@anyusmoon1 Yes, I agree about the IMF. I should not have said to end the FED is spot on. It should remain in place just taken over by Congress. Competing metals still leaves you with the same problem. The Mega bankers have played this game before and they win it every time. History bares it out.
Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard. This was shown in history to be a disaster. Please view "Secret of Oz" on youtube and you will see history and how that and many other things have played out. Ron Paul is your best bet but he's not going to do the trick. Stu is correct.
@frankielo1 You are in error. Ron Paul wants a COMPETING METALS STANDARD not exclusively 'gold' which would invite cornering / manipulating the market.
Thank you for a well thought out response to this delusional creep. As pointed out by the poster below me Anarchy would start off with a survival of the fittest of sorts, which is essentially where we are today anyway. The main difference being instead of being shot in the head we are suffering the financial assault which has probably led many to shot themselves in the head. Ron Paul is genuine, which at the very least is a step in the right direction, and at best a solution. Ron Paul 2012!
"As a Canadian, I don't expect you to know that [in the USA] county taxes are collected to pay for schools."
As a Canadian myself, the system here works exactly the same way--only we call counties "regions" or "municipalities" not "counties." Canada is VERY similar to the United States--and if one or two wars went the other way--would in fact be part of the United States.
Also, people who oppose taxation don't care whether it's county, state or federally garnered.
@qtutoringhelps Can't speak for everyone else but my demands of government (all jurisdictions) is they follow the law and strictly keep to the constitution(s) (state and federal) that they are bound to by oath. The fed encroachment is my chief complaint. Why? Unlike local, state disagreements I can't vote with my feet against the fed.
Case in point- 'income tax' there is no law making avg American, living/working in U.S., liable to file or pay for income tax under subtitle C of Title 26.
@Unrealll6666 U sir are the reason why governments thrive with ur dumbass attitude....come plant crops on my property that i have put my labor and time and effort into making that soil plantable and you want to come and steal my labor and land from me and are willing to use force to do it...fuck you! fuck you! you are no anarchist, you are a fucking douchebag power hungry piece of shit. Ignorance is the air u breath and the food you eat...go have sex with it...douche
@whiff1962 The founders of this republic wisely realized the great experiment in freedom depended entirely on 1) We The People being SELF GOVERNED; 2) ever vigilant and watchful to see the CHAINS of the CONSTITUTION tightly BIND and LIMIT the fed gov; 3) the best gov't governs least; 4) the evil empirical / oligarchical types have been alive & well since the beginning and thrived by banking BEHIND monarchies (dictators, presidents and other puppets) and lastly 5) SOUND MONEY no national bank.
I did not agree with the "slave beating" argument, either. Stef certainly appeals to the emotional in his political vision, but fails to take heed of the fact that those who gravitate to Utopian idea(l)s are themselves in danger of lapsing into tyranny. He does mention Hayek, but refuses to accede to the latters own applicable critique (what of Karl Popper's "The open society and its enemies"? ) I have serious reservations with anarchists
@whiff1962 Re: Anarchy- The 'nature abhors a vacuum...' analogy describes the process well and I contend the ugly things that get pulled into place when the great sucking stops are always worse than what went out. Absolute anarchy is impossible not only because it requires 100% perfect agreement of all parties to the written laws put in place but perfect obedience too. Once 1 person takes what doesn't belong to them some1 has 2 administer remedy and thats called gov't.
The Libertarian position, as communicated through Ron Paul, seems very plausible in many respects. However, if one is talking about the theoretical underpinnings of Libertarianism-not just a refraction through the person of Dr. Paul-, then, I believe, there might be some problems with competing interests. So I qualifyingly agree with Stef on the Postal worker argument, but disagree with the "necessary" means and ends.
Yes I agree that Stephbot was either lacking knowledge or disingenuous about his Standing on Ron Paul.
I do think that Steph used a poor choice of wording to make a point that returning the Constitution would return us again to the present slavery that exists today. He mentions the slavery to an income tax as an example. If that is Steph's point, it is valid.
Saying that Ron Paul would start off by completely pulling the plug, that's a big exaggeration.
"The Law" has been on my vlog page, recommended reading, including a link to the free 90 page online version with a mention of the audio book also available free online from day one :-)
My point being is that it is the mentality of those so inured and dependent upon a system of legalized stealing that is the problem.
You should read The Law. It explains what you are going through right now to a T. (What does "to a T" mean? Tittle or smallest stroke in writing. Think King James; Verily I say...Heaven & earth shall not pass until...- I just wondered why.)
It may just have to run it's course. Steph does have much of it on point, but he thinks he is more clever than the Creator.
Steph is only paraphrasing much of Fredrick Bastiat in "The Law". Which is why I've liked much of what he has to say.
The problem with Atheists is that they really are cheerleaders too. They can't explain why anyone is subject to law or even civility in the absence of a Creator; the difference between Bastiat and Steph. Where there is no root there is circular reasoning.
Steph now appears to me to be just another garden variety clever politician. Ron Paul is not that at all.
Ron Paul omits snarkiness and condescension, this is often mistaken for naivete but is in fact the mark of gentlemanliness. Obviously Steph is the polar opposite, many are.
3. We are in our current economic tragedy because of the deregulation, and exalutation, of the corporation (See the Documentary; The Corporation). If you were clearer of fear, you would see that as the primary issue, and not be as drawn in by all the other window dressing, as it would obviously be all for nothing if the global financial system implodes from the unchecked greed of deregulated, and unshackled bankers and executives. Paul's a Trojan Horse, K?
4. The Constitution wont save us. Otherwise you would still not be able to vote. Or play professional sports. Or even call the police when a MAN blacks your eye, because the constitution didn't provide you with that.
When it came time for people to declare those rights, do you know who was against it?
If the constitution were godzilla, then your minarchist utopia in which government remains constrained might be more plausible. But the constitution is just a piece of paper which failed to stop Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, or George Bush. We tried your way, and it was a total failure. The Constitution has not been able to limit the size of government. If we returned to the Constitution, we would just be back where we are now in a hundred years. An elementary understanding of history will suffice.
That has got to be the stupidest, sorryist excuse of an argument yet.
For G*d's sake brother- don't you understand anything in our history? You have to FIGHT government corruption. That's what the whole issue is, the fight was taken outta the people by virtue of the take-over of the classroom, the rewriting of history books to skew the culture and truth from the young minds.
I won't give up fighting. You go ahead though, o.k. and enjoy the bootlicking, it's not for me.
You are either ignorant of history, or fail to understand basic patterns of human civilization. Every constitution that has ever been conceived to constrain government has been a total utter failure. They simply don't work. When I say "every", I literally mean every single Constitution ever conceived to constain government has failed to do so.. Literally every single one of them. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
The FACT is every American, especially the founders, knew the Constitution was imperfect. You could point out that every thing fails eventually- does that preclude us from acknowledging the excellent nature of our Constitutional Republic? Does it preclude us from righting the wrong? NO!
The entire point, and one the founders warned about as well, is that 'We The People' we are responsible for checks and balance. This principle worked ingeniously until the public was miseducated (deliberately).
The "people" is a fictional entity. There are only persons, and you do not have any influence over this government or its policy decisions. Tell me when "the people" signed for the trillions of dollars of debt we have, and tell me when "the people" authorized politicians to take a third of our money. When did "the people" vote to invade Iraq or Mexico or Spain?
Molyneux did not deny that the federal Department of Education is an evil institution that should not exist. He simply argued that to abolish it would be mayhem. The teachers unions would go on strike and there would be rioting. That's simply the reality of the situation.
It would do good to limit gross violations of property rights, but to not petition for its outright abolition is to simply sacrifice the entire principle that extortion is immoral. It is equivelant to saying, "slavery is wrong, so therefore we should have less of it." No. Slavery is wrong, so therefore it should be abolished.
Did Ron Paul propose to abolish taxation, or to limit it? You yourself even said, "What Dr. Paul plans to do, is collect taxes lawfully." You see, it's not a principled rejection of extortion. It's simply the limiting of immoral activity he aspires for. Taxation is, by definition, extortion. It is the forceful seizure of legitimately acquired property.
