tend to follow what is "popular". Ron Paul wins and you'll have many reconsidering their thoughts about what Govt is for.
Of course, they(disinformationists) can try to demonize Ron Paul all they want but wont be able to censor him as much, which is why Americans don't know much about him, because the man is highly censored. His message(Liberty) needs more exposure, running for pres does that, winning it, even more.
who cares if mises ideas gets blamed? not like anyone cares which ideology "destroys" america, hell both parties get blamed yet people vote for ether of themj
I've been trying to get the same thing across for years... On the list of importance, truth is actually pretty far down. What people believe is much more important than what is true. And what people believe is generally fed to them. Stories are powerful things, but you also need the means of convincing people they are true, or in other words, cultural hegemony.
What I disagree with is the sense of resignment & futility that comes across... Be merry in your heart!
Yeah it sounds like a big game to me. Basically the US government trying to put to rest all of the agorist, libertarian, mutualist, do it yourself mentalities. In the last few months i've had the feeling that ron paul acts just like obama in his efforts. Promise everything, do nothing.
How do you come to such a conclusion when he has not yet had the chance to do anything?
"Promise everything"
Not by my analysis. Paul's stated position on presidential power is much narrower than even my reading of the constitution.
There is only one reason to vote for Paul: his position on the use of the military. I use "only" in the same sense that desire is the "only" reason to keep living. (that is to say: "do you really need another reason?")
@blackacidlizzard Well...he has a classic view of the Constitution in which the President is more of a guiding hand not an active one in policies. Which is stated pretty black and white in the text of it. I personally agree with Ron Paul in his view especially on giving the 10th Amendment an actually function again since recently the State's have damn near no power excluding a few of the most basic things.
@blackacidlizzard Really? Cause from what I remember the Pres only has control of the Military and everything else falls under administrative duties not trying to argue just trying to understand
@AAAV92 I was skeptical till I saw some really old videos, and the only thing I could find in his position that changed was capital punishment. At first he was for it (only for those that fit the bill), but then later he went against because of the cost, efficiently, innocents convicted, and the incentive system is so perverted.
@BIackOp I understand he would be a pretty good bullshitter if he could keep it up for 20 years, but idk. I'll believe he's good when he actually does what he promises, but then i bet he'll either not get elected, or will be assassinated soon after his election.
Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher (who were only rhetorically neo-liberal but not in practice) have become the perfect boogeymen for leftist types in their arguments against the failures of "free market capitalism" and "neo-liberalist policies" which never existed in the first place.
I fear this will happen with Ron Paul if he ends up having to veto all his proposed bills due to congress ruining them.
DoctorCapitalist 2 months ago
I feel like a purging event is coming and, to me, being there on the other side to influence the future is almost a greater incentive to make it than mere self-preservation.
You and I see eye to eye on a lot of things. I really hope that more people like you make it through the oncoming storm than others.
KagarBeardtooth 4 months ago
I almost missed this vid.
Fucking favorited.
Morrakiu 4 months ago
but damn good ending
SpectacularNumanist 5 months ago
the left lib talking point isnt that wealth is bad, but wealth concentrated in the hands of a small minority. and im not against transport or markets., but against price system distortion.
SpectacularNumanist 5 months ago
@SpectacularNumanist
What I am referring to is neither of those claims, but rather the idea that what is bad about government has its genesis in some aspect or other of "business" This is total bullshit. It contradicts both history and the actual mechanisms of even modern governments.
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
Wow, BAL. Yet again, you have blown me away. I have missed your insights more so than others whom have disappeared or gone on hiatus.
I don't know about this, though: "watch everything I love about society...be wiped out". I don't disagree with this, but...
Is it REALLY so bad?!?
Or, if you prefer, is it so hopeless?
Clearly, these are entirely different questions, but, I believe, commonly rooted.
Cailwyn 5 months ago
@Cailwyn
My reading of the winds indicates they are not blowing in any direction I wish them to.
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
Awesome insight. I've heard Tom Woods make the same argument about the industrial revolution, and also extend it to outsourced labor in certain 3rd world countries.
machaeroguy 5 months ago
Can't we all give em a chance tho even tho I a agree about the end part of begging to be saved by cult mentality, Almost y Satan type loyalty make no sense told need repent for others doing and most ask for more.
CopyRightFreedom2012 5 months ago
Your videos are kick-ass.
Anon1696 5 months ago
What do you find uncompelling about mutualist critiques of the industrial revolution? Ie that the reason the peasantry was wiling to work for cheap in factories was because their land was expropriated from them via things like the enclosure acts.
Also, yes people believe things because their opinions are rough copies of things they hear from second hand dealers of ideas. Have you ever read Hayek's essay "The Intellectuals and Socialism", or heard of "The Institute for Humane Studies"?
nightpotato 5 months ago
@nightpotato
I don't deny that as a factor, but based on the knowledge I have it doesn't seem to explain the entirety of it. For instance, I am unaware of any large-scale closing/transfer of previously used land in North America during this time.