Dr. Paul said he would abolish the 'income tax' and the Federal Reserve-
All governments must raise money somehow but our Constitution permits it only through apportionment and through representative numbers- ie excises or through the states. THIS IS NOT INCOME TAX, which is the unConstitutional issue Dr. Paul is fighting.
You're so far off it's really hard to begin your education here in order to right your ship.
Molyneux was not referring back to any sort of 18th century conception of slavery with his useage of the term. He was referring to the state of today, and how it forcefully subjugates people into labor for its own ends.
Er, well, the income tax law and codes are written lawfully but not applied lawfully. Apportionment is necessary for income tax to remain lawful- but a law that is written properly but applied incorrectly (deliberately or not) is unlawful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse particularly (IMHO) for government agents sworn to uphold it.
Nothing you said has any relevance to the key points stef made or provided any coherent arguments. ALL taxation is coercive and violent. ALL states grow, all states are violent and corrupt by their very nature. This is a fact, it is proven. The RP movement was a joke.
My apologies, with all your recent comments, it just doesn't show comments from hardly anyone else. After pulling up the full list of comments, I can see what has happened. Feel free to delete my comments. ;-)
The banks in this government funded Both sides of the civil war. The reason being is because By making the war grow you created more animosity. When the war was at it's peak the banks pulled funding from the south & forced plantation owners to support the war. It cut into their profits so much that they had to sell off property to maintain a living. The banks moved in & purchased most of the plantations for penny's on the dollar.
They then used the profits from the lucrative cotton trade to control the south & grow their empire. After taking control of the creation of money in 1913 they had the government by the balls. Rockefeller then funded the womens lib movement to set the stage for women to enter the work force so they could collect taxes from the other 50% of the population.
They even funded the civil rights movement so they could tax the colored people in this nation. This is one of the reasons why Dr. King was murdered. He discovered this & was about to go public witch would have threatened the movement. They have taken great pains to hide the truth from you all. The truth is all around you. Seek & ye shall find.
Actually 14th amendment citizens and all other federal subjects/employees are the only persons taxable under Title 26 subtitle A (income tax). That's my understanding.
Wars have been duplicitously funded by Rothchild and those like them (our government is famous for it too). This is an interesting post wingnut thanks.
No problem ;) this is the kind of stuff you don't learn in school. Of course you'll never know it any other way with the " No child left behind" scam the government is pulling on us.
I think you made some good points. Thanks. I like your habit of referring to Ron Paul as Dr. Paul. Many of the media fail to extend this dignifying courtesy.
Thanks jeremy837 yea, I get very annoyed by the 'Mr.' thing too.
It's always shocking how the 'punk journalists' with barely an under graduate degree diss our honorable and good Dr. Paul. Especially considering he could practically qualify for an honorary doctorate in economics.
Would you agree that nither helping the Iraqi people to install democracy or installing oil pipes is what American taxpayers should pay for at the cost of your body and soul?
Our politicians won't listen to us and are making speech against them 'domestic terrorism'. They are also planning incarceration camps for folks who speak out.What do you suggest we do?
I am new to the youtube. I am also new to what is going on in our country I mean what is realy going on. my eyes are opening and I cant believe how it is so apparent all around me. I do not have a web cam but maybe for my birthday I might get one.
Welcome home soldier and I am so happy you are safe and sound. We need leaders in our communities who've woken up to the facts that the oath you took to defend the constitution is the same one your elected officials took.
We need you to lead. Lead the troops here in a return to that constitution.
Thank you so much for your informative comment. You've saved me an hour of my life... I won't waste it. Instead of watching the video you are commenting to, I think I'll go out and tell some freedom-loving Americans about Dr. Ron Paul.
This is the first time that I've been passionate about supporting a presidential candidate.
Can't tell ya how great that is to hear. Recently my girlfriend and I hand addressed 150 Ron Paul intro letters to independant voters in Iowa. Got a call back from the first of that mailing today. I'm on cloud nine! And you my dear just put a silver lining on it :-) Cheers! Lets make sure to join our local GOP precinct, district etc to empower delegates.
I keep hearing the same thing from supporters of Ron Paul. They say that this is the first time they have agreed on many points with a presidential candidate/politician, and it's the first time that they've actually wanted to get up, get out, and do something to help that candidate win.
I also happen to be one of those people.
I think Ron Paul and the constitution have actually made me start believing in Americans and America again.
You are SO much easier to listen to than this blithering idiot Stef, and make more sense. For the first time ever, I'm interested in a political candidate! Why? Ron Paul is the only candidate I've ever seen (since I've been eligible to vote anyway) who is votable. Yup, new word. I no longer need to find "the least of the evils" - Paul actually makes common sense, which unfortunately is not so common, as evidenced by Stef's idiotic ramblings and H. G. Wellsian fictional predictions. Kudos!
Hey boman2000- lol @ votable. I love new words and thats a perfect one for Ron Paul :-)
Thanks for the encouragement here. It's not easy going up against a guy with 3000+ subscribers, 45 minutes with my humble background. But it had to be done. He is taking young folks into his fold and I feel they need to hear both sides.
Thanks coolfoil... I appreciate your encouragement of the videos and to run. Currently I am reading the Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (not finished yet but it's very interesting); I recommend watching the 6-part Norman Dodd interview (see playlist on my channel); if you haven't read Frederic Bastiat's 'The Law', it's essential for any liberty loving American (available in its entirety online- scroogle it). :-) I look forward to hearing from you again, soon.
I get the feeling that Molyneux is worried that the state would be dramatically reduced in his lifetime. He acts as though Paul would be elected in a vacuum where there isn't an acceptance of his ideas.
Thanks for correcting some of his strangely misguided thinking.
There are some anarchists who support Ron Paul because many of them see decentralizing the state as a move in the right direction. Read some of Walter Block's take on Ron Paul.
Sorry to bring you back John, but I feel like you are really the only person here who could answer my question well. Because I wanted to set the record straight and really understand what's going on: I don't think Molyneux was arguing that Ron Paul would be elected in a setting that would completely oppose his manner of thought, but that there would have been so many people with deeply entrenched, vested interests in the system as it stood then, that it would be extremely difficult
My question is this: Today, Dec 31st is indeed approaching the bewitching hour HOWEVER, is this not a CAMPAIGN (a contest whereby public debates and interviews are conducted) to GROW ones constituency?. Why has everyone FROM DAY ONE rushed to say it won't happen? Could it be because lamestream media is deciding for us? If so, can you understand the frustration of supporters who spend time and energy on the campaign?
I contend there is enough 'reason', culture and recollection of history left in many Americans that IF THEY HEARD the platform, had an opportunity to HEAR, DEBATE, and not from the vantage point of 'all ready decided' interviewers, people will (as they have) rally in a BIG WAY.
to reduce. Like...as an example, taking away the department of education (one of RPs goals). Molyneux talked about how Reagan tried this and failed...and furthermore, that reduction of the state through control has been attempted already for more than 300 years, and throughout all of history the state has never decreased in size. I was just curious what your thoughts were on this, because I'm unsure whether Ron Paul really represents something new, or whether he'll meet with the
same failure that we've seen throughout history, particularly in the US. I also posted some similar argumentations higher up on this page, but unfortunately no one really commented back to me correcting my position. If not this time, then it will probably be my last post here. So: Is it actually possible to reduce the powers of the state gradually? Is Ron Paul going to do anything special? Because this whole spiel seems to be following a very non-historically-accurate-route!
He often seems to take a position of decentralization. This is something I support, and it is something many others who want to reduce or eliminate the state also support. Eliminating the DoE only removes the central state from education. There would then be varying amounts of success on the state and local level. If you look closely at the policy positions he takes, they are often getting the federal government out of an issue or legalizing competition in some area.
One thing about Ron Paul that I see different from so many others is that he is very knowledgeable about these issues and can explain them to people. I think he has quite a teaching ability. So many others learn what the right position is, but don't have the ability to explain it to the general public, so they end up compromising.
I believe the state can be made smaller, but it is likely to be due to some external event out of their control that will bring the situation to a head, and if you look at history something ALWAYS brings it to a head, Rome fell, the US declared independance, so on and so forth, this is the first time people will try to bring down an empire peacefully, right now we're in virgin territory, we're living in interesting times, anything is possible.
stefbot seems to be a anarcho-capitalist. Anarcho-capitalists view the state as evil, period; not necessary evil as minarchist libertarians. Therefore the beating analogy was to say that even if Ron Paul were to be able to reduce the state to next to nothing that remnant would still be evil.
Yes. I got that. I know that. My address was to both the analogy as it applies to subliminal intent (or natural occurance) AND given my limited time, the more obvious.
Gotcha. I kind of agree with a good deal of stefbot's positions, but like a lot of anarcho-capitalist he'd rather not dirty his hands in the necessary steps to at least reign in government. It allows folks to remain intellectually pure. Even Paul recognizes the importance of being pragmatic.
Me too (agree with some of stefpots positions). And you're right about not dirtying hands in the toil of correction but worse, adding insult to that injury, by completely soiling the debate with open hostility and hystrionics for his own agenda- using Paul's name to further his own agenda.
Stefbot seems to have all the right answers. Yeah, he's a real sage alright -- damn brilliant! If we are actually ignorant enough to follow his incredibly dubious advice and do absolutely nothing -- and just let all this nonsense continue -- then the freedom that we seek to restore will just spontaneously "happen" (someday). We can simply delude ourselves into thinking that we're all "free", have attained a state of liberty, and actually have natural rights. Now go take some more soma.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams, (1722-1803) U.S. Founding Father and Public Enemy #1"
Right! Stef is not only NOT one of our countrymen but the first to say, as an anarchist, that he'll crouch to no one; but... he won't lift a finger to help those like us- And takes advantage of many young minds to build his anthill of admirers.
The Lady is correct: A constitutional republic will keep all virtuous people clean, safe, and free, and the ability for all like-minded individuals to attempt to have prosperity unencumberanced. The Republic will enhance liberty since it will prevent 'Tyrany of the Majority'.
For your information, the public school system in Canada (as if Canada is some distant, unrelated, alien place) work--in terms of financing--at the municipal level as well.
I don't know a thing about Canadian schools nor your government. As to 'alien' in legal terms- Canadians ARE aliens when in this country and I'm an alien when in Canada. From THIS vantage point you and I are FOREIGN to one another. There is nothing ugly about the term alien.
Just as a Federal Agent is an 'alien' when attempting to impose his jurisdiction on you, in your state. :-)
The DOE is NOT municipal it is Federal. That's why Dr. Paul shall do away with it.
The school system here is similar to the British system, as is our parliamentary government. (A cursory knowledge of North American/British history should give you some hint of that.)
Of course, in a legal sense, I am an "alien" in your country. Today, in broader cultural usage, however, that term connotes a certain xenophobia, and it is clear that its users _know_ that it does.
You raised the word/notion of 'alien' not I. In either case it's not a matter of xenophobia nor is it important. Neither is county vs. municipal- the Paul presidential platform pertains to Federal DOE.
Learning, knowing and applying canadian customs, laws or methods of edu are not the subject of this video. Nor does it pertain to the presidential candidate Ron Paul- in the true nature or 'stefpots shapes'. Thanks for the info though.
Actually the "xenophobia" has nothing to do with the term "alien" unless YOU put it there. And the only "clear" is that YOU assume things, believe them, speak on them, without actually knowing.
"The DOE is NOT municipal it is Federal. That's why Dr. Paul shall do away with it."
At ~4:30 in this video, you say: "The school system operate from property taxes at the county level, but I don't expect a Canadian to understand our laws..."
I was referring to this remark in my above reply. Is or is not the "county level" synonousm with the municipal level? If it is, then our school system in Canada works the same way in terms of funding, whether you know anything about it or not.
I'm sure we can dispense with policing spelling, semantics and grammar- you're obviously bright and articulate, everyone I'm sure will understand you. :-)
I would like to dispense with sarcasm too but that's probably asking too much :-0
Moreover, it's utterly ridiculous to say "I don't expect a Canadian to understand our laws..." as if to understand some body of information you have to be born within some geographic boundary. Absurd.
The absurdity lay in a 45 minute hystrionic video designed to portray the Paul presidency in a blood-bath. THAT sir, is absurd. The absurdity is a Canadian anarchist attempting to drum up backers for his scheme, for his benefit using the highly marketable name RON PAUL through misinformation and if not misinformation than worse yet, lies.
With all due respect (and I'm an Objectivist, not an anarchist--and I have many problems with 'stefbot' and libertarians generally), I think you're misinterpreting his principal point... His main point, in essence, is that people (pressure interest groups, in particular) do not understand the principles of liberty and will see any deep and _significant_ government cuts and shrinkage as a massive threat to their livelihood and, consequently, will rebel tooth and nail.
Given the state of the culture, I don't see how you can disagree with this point. As to the degree to which R. Paul actually proposes to implement massive domestic government shrinkage is perhaps where stefbot goes wrong.
I believe I understand what you are getting at and my comments, my video express what I think of his point, the way he made and why.
He is no libertarian otherwise he would be encouraging not harrangueing (sp?) and making a spectacle (have some PRIDE, have some PRIDE, have some PRIDE) of himself and the issues.
And do you really, in your heart of hearts believe he represented facts, truth or did anything but exacerbate his demented desires? He desires negativity, hystrionics and mayhem. And for WHAT? Merely to promote. Promote his own view, his book(s), his vlog. Like I said before he can conjur up scenarios all day long, I could care less, but don't put Ron Pauls name on his fiction for ill-purposes and casting aspurtions on this campaign.
I weary dueling ideologies, of people adopting opinions they have not thoroughly researched and warring over pure rhetoric.
I have intelligent friends on all sides of any issue; and the only thing I can see aligning them all is the Constitution. Without that, things get chaotic.
It would be so refreshing to live in a society where a majority of the citizens were as well informed and conscientious as you obviously are. Thank you.
Judging by my two of three postal workers I've spoken to the it's no wonder... they loved the idea of not turning them into police force and rat finks. It's disgusting what the gov is asking them to do. I guess they don't much like fillingout reports (spying) on citizens/neighbors.
Apparently, they are trying to do the same thing with firefighters. On Friday, there was an Associated Press article titled "Firefighter help on terrorism." A society of spies. Who wants that? It's depressing, really.
It's been in place for some time (society of spies) the banks for instance have immunity from busting you or anyone that deposits, withdraws or anything in their institution, and required by law NOT to advise their customers of inquiries by the feds. This is essentially the IMF, Fed/Res, controlling you via the (non-existent) enforcement arm of the IRS. IRS has no jurisdiction over you or I in our domestic dealings.
Stef was making a comparison when he talked about slavery, He doesn't think the Ron Paul wants it back. What exactly is patriotism anyway? My father, brother, and both my grandfathers have all been in the military. I've grown up with more patriotism then anyone and I can tell you this; it counts for nothing. All it is, is something talk show radio hosts talk about to make you feel more right wing.
My vid/reply addressed either possibility re the slavery analogy being either a twisted and sick subtlety or pertaining to income tax. Either way it's a non issue in this thread.
Patriotism is exactly what your family exhibited and has NOTHING to do with talking t.v. heads. Dr. Paul is pure unadulterated patriotism. Speaking his msg DESPITE it's unpopularity, never wavering, totally consistent and without person gain. Not that gain is a bad thing but for a Congressman it shows stellar motives.
There are many brilliant anarcho-capitalist scholars who have actually endorsed Dr. Paul for president, simply because they don't commit the error that Stefan does.
Good job, again, on the video, and keep up the good work!
Anyus, congrats on making a response to this video. I've watched Stefan's video's before and many of them are rather good. This one, though, he completely misses the mark.
You probably know that I'm sympathetic to anarcho-capitalism. Now, Stefan, is a market anarchist, but he commits the fallacy of a lack of a sense of proportion. He equates unlimited government tyranny with limited, constitutional government.
Go to rudysreadinglist and sign up for Nov 30th donation to Ron Paul. If you are like me and cannot afford $100 just give whatever you can. This is an investment in your and your children's future that will provide better returns on your money than the stock market ever will. Than Donate again Dec 16th visit teapaty07.
I'm fascinated with the 14th amendment. What WERE the ramifications? Does that amendment apply to sovereign citizens or merely speaking to giving Federal citizenship to emancipated persons. ie, none of us (born in one of the 50 states) are U.S. citizens. Interesting dilemma.