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard True, the North American land grants were of mostly unused land (except by native americans, but thats basically impossible to figure out now). But there were large scale land grants to european aristocrats, land barons, and later on railroad barons. Charles Beard has written on this.
nightpotato 4 months ago
Comment removed
DaveElectric 5 months ago
@nightpotato Maybe because their objections do not apply equally to the United States and their BS about roads being a subsidy for corporations is retarded. Roads benefit everyone. There is nothing parasitical about them.
And their reasons for why worker co-ops do not exist are completely uncompelling. Bankers being "baised" against the idea sounds like BS.
DaveElectric 5 months ago
@DaveElectric Dont you think that large quantities of heavy trucks wear down roads much more rapidly than cars?
The idea that banker bias is the reason that co-ops dont exist is something I've never heard out of any mutualist.
nightpotato 4 months ago
believing is seeing. Libertarianism and free markets are already being blamed even as bush and obama rule over us. If ron paul were to be elected it would ipso facto mean at least a large segment of the population understood, at least in part, his ideology. True many would still disagree, but if many millions understood reality, it will be basically impossible for scapgoating libertarianism even if the claim is made.
lengthyounarther 5 months ago
Does ron paul have access to a propoganda machine? Does he have an army of libertarian intellectuals and historical revisionists at his command capable of combating the present 'intellectual consensus'? Will people at the time say that Ron Paul's non intervention 'gave them hope' in the same way FDR's heavy intervention did?
I doubt it. '
Good video though btw.
Worldslargestipod 5 months ago
@Worldslargestipod
Exactly. Ron Paul could single-handedly create a virtual utopia and it would be held up as a horror-show of evil by the usual suspects.
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard
I consider it more likely that the economic collapse will take much of the MSM media and college industrial complex along with it than ron paul winning the presidency AND enacting his platform.
Worldslargestipod 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard
Right. If Ron Paul slashed the state there would be riots in the streets. Therefore I'm the Right/Left Nietzschean Insurrectionist. Eh, kidding (sort of)
RjWeapon 5 months ago
@RjWeapon
I will gladly know of the violence and chaos and hope I have sufficient supplies and skills by the time it comes. The masses will never choose anything even as nice as what we have now. I will not fight alongside the idiot scum. Let them die shouting empty slogans. I just hope they destroy society enough to give me some breathing room.
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard
"I just hope they destroy society enough to give me some breathing room."
They plan on taxing you for that breathing room.
RjWeapon 5 months ago
@RjWeapon
If they fuck shit up enough, they won't have the personnel to do it.
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
A lot of people tend to follow what is "popular". Ron Paul wins and you'll have many reconsidering their thoughts about what Govt is for.
Of course, they(disinformationists) can try to demonize Ron Paul all they want but wont be able to censor him as much, which is why Americans don't know much about him, because the man is highly censored. His message(Liberty) needs more exposure, running for pres does that, winning it, even more.
asperin 5 months ago
who cares if mises ideas gets blamed? not like anyone cares which ideology "destroys" america, hell both parties get blamed yet people vote for ether of themj
chorizo1337 5 months ago
I've been trying to get the same thing across for years... On the list of importance, truth is actually pretty far down. What people believe is much more important than what is true. And what people believe is generally fed to them. Stories are powerful things, but you also need the means of convincing people they are true, or in other words, cultural hegemony.
What I disagree with is the sense of resignment & futility that comes across... Be merry in your heart!
CeltoSaxonKnight 5 months ago
Good post, bro.
bweazel 5 months ago
Yeah it sounds like a big game to me. Basically the US government trying to put to rest all of the agorist, libertarian, mutualist, do it yourself mentalities. In the last few months i've had the feeling that ron paul acts just like obama in his efforts. Promise everything, do nothing.
AAAV92 5 months ago
@AAAV92
How do you come to such a conclusion when he has not yet had the chance to do anything?
"Promise everything"
Not by my analysis. Paul's stated position on presidential power is much narrower than even my reading of the constitution.
There is only one reason to vote for Paul: his position on the use of the military. I use "only" in the same sense that desire is the "only" reason to keep living. (that is to say: "do you really need another reason?")
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard Well...he has a classic view of the Constitution in which the President is more of a guiding hand not an active one in policies. Which is stated pretty black and white in the text of it. I personally agree with Ron Paul in his view especially on giving the 10th Amendment an actually function again since recently the State's have damn near no power excluding a few of the most basic things.
monkeywolf 5 months ago
@monkeywolf
By my reading, the president can issue direct orders to national enforcement agencies which prevent them from "doing their job"
blackacidlizzard 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard Really? Cause from what I remember the Pres only has control of the Military and everything else falls under administrative duties not trying to argue just trying to understand
monkeywolf 5 months ago
@blackacidlizzard I just figure he's gonna be no different. I could be wrong, but I'm skeptical regardless.
AAAV92 5 months ago
@AAAV92 I was skeptical till I saw some really old videos, and the only thing I could find in his position that changed was capital punishment. At first he was for it (only for those that fit the bill), but then later he went against because of the cost, efficiently, innocents convicted, and the incentive system is so perverted.
BIackOp 5 months ago
@BIackOp I understand he would be a pretty good bullshitter if he could keep it up for 20 years, but idk. I'll believe he's good when he actually does what he promises, but then i bet he'll either not get elected, or will be assassinated soon after his election.
AAAV92 5 months ago