And they spend most of their energies lambasting Ron Paul out of all people. Out of all the evil candidates out there, they choose Ron Paul. It's like throwing out water that has a spec of dust in it and continuing to bathe in contaminated filth while dreaming for crystal clear perfection. It's pretty cowardly and it's practical implications are no less utopian than communism
Anyways, THANK YOU for that. It's funny because out of all the people I've had trouble with during this campaign, it was the anarchists/atheists who gave me the hardest time. It's such irony because we both fight for the same thing (minarchism vs anarchism), yet anarchists shift so much on their hatred on constitutional minarchists because of that one little discrepancy - they believe there should be NO government.
Perhaps you can convince them with the deep-diver-analogy (diver needs to come slowly to surface to prevent decompression sickness - state will become obsolete in a natural way by decentralization and making state services optional). Because I (as an anarchist myself) use that argument in support of RP. Hope it helps.
That is an excellent analogy; I'm a gradualist anarcho-capitalist myself and view the re-establishment of federalism as a means to the eventual dissolution of the state. Stefbot does have a point about the dangers of detours though
The first step is by following the law as it is written. If anyone, socialist on the one end of the spectrum or anarchist on the other, wants to change things they must do so within the law. Not just say it, make it up as we go along, or rely on a majority vote (utterly unacceptable) which abuses 49%.
So..is it actually possible to decrease the powers of the state gradually? Because I think that was Stefan's main criticism of Ron Paul, that even if you remove one service (the postal service) the people and vested interests are so inherently dependent on the system that there would be chaos in return. I don't think he was arguing for complete dissolution of the state (although he projected a hectic scenario towards the end of his video for solid entertainment!)
Not that the postal service is actually going to be removed...but as an example, I think it shows how much of an effect these attempts at reduction can have. Compared to eliminating the department of education, for instance, I think there could be similar repercussions, unless there is some replacement institution, not privatized of course.
Stefan states how libertarians, for about 300 years, have been trying to control the state by joining the state...is this not what you are describing? (6:15 on his video) This sounds exactly like Ron Paul. Again at 8:40, he makes a point about how great thinkers and men have attempted to reduce the state's powers, and failed...isn't that the problem? Replies appreciated
The fact is Dr. Paul is not purporting getting rid of the USPS, he is merely discussing the concept to introduce competitive mail carriers, period.
Furthermore- his plans do NOT include throwing Americans, who've been taught to be dependant, out on the street. He would begin the cuts overseas, wars, foreign entitlements and CORPORATE entitlenments, special interests.
These things and stopping the federal reserve and its funny money schemes.
Dr. Paul is like a swimmer trying to save a drowning man that will not stop clawing and panicking- thus he has to cold-cock the guy, knock him out, in order to save his life.
None of the economic facts Dr. Paul so aptly talks about falls easily on the ears of the neocons.
I forgot to add that ending the FED as R. Paul wants to do is 100% spot on as long as the same body does not sprout up in a international way.
frankielo1 1 month ago
It already exists, IMF
anyusmoon1 1 week ago
@anyusmoon1 Yes, I agree about the IMF. I should not have said to end the FED is spot on. It should remain in place just taken over by Congress. Competing metals still leaves you with the same problem. The Mega bankers have played this game before and they win it every time. History bares it out.
frankielo1 1 week ago
Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard. This was shown in history to be a disaster. Please view "Secret of Oz" on youtube and you will see history and how that and many other things have played out. Ron Paul is your best bet but he's not going to do the trick. Stu is correct.
frankielo1 1 month ago
@frankielo1 You are in error. Ron Paul wants a COMPETING METALS STANDARD not exclusively 'gold' which would invite cornering / manipulating the market.
anyusmoon1 1 week ago
Don't blame me! I voted for Nader.
6of6 2 months ago
I support Ron Paul and Stef. It was a big disapointment to see that Stef declined the ideas of Ron Paul. Hopefully it's just out of ignorance.
CowboyDoug38 3 months ago
@CowboyDoug38 Truly, so disappointing that it moves in to disturbing. :-(
anyusmoon1 3 months ago
Thank you for a well thought out response to this delusional creep. As pointed out by the poster below me Anarchy would start off with a survival of the fittest of sorts, which is essentially where we are today anyway. The main difference being instead of being shot in the head we are suffering the financial assault which has probably led many to shot themselves in the head. Ron Paul is genuine, which at the very least is a step in the right direction, and at best a solution. Ron Paul 2012!
BearDownBean 9 months ago
"As a Canadian, I don't expect you to know that [in the USA] county taxes are collected to pay for schools."
As a Canadian myself, the system here works exactly the same way--only we call counties "regions" or "municipalities" not "counties." Canada is VERY similar to the United States--and if one or two wars went the other way--would in fact be part of the United States.
Also, people who oppose taxation don't care whether it's county, state or federally garnered.
qtutoringhelps 10 months ago
@qtutoringhelps Can't speak for everyone else but my demands of government (all jurisdictions) is they follow the law and strictly keep to the constitution(s) (state and federal) that they are bound to by oath. The fed encroachment is my chief complaint. Why? Unlike local, state disagreements I can't vote with my feet against the fed.
Case in point- 'income tax' there is no law making avg American, living/working in U.S., liable to file or pay for income tax under subtitle C of Title 26.
anyusmoon1 10 months ago
I'm sick of all the anti-anarchists... If you come to stop me from planting crops on your "property", I will shoot you in the head.
Unrealll6666 1 year ago
@Unrealll6666 U sir are the reason why governments thrive with ur dumbass attitude....come plant crops on my property that i have put my labor and time and effort into making that soil plantable and you want to come and steal my labor and land from me and are willing to use force to do it...fuck you! fuck you! you are no anarchist, you are a fucking douchebag power hungry piece of shit. Ignorance is the air u breath and the food you eat...go have sex with it...douche
funkysnarf 6 months ago
I concur. For those who advocate for anarchy, there is more than looking to better the human lot. I say, hate the state, but love the republic.
whiff1962 1 year ago
@whiff1962 The founders of this republic wisely realized the great experiment in freedom depended entirely on 1) We The People being SELF GOVERNED; 2) ever vigilant and watchful to see the CHAINS of the CONSTITUTION tightly BIND and LIMIT the fed gov; 3) the best gov't governs least; 4) the evil empirical / oligarchical types have been alive & well since the beginning and thrived by banking BEHIND monarchies (dictators, presidents and other puppets) and lastly 5) SOUND MONEY no national bank.
anyusmoon1 1 year ago
I did not agree with the "slave beating" argument, either. Stef certainly appeals to the emotional in his political vision, but fails to take heed of the fact that those who gravitate to Utopian idea(l)s are themselves in danger of lapsing into tyranny. He does mention Hayek, but refuses to accede to the latters own applicable critique (what of Karl Popper's "The open society and its enemies"? ) I have serious reservations with anarchists
whiff1962 1 year ago
@whiff1962 Re: Anarchy- The 'nature abhors a vacuum...' analogy describes the process well and I contend the ugly things that get pulled into place when the great sucking stops are always worse than what went out. Absolute anarchy is impossible not only because it requires 100% perfect agreement of all parties to the written laws put in place but perfect obedience too. Once 1 person takes what doesn't belong to them some1 has 2 administer remedy and thats called gov't.
anyusmoon1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Libertarian position, as communicated through Ron Paul, seems very plausible in many respects. However, if one is talking about the theoretical underpinnings of Libertarianism-not just a refraction through the person of Dr. Paul-, then, I believe, there might be some problems with competing interests. So I qualifyingly agree with Stef on the Postal worker argument, but disagree with the "necessary" means and ends.
whiff1962 1 year ago
Comment removed
whiff1962 1 year ago
Comment removed
whiff1962 1 year ago
Comment removed
whiff1962 1 year ago
Yes I agree that Stephbot was either lacking knowledge or disingenuous about his Standing on Ron Paul.
I do think that Steph used a poor choice of wording to make a point that returning the Constitution would return us again to the present slavery that exists today. He mentions the slavery to an income tax as an example. If that is Steph's point, it is valid.
Saying that Ron Paul would start off by completely pulling the plug, that's a big exaggeration.
I hope you're doing well.
ifreemantoo 2 years ago 3
That was a brilliantly texted summary of things. WHen are you going to get a VIDEO and start helping educate folks with your keen, concise commentary?
Come on man!!! Time is short, the end is nigh. We HAVE to actively work at this. :-) peace and love, moon
anyusmoon1 2 years ago
Thanks for your kind words. At the end of my thinking today, it is mostly a sheeple problem.
Frederick Bastiat in his book "The Law" writes one answer.
"When, then, does plunder stop? It stops when it becomes more painful & more dangerous than labor. It is evident, then,
that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of to
work. All the measures of the law should protect property & punish plunder."
ifreemantoo 2 years ago 3
"The Law" has been on my vlog page, recommended reading, including a link to the free 90 page online version with a mention of the audio book also available free online from day one :-)
I quote it regularly.
anyusmoon1 2 years ago
My point being is that it is the mentality of those so inured and dependent upon a system of legalized stealing that is the problem.
You should read The Law. It explains what you are going through right now to a T. (What does "to a T" mean? Tittle or smallest stroke in writing. Think King James; Verily I say...Heaven & earth shall not pass until...- I just wondered why.)
It may just have to run it's course. Steph does have much of it on point, but he thinks he is more clever than the Creator.
ifreemantoo 2 years ago
One final note.
Steph is only paraphrasing much of Fredrick Bastiat in "The Law". Which is why I've liked much of what he has to say.
The problem with Atheists is that they really are cheerleaders too. They can't explain why anyone is subject to law or even civility in the absence of a Creator; the difference between Bastiat and Steph. Where there is no root there is circular reasoning.
Steph now appears to me to be just another garden variety clever politician. Ron Paul is not that at all.
ifreemantoo 2 years ago 3
Ron Paul omits snarkiness and condescension, this is often mistaken for naivete but is in fact the mark of gentlemanliness. Obviously Steph is the polar opposite, many are.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts.
anyusmoon1 2 years ago
A minimal government is a religion that dogmatically assumes that a territorial monopoly will reduce by using the violence of the state.
Eldel15 2 years ago
1. The Magna Carta.
2. Your missing his point, and seeing only the "example" he uses. I would think you were more familiar with the parable.
His point is simply: If its wrong, its wrong, Period.
brenhin10 2 years ago
3. We are in our current economic tragedy because of the deregulation, and exalutation, of the corporation (See the Documentary; The Corporation). If you were clearer of fear, you would see that as the primary issue, and not be as drawn in by all the other window dressing, as it would obviously be all for nothing if the global financial system implodes from the unchecked greed of deregulated, and unshackled bankers and executives. Paul's a Trojan Horse, K?
brenhin10 2 years ago
4. The Constitution wont save us. Otherwise you would still not be able to vote. Or play professional sports. Or even call the police when a MAN blacks your eye, because the constitution didn't provide you with that.
When it came time for people to declare those rights, do you know who was against it?
Thats right, Conservatives.
=^D
brenhin10 2 years ago
If the constitution were godzilla, then your minarchist utopia in which government remains constrained might be more plausible. But the constitution is just a piece of paper which failed to stop Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, or George Bush. We tried your way, and it was a total failure. The Constitution has not been able to limit the size of government. If we returned to the Constitution, we would just be back where we are now in a hundred years. An elementary understanding of history will suffice.
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
That has got to be the stupidest, sorryist excuse of an argument yet.
For G*d's sake brother- don't you understand anything in our history? You have to FIGHT government corruption. That's what the whole issue is, the fight was taken outta the people by virtue of the take-over of the classroom, the rewriting of history books to skew the culture and truth from the young minds.
I won't give up fighting. You go ahead though, o.k. and enjoy the bootlicking, it's not for me.
anyusmoon1 3 years ago
You are either ignorant of history, or fail to understand basic patterns of human civilization. Every constitution that has ever been conceived to constrain government has been a total utter failure. They simply don't work. When I say "every", I literally mean every single Constitution ever conceived to constain government has failed to do so.. Literally every single one of them. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
The FACT is every American, especially the founders, knew the Constitution was imperfect. You could point out that every thing fails eventually- does that preclude us from acknowledging the excellent nature of our Constitutional Republic? Does it preclude us from righting the wrong? NO!
The entire point, and one the founders warned about as well, is that 'We The People' we are responsible for checks and balance. This principle worked ingeniously until the public was miseducated (deliberately).
anyusmoon1 3 years ago
The "people" is a fictional entity. There are only persons, and you do not have any influence over this government or its policy decisions. Tell me when "the people" signed for the trillions of dollars of debt we have, and tell me when "the people" authorized politicians to take a third of our money. When did "the people" vote to invade Iraq or Mexico or Spain?
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
Molyneux did not deny that the federal Department of Education is an evil institution that should not exist. He simply argued that to abolish it would be mayhem. The teachers unions would go on strike and there would be rioting. That's simply the reality of the situation.
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
It would do good to limit gross violations of property rights, but to not petition for its outright abolition is to simply sacrifice the entire principle that extortion is immoral. It is equivelant to saying, "slavery is wrong, so therefore we should have less of it." No. Slavery is wrong, so therefore it should be abolished.
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
Did Ron Paul propose to abolish taxation, or to limit it? You yourself even said, "What Dr. Paul plans to do, is collect taxes lawfully." You see, it's not a principled rejection of extortion. It's simply the limiting of immoral activity he aspires for. Taxation is, by definition, extortion. It is the forceful seizure of legitimately acquired property.
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
Dr. Paul said he would abolish the 'income tax' and the Federal Reserve-
All governments must raise money somehow but our Constitution permits it only through apportionment and through representative numbers- ie excises or through the states. THIS IS NOT INCOME TAX, which is the unConstitutional issue Dr. Paul is fighting.
You're so far off it's really hard to begin your education here in order to right your ship.
anyusmoon1 3 years ago
Molyneux was not referring back to any sort of 18th century conception of slavery with his useage of the term. He was referring to the state of today, and how it forcefully subjugates people into labor for its own ends.
LastTrueLiberal 3 years ago
Yeah the income tax as it exists now is lawful, so the government is raising revenue lawfully. And no apportionment is necessary.
ensrifraff 3 years ago
Er, well, the income tax law and codes are written lawfully but not applied lawfully. Apportionment is necessary for income tax to remain lawful- but a law that is written properly but applied incorrectly (deliberately or not) is unlawful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse particularly (IMHO) for government agents sworn to uphold it.
Peace
anyusmoon1 3 years ago
Nothing you said has any relevance to the key points stef made or provided any coherent arguments. ALL taxation is coercive and violent. ALL states grow, all states are violent and corrupt by their very nature. This is a fact, it is proven. The RP movement was a joke.
lukeev 3 years ago
Why delete everyone else's comments? It's looks quite arrogant with only you commenting on your video.
Sepero1 4 years ago
???? what videos are deleted?
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
My apologies, with all your recent comments, it just doesn't show comments from hardly anyone else. After pulling up the full list of comments, I can see what has happened. Feel free to delete my comments. ;-)
Sepero1 4 years ago
lol nah, I don't delete comments unless they contain profanity or totally useless data such as spam (real spam) and sometime crude remarks.
Appology accepted and thank you for trying to have a discerning eye for shibai. :-D
Cheers 'moon'
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Thankyou much for that much needed ass kicking of that S.O.B My God was that guy way off!! LOL!!
AiresQX4 4 years ago 3
Thanks for the encouragment airesqx4.
Will we see you at the Grande Stande (march/rally)? It's SO exciting- I can't wait.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
The banks in this government funded Both sides of the civil war. The reason being is because By making the war grow you created more animosity. When the war was at it's peak the banks pulled funding from the south & forced plantation owners to support the war. It cut into their profits so much that they had to sell off property to maintain a living. The banks moved in & purchased most of the plantations for penny's on the dollar.
wingnut4427 4 years ago 4
They then used the profits from the lucrative cotton trade to control the south & grow their empire. After taking control of the creation of money in 1913 they had the government by the balls. Rockefeller then funded the womens lib movement to set the stage for women to enter the work force so they could collect taxes from the other 50% of the population.
wingnut4427 4 years ago 5
They even funded the civil rights movement so they could tax the colored people in this nation. This is one of the reasons why Dr. King was murdered. He discovered this & was about to go public witch would have threatened the movement. They have taken great pains to hide the truth from you all. The truth is all around you. Seek & ye shall find.
wingnut4427 4 years ago 6
Actually 14th amendment citizens and all other federal subjects/employees are the only persons taxable under Title 26 subtitle A (income tax). That's my understanding.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Sadly I believe this to be true and the ruination of American families. Even more tragic I took part in activities to further the womens movement :-(
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Wars have been duplicitously funded by Rothchild and those like them (our government is famous for it too). This is an interesting post wingnut thanks.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
No problem ;) this is the kind of stuff you don't learn in school. Of course you'll never know it any other way with the " No child left behind" scam the government is pulling on us.
wingnut4427 4 years ago 3
Yes, no child left behind is code for 'we'll make sure all children are turned into good little socialists comrades.'
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I think you made some good points. Thanks. I like your habit of referring to Ron Paul as Dr. Paul. Many of the media fail to extend this dignifying courtesy.
jeremy837 4 years ago 3
Thanks jeremy837 yea, I get very annoyed by the 'Mr.' thing too.
It's always shocking how the 'punk journalists' with barely an under graduate degree diss our honorable and good Dr. Paul. Especially considering he could practically qualify for an honorary doctorate in economics.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Applause......................................
txnwinterbride 4 years ago 3
Thank you thank you txnwinterbride. Cheers to you and Happy New Year too :-D
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I am a combat veteran Having served two
tours of duty in Iraq. I can tell you it is a mess and
its not getting better wake up America. You want to
know what I did over there I drove all over the
country getting shot at going through ieds losing 2 of
my best friends. I escorted oil pipes all over and you
know what I saw more going on at the oil fields than I
did see us helping the Iraqis. And almost everyday the
pipes we escorted were blown up. Wake up
People!!!!
ajimwest 4 years ago 3
Would you agree that nither helping the Iraqi people to install democracy or installing oil pipes is what American taxpayers should pay for at the cost of your body and soul?
Our politicians won't listen to us and are making speech against them 'domestic terrorism'. They are also planning incarceration camps for folks who speak out.What do you suggest we do?
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Rise Up!!! speek out tell everone you meet even if they think you are crazy. Tell your family and friends TELL EVERONE
ajimwest 4 years ago 2
I looked at your vlog you have no videos up Jim. Can I help you with this?
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I am new to the youtube. I am also new to what is going on in our country I mean what is realy going on. my eyes are opening and I cant believe how it is so apparent all around me. I do not have a web cam but maybe for my birthday I might get one.
ajimwest 4 years ago
Welcome home soldier and I am so happy you are safe and sound. We need leaders in our communities who've woken up to the facts that the oath you took to defend the constitution is the same one your elected officials took.
We need you to lead. Lead the troops here in a return to that constitution.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Oh Yeah and vote for ron paul. and tell everyone you knoiw to vote for him. donate as much as you can to suport him even if it is only a penny
ajimwest 4 years ago 3
Have you looked at my youtube channel? :-D Five guesses as to who I'm voting for.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Each time I see a video lying about
Dr. Paul I go and donate 10 bucks and let me
encourage others to do also.. As of 10 min ago
he's up to 10,743,503,44 so please be apart of the revolution of constitutional government
AiresQX4 4 years ago 4
Great comment here aires and I hope everyone will join us at the tea party. I'm signed up!
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Thank you so much for your informative comment. You've saved me an hour of my life... I won't waste it. Instead of watching the video you are commenting to, I think I'll go out and tell some freedom-loving Americans about Dr. Ron Paul.
This is the first time that I've been passionate about supporting a presidential candidate.
I'll be voting for Ron Paul in 2008!
girlygirl1323 4 years ago 9
Can't tell ya how great that is to hear. Recently my girlfriend and I hand addressed 150 Ron Paul intro letters to independant voters in Iowa. Got a call back from the first of that mailing today. I'm on cloud nine! And you my dear just put a silver lining on it :-) Cheers! Lets make sure to join our local GOP precinct, district etc to empower delegates.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I keep hearing the same thing from supporters of Ron Paul. They say that this is the first time they have agreed on many points with a presidential candidate/politician, and it's the first time that they've actually wanted to get up, get out, and do something to help that candidate win.
I also happen to be one of those people.
I think Ron Paul and the constitution have actually made me start believing in Americans and America again.
PiratePuppetMelba 4 years ago 4
TRUE STATEMENT! I have a tough time deciding who I appreciate more, Dr. Paul or PiratePuppetMelba (ie my fellow patriots).
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
You are SO much easier to listen to than this blithering idiot Stef, and make more sense. For the first time ever, I'm interested in a political candidate! Why? Ron Paul is the only candidate I've ever seen (since I've been eligible to vote anyway) who is votable. Yup, new word. I no longer need to find "the least of the evils" - Paul actually makes common sense, which unfortunately is not so common, as evidenced by Stef's idiotic ramblings and H. G. Wellsian fictional predictions. Kudos!
boman2000 4 years ago 4
Hey boman2000- lol @ votable. I love new words and thats a perfect one for Ron Paul :-)
Thanks for the encouragement here. It's not easy going up against a guy with 3000+ subscribers, 45 minutes with my humble background. But it had to be done. He is taking young folks into his fold and I feel they need to hear both sides.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
THanks FJF- always good to hear from you.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Thanks Anyusmoo,
I encourage you to run at a local level.
I could only watch 10 minutes of that dudes vid.
I was guessing he was an anarchist. but many of the anarchists I know are becoming interested in politics and registering republican this year :)
keep up the good work.
I'm reading Paul's book now but can I get a reading assignment from you?
whats your favorite Book?
Ive had enough Ayn Rand this year.
What would you reccomend?
coolfoilhatman 4 years ago 3
Thanks coolfoil... I appreciate your encouragement of the videos and to run. Currently I am reading the Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (not finished yet but it's very interesting); I recommend watching the 6-part Norman Dodd interview (see playlist on my channel); if you haven't read Frederic Bastiat's 'The Law', it's essential for any liberty loving American (available in its entirety online- scroogle it). :-) I look forward to hearing from you again, soon.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I get the feeling that Molyneux is worried that the state would be dramatically reduced in his lifetime. He acts as though Paul would be elected in a vacuum where there isn't an acceptance of his ideas.
Thanks for correcting some of his strangely misguided thinking.
There are some anarchists who support Ron Paul because many of them see decentralizing the state as a move in the right direction. Read some of Walter Block's take on Ron Paul.
johnpdd 4 years ago 3
Thanks, I'll check out walter block. I appreciate the kudos john and look forward to checking out your channel too.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Sorry to bring you back John, but I feel like you are really the only person here who could answer my question well. Because I wanted to set the record straight and really understand what's going on: I don't think Molyneux was arguing that Ron Paul would be elected in a setting that would completely oppose his manner of thought, but that there would have been so many people with deeply entrenched, vested interests in the system as it stood then, that it would be extremely difficult
DoctorFist 4 years ago
My question is this: Today, Dec 31st is indeed approaching the bewitching hour HOWEVER, is this not a CAMPAIGN (a contest whereby public debates and interviews are conducted) to GROW ones constituency?. Why has everyone FROM DAY ONE rushed to say it won't happen? Could it be because lamestream media is deciding for us? If so, can you understand the frustration of supporters who spend time and energy on the campaign?
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I contend there is enough 'reason', culture and recollection of history left in many Americans that IF THEY HEARD the platform, had an opportunity to HEAR, DEBATE, and not from the vantage point of 'all ready decided' interviewers, people will (as they have) rally in a BIG WAY.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
to reduce. Like...as an example, taking away the department of education (one of RPs goals). Molyneux talked about how Reagan tried this and failed...and furthermore, that reduction of the state through control has been attempted already for more than 300 years, and throughout all of history the state has never decreased in size. I was just curious what your thoughts were on this, because I'm unsure whether Ron Paul really represents something new, or whether he'll meet with the
DoctorFist 4 years ago
same failure that we've seen throughout history, particularly in the US. I also posted some similar argumentations higher up on this page, but unfortunately no one really commented back to me correcting my position. If not this time, then it will probably be my last post here. So: Is it actually possible to reduce the powers of the state gradually? Is Ron Paul going to do anything special? Because this whole spiel seems to be following a very non-historically-accurate-route!
DoctorFist 4 years ago
He often seems to take a position of decentralization. This is something I support, and it is something many others who want to reduce or eliminate the state also support. Eliminating the DoE only removes the central state from education. There would then be varying amounts of success on the state and local level. If you look closely at the policy positions he takes, they are often getting the federal government out of an issue or legalizing competition in some area.
johnpdd 4 years ago
One thing about Ron Paul that I see different from so many others is that he is very knowledgeable about these issues and can explain them to people. I think he has quite a teaching ability. So many others learn what the right position is, but don't have the ability to explain it to the general public, so they end up compromising.
johnpdd 4 years ago
ooh...that makes much more sense now. Thanks!
DoctorFist 4 years ago
I believe the state can be made smaller, but it is likely to be due to some external event out of their control that will bring the situation to a head, and if you look at history something ALWAYS brings it to a head, Rome fell, the US declared independance, so on and so forth, this is the first time people will try to bring down an empire peacefully, right now we're in virgin territory, we're living in interesting times, anything is possible.
luke666808g 4 years ago
Sorry this is so late. Dr. Pauls success is inevitable in light of the current 'perfect storm' brewing in our economy and with the awful war.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Fantastic Response! You really know how to explain these issues in great detail.
MyStrangeMind 4 years ago 8
Thanks MSM too bad your initials are the same as main stream media but, you know what I mean :-)
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Good job,
I support Ron Paul and I'm from Canada
At the end of your video you hit it bang on. Ron Paul speaks of these issues that upset me about what is going on in the world.
We both know that your last statement not only effects you, it effects us as well and the rest of the world.
Thank you for your video.
fcirc 4 years ago 3
Thanks fcirc
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
stefbot seems to be a anarcho-capitalist. Anarcho-capitalists view the state as evil, period; not necessary evil as minarchist libertarians. Therefore the beating analogy was to say that even if Ron Paul were to be able to reduce the state to next to nothing that remnant would still be evil.
murphycline 4 years ago
Yes. I got that. I know that. My address was to both the analogy as it applies to subliminal intent (or natural occurance) AND given my limited time, the more obvious.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Gotcha. I kind of agree with a good deal of stefbot's positions, but like a lot of anarcho-capitalist he'd rather not dirty his hands in the necessary steps to at least reign in government. It allows folks to remain intellectually pure. Even Paul recognizes the importance of being pragmatic.
murphycline 4 years ago
Me too (agree with some of stefpots positions). And you're right about not dirtying hands in the toil of correction but worse, adding insult to that injury, by completely soiling the debate with open hostility and hystrionics for his own agenda- using Paul's name to further his own agenda.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Stefbot seems to have all the right answers. Yeah, he's a real sage alright -- damn brilliant! If we are actually ignorant enough to follow his incredibly dubious advice and do absolutely nothing -- and just let all this nonsense continue -- then the freedom that we seek to restore will just spontaneously "happen" (someday). We can simply delude ourselves into thinking that we're all "free", have attained a state of liberty, and actually have natural rights. Now go take some more soma.
KobyBrandt 4 years ago 3
Goethe got it right:
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
KobyBrandt 4 years ago
And btw, nice job on the vid!
KobyBrandt 4 years ago 2
Thanks.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Excellent video anyusmoon1! And here's what I say to Stef and his totally apathetic and defeatest anarcho crew:
P3rf3ctStorm 4 years ago 3
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams, (1722-1803) U.S. Founding Father and Public Enemy #1"
Fortunately, Stef is not one of OUR Countrymen...
P3rf3ctStorm 4 years ago 2
Right! Stef is not only NOT one of our countrymen but the first to say, as an anarchist, that he'll crouch to no one; but... he won't lift a finger to help those like us- And takes advantage of many young minds to build his anthill of admirers.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I raise a salute to you! I love the way you give em' Hell in a polite and informed manner!
krimax7347 4 years ago 3
Not sure if I would have spent the time on a foreigner's opinion, regardless, great work! :)
NotMyLiberty 4 years ago 6
5 stars, you rock lady !!!
saveRconstitution 4 years ago 7
The Lady is correct: A constitutional republic will keep all virtuous people clean, safe, and free, and the ability for all like-minded individuals to attempt to have prosperity unencumberanced. The Republic will enhance liberty since it will prevent 'Tyrany of the Majority'.
Bill25cycle 4 years ago 6
For your information, the public school system in Canada (as if Canada is some distant, unrelated, alien place) work--in terms of financing--at the municipal level as well.
qtronman 4 years ago
I don't know a thing about Canadian schools nor your government. As to 'alien' in legal terms- Canadians ARE aliens when in this country and I'm an alien when in Canada. From THIS vantage point you and I are FOREIGN to one another. There is nothing ugly about the term alien.
Just as a Federal Agent is an 'alien' when attempting to impose his jurisdiction on you, in your state. :-)
The DOE is NOT municipal it is Federal. That's why Dr. Paul shall do away with it.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
The school system here is similar to the British system, as is our parliamentary government. (A cursory knowledge of North American/British history should give you some hint of that.)
Of course, in a legal sense, I am an "alien" in your country. Today, in broader cultural usage, however, that term connotes a certain xenophobia, and it is clear that its users _know_ that it does.
qtronman 4 years ago
You raised the word/notion of 'alien' not I. In either case it's not a matter of xenophobia nor is it important. Neither is county vs. municipal- the Paul presidential platform pertains to Federal DOE.
Learning, knowing and applying canadian customs, laws or methods of edu are not the subject of this video. Nor does it pertain to the presidential candidate Ron Paul- in the true nature or 'stefpots shapes'. Thanks for the info though.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Actually the "xenophobia" has nothing to do with the term "alien" unless YOU put it there. And the only "clear" is that YOU assume things, believe them, speak on them, without actually knowing.
christopherquinn 4 years ago
Who are you addressing christopherquinn? I assume qtornman.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Yes, anyusmoon1, I am addressing qtronman.
christopherquinn 4 years ago
"The DOE is NOT municipal it is Federal. That's why Dr. Paul shall do away with it."
At ~4:30 in this video, you say: "The school system operate from property taxes at the county level, but I don't expect a Canadian to understand our laws..."
I was referring to this remark in my above reply. Is or is not the "county level" synonousm with the municipal level? If it is, then our school system in Canada works the same way in terms of funding, whether you know anything about it or not.
qtronman 4 years ago
* synonousm = synonymous
qtronman 4 years ago
I'm sure we can dispense with policing spelling, semantics and grammar- you're obviously bright and articulate, everyone I'm sure will understand you. :-)
I would like to dispense with sarcasm too but that's probably asking too much :-0
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Moreover, it's utterly ridiculous to say "I don't expect a Canadian to understand our laws..." as if to understand some body of information you have to be born within some geographic boundary. Absurd.
qtronman 4 years ago
The absurdity lay in a 45 minute hystrionic video designed to portray the Paul presidency in a blood-bath. THAT sir, is absurd. The absurdity is a Canadian anarchist attempting to drum up backers for his scheme, for his benefit using the highly marketable name RON PAUL through misinformation and if not misinformation than worse yet, lies.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
With all due respect (and I'm an Objectivist, not an anarchist--and I have many problems with 'stefbot' and libertarians generally), I think you're misinterpreting his principal point... His main point, in essence, is that people (pressure interest groups, in particular) do not understand the principles of liberty and will see any deep and _significant_ government cuts and shrinkage as a massive threat to their livelihood and, consequently, will rebel tooth and nail.
qtronman 4 years ago
Given the state of the culture, I don't see how you can disagree with this point. As to the degree to which R. Paul actually proposes to implement massive domestic government shrinkage is perhaps where stefbot goes wrong.
qtronman 4 years ago
I believe I understand what you are getting at and my comments, my video express what I think of his point, the way he made and why.
He is no libertarian otherwise he would be encouraging not harrangueing (sp?) and making a spectacle (have some PRIDE, have some PRIDE, have some PRIDE) of himself and the issues.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
And do you really, in your heart of hearts believe he represented facts, truth or did anything but exacerbate his demented desires? He desires negativity, hystrionics and mayhem. And for WHAT? Merely to promote. Promote his own view, his book(s), his vlog. Like I said before he can conjur up scenarios all day long, I could care less, but don't put Ron Pauls name on his fiction for ill-purposes and casting aspurtions on this campaign.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Nope, the guy was clearly on a disinformation binge and trying tap Dr. Paul's viewers to market his self-serving and poorly thought out propaganda.
christopherquinn 4 years ago 3
Thank you.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Keep up the good work, anyusmoon1!
michaej 4 years ago 7
I weary dueling ideologies, of people adopting opinions they have not thoroughly researched and warring over pure rhetoric.
I have intelligent friends on all sides of any issue; and the only thing I can see aligning them all is the Constitution. Without that, things get chaotic.
It would be so refreshing to live in a society where a majority of the citizens were as well informed and conscientious as you obviously are. Thank you.
christopherquinn 4 years ago 5
When you look at lists of employers of candidates' donors, you find that for most of the candidates, their top contributors are Wall Street firms.
Top employer of donors to Obama, Clinton and Romney: Goldman Sachs.
For Ron Paul it is: Google, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, Microsoft, U.S. Air Force... on down to number 11, which is: U.S. Postal Service!
peterscottfrost 4 years ago 6
Judging by my two of three postal workers I've spoken to the it's no wonder... they loved the idea of not turning them into police force and rat finks. It's disgusting what the gov is asking them to do. I guess they don't much like fillingout reports (spying) on citizens/neighbors.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Apparently, they are trying to do the same thing with firefighters. On Friday, there was an Associated Press article titled "Firefighter help on terrorism." A society of spies. Who wants that? It's depressing, really.
peterscottfrost 4 years ago 5
It's been in place for some time (society of spies) the banks for instance have immunity from busting you or anyone that deposits, withdraws or anything in their institution, and required by law NOT to advise their customers of inquiries by the feds. This is essentially the IMF, Fed/Res, controlling you via the (non-existent) enforcement arm of the IRS. IRS has no jurisdiction over you or I in our domestic dealings.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
This is interesting. Where did you get this info? I'd like to look it up. Thanks a lot!
jeremy837 4 years ago
Jeremy837 I apppologize to you also, without going into the boring details let me offer that I honestly believe YouTube is messed up.
Were you asking me this question?
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Stef was making a comparison when he talked about slavery, He doesn't think the Ron Paul wants it back. What exactly is patriotism anyway? My father, brother, and both my grandfathers have all been in the military. I've grown up with more patriotism then anyone and I can tell you this; it counts for nothing. All it is, is something talk show radio hosts talk about to make you feel more right wing.
IItothe222345helomot 4 years ago 2
My vid/reply addressed either possibility re the slavery analogy being either a twisted and sick subtlety or pertaining to income tax. Either way it's a non issue in this thread.
Patriotism is exactly what your family exhibited and has NOTHING to do with talking t.v. heads. Dr. Paul is pure unadulterated patriotism. Speaking his msg DESPITE it's unpopularity, never wavering, totally consistent and without person gain. Not that gain is a bad thing but for a Congressman it shows stellar motives.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Thanks I appreciate your video response. Thanks for taking the time and tellingn it like it is.
HollisQueens 4 years ago 5
Oh, and people like Dr. Walter Block and Lew Rockwell, are market anarchists and support Paul... :)
Austrolibertarian 4 years ago 4
There are many brilliant anarcho-capitalist scholars who have actually endorsed Dr. Paul for president, simply because they don't commit the error that Stefan does.
Good job, again, on the video, and keep up the good work!
Austrolibertarian 4 years ago 5
Please excuse my not commenting sooner, sometimes I don't see additional comments if somone has a more recent one. I'm so sorry austrolibertarian.
Thank you for your kind words and encouragement. Will you support Dr. Paul?
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Yes. I have been and will continue to.
Austrolibertarian 4 years ago 3
Will we see you at the Grande Rally in Washington D.c.?
Help spread the word. The Ron Paul Rally will be HUGE
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Anyus, congrats on making a response to this video. I've watched Stefan's video's before and many of them are rather good. This one, though, he completely misses the mark.
You probably know that I'm sympathetic to anarcho-capitalism. Now, Stefan, is a market anarchist, but he commits the fallacy of a lack of a sense of proportion. He equates unlimited government tyranny with limited, constitutional government.
Austrolibertarian 4 years ago 5
Ron Paul needs money NOW!
Go to rudysreadinglist and sign up for Nov 30th donation to Ron Paul. If you are like me and cannot afford $100 just give whatever you can. This is an investment in your and your children's future that will provide better returns on your money than the stock market ever will. Than Donate again Dec 16th visit teapaty07.
sharpsteve2003 4 years ago 3
Best book on slavery and the Civil War:
Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men
sanarkhos 4 years ago
I'm fascinated with the 14th amendment. What WERE the ramifications? Does that amendment apply to sovereign citizens or merely speaking to giving Federal citizenship to emancipated persons. ie, none of us (born in one of the 50 states) are U.S. citizens. Interesting dilemma.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
And they spend most of their energies lambasting Ron Paul out of all people. Out of all the evil candidates out there, they choose Ron Paul. It's like throwing out water that has a spec of dust in it and continuing to bathe in contaminated filth while dreaming for crystal clear perfection. It's pretty cowardly and it's practical implications are no less utopian than communism
takadi 4 years ago 5
Anyways, THANK YOU for that. It's funny because out of all the people I've had trouble with during this campaign, it was the anarchists/atheists who gave me the hardest time. It's such irony because we both fight for the same thing (minarchism vs anarchism), yet anarchists shift so much on their hatred on constitutional minarchists because of that one little discrepancy - they believe there should be NO government.
takadi 4 years ago 3
Perhaps you can convince them with the deep-diver-analogy (diver needs to come slowly to surface to prevent decompression sickness - state will become obsolete in a natural way by decentralization and making state services optional). Because I (as an anarchist myself) use that argument in support of RP. Hope it helps.
donienarder 4 years ago 4
That is an excellent analogy; I'm a gradualist anarcho-capitalist myself and view the re-establishment of federalism as a means to the eventual dissolution of the state. Stefbot does have a point about the dangers of detours though
murphycline 4 years ago
The first step is by following the law as it is written. If anyone, socialist on the one end of the spectrum or anarchist on the other, wants to change things they must do so within the law. Not just say it, make it up as we go along, or rely on a majority vote (utterly unacceptable) which abuses 49%.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
So..is it actually possible to decrease the powers of the state gradually? Because I think that was Stefan's main criticism of Ron Paul, that even if you remove one service (the postal service) the people and vested interests are so inherently dependent on the system that there would be chaos in return. I don't think he was arguing for complete dissolution of the state (although he projected a hectic scenario towards the end of his video for solid entertainment!)
DoctorFist 4 years ago
Not that the postal service is actually going to be removed...but as an example, I think it shows how much of an effect these attempts at reduction can have. Compared to eliminating the department of education, for instance, I think there could be similar repercussions, unless there is some replacement institution, not privatized of course.
DoctorFist 4 years ago
Stefan states how libertarians, for about 300 years, have been trying to control the state by joining the state...is this not what you are describing? (6:15 on his video) This sounds exactly like Ron Paul. Again at 8:40, he makes a point about how great thinkers and men have attempted to reduce the state's powers, and failed...isn't that the problem? Replies appreciated
DoctorFist 4 years ago
Correction: Replace men with statesmen
DoctorFist 4 years ago
It's all about timing. Horrid neocons, indistinguishable from horrid liberals, and the horrid fed reserve, horrid war. ITS THE PERFECT STORM.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
The fact is Dr. Paul is not purporting getting rid of the USPS, he is merely discussing the concept to introduce competitive mail carriers, period.
Furthermore- his plans do NOT include throwing Americans, who've been taught to be dependant, out on the street. He would begin the cuts overseas, wars, foreign entitlements and CORPORATE entitlenments, special interests.
These things and stopping the federal reserve and its funny money schemes.
No income tax is HUGE and GREAT. This man=genius.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
I just heard a great one to share with you.
Dr. Paul is like a swimmer trying to save a drowning man that will not stop clawing and panicking- thus he has to cold-cock the guy, knock him out, in order to save his life.
None of the economic facts Dr. Paul so aptly talks about falls easily on the ears of the neocons.
anyusmoon1 4 years ago
Eh ancaps can really get under your skins sometimes
takadi 4 years ago 3