But my friend Stefan, isn't non-documented immigration, with its miasma of counterfeiting and subterfuge, at the very least, fraud, if not economic aggression?
How can we be free? I have hope but am skeptical. Why do nothing as far as voting for him, aren't we slaves regardless, what would be the harm, considering the alternative which is really just giving up and accepting slavery?
Actually, moving can be seen as a form of initiation o violence if seen as trespassing in somebody's territory. Its simple to understand. For example, if a stranger enters your personal bubble without first asking or warning, it will be perceived instinctively as a threat.Same thing if you wake up one morning to find somebody you dont know in your kitchen.
really makes you think....my idea is to abandon this country and form a new community somewhere were everybody would have this filosophy, therefore a bit of isolationism...i know...it must be somewhere really far so the corrupted ideologies of government ca;t reach us... i al all ears to your proposals.
Stef, You keep making it about the person and not the idea. Its the idea that ron paul represents thats attractive. The message man not the messenger!
In principle you sound logical.Now in my opinion, in the idea of personal freedom,I think we share the same common goals but my question to you is this. Is the massage of spreading freedom best delivered and most effective under a Ron Paul Government with Political leaders of like minded principles or under a Obama's, Reagan's or Bushes' political elites in power?
Ron Paul has done a lot of good for the freedom movement.You may not agree,but having the biggest bull horn in the country does work
who was the last libertarian president? ill read ur books if you wanna send them my way. i just feel like im missing something that maybe ur books will explain better. ron paul is more of an anti-federalist, one of the first political parties in america.
Ron Paul would "stop the truck" when it's going 120 MPH when no one before had been able to slow it down by phasing out the Fed with competitive money. Our last two assassinated presidents both tried to introduce interest-free money into the economy. THAT is why the truck continues to go faster. If we remove the weight of the Fed from the gas pedal, the truck will at least have the ability to slow down and maybe eventually stop. As long as we have a debt-based economy, it's zoom to the moon.
Look, I'm not going to say you live in lala land because I too sometimes wish things could be that way. But their not. What your preaching is very New Age, I know all about New Age because I used to be a black belt in it if there where such thing. Here's where the problem comes in. Are you perfect? Don't answer that, no your not. As long as that's the case, we will always have not just the use of violence, but those who seek to conquer. This is way "A" state will always be needed.
i must humbly disagree, "illegal" immigrants do violate the NON AGRESSION PRINCIPLE by using the subsidies for education and healthcare and roads and all else. by ur own definition (and mine) taxation is theft and force and i am being forced to subsidize someone against my will at the barrel of a gun...in a perfect world there are no borders, but there are also no subsidies...so yes NO AMNESTY...
@funkysnarf But aren't non-immigrants violating the non-aggression principle just as much? Why is it worthy of punishment to take these subsidies from taxpayers after moving here but not worthy of punishment to do it after being born here?
Ok well then this brings the whole Capitalist system into question. Ultimately it is capitalism that is used as the excuse or even the reason that illegal immigrants are a problem. So how then do we accomplish non-agression and afford through Capitalism the problem of "over immigration"?... State or not.
Barren land that once filled a need Are worthless now, dead without a deed Slipping away from an iron grip Nature's scales are forced to tip The heartland cries, loss of all pride To leave ain't believing, so try and be tried Insufficient funds, insanity and suicide Now with new hope some will be proud This is no hoax, no one pushed out Receive a reprieve and be a pioneer Break new ground of a new frontier New ideas will surely get by No deed, or dividend. Some may ask "Why?"
Not voting for a person who wants to end the murder of people overseas and might have some success in doing that over this one issue just strikes me as ideological blind and completely neglectful of human reality.
"Deport the police and politicians." Where can I sign up for that?
I used to be a huge fan of Ron Paul, but not so much these days. What Stef is saying here is essentially correct. One of the fundamental aspects of Paulian philosophy is rigid constitutionalism. But hey, I never consented to any constitution -- just strikes me as an invalid contract.
Voting is the slaves' suggestion box. People who put their faith in such a process are brainwashed dupes.
I think Reagan and others still achieved a lot in terms of convincing people ideologically that government is the problem, not the solution, by showing that, for example, lower taxes helps growth. And Reagan was much less committed ideologically to the ideal of small government than Ron Paul. Even if Reagan failed to really slow down the "train" in the broader sense, he helped change people's minds. A Ron Paul presidency could change a lot more minds, which could move us in the right direction.
The only way I can see that happening (the average guy on the street believing the state is unnecessary) is for small government policies to succeed--i.e., we elect Ron Paul, he succeeds in pushing forward a small government agenda, great prosperity ensues, people say "look, we get more prosperity with less government--let's keep pushing in that direction." Certainly it's very hard. But I think you're also not being fair to Reagan and others. I don't think they absolutely failed.
Here's the thing I think you're missing. You say all these people have been piling on to the "shrink government" truck, but I don't think that's true. Von Mises and others have never truly won the intellectual battle. Their arguments were brilliant, but their thinking has never become mainstream. If anarchism is ever to really work, I think it will have to be because a great majority of regular people in a geographic area are convinced they don't need a state.
The important message is protection and preservation of freedom of information. Let's keep the dialogue open. Join the conversation at HumanitoriumDOTcom
The reason why it can be done this time is we are starting to acknowledge the power behind the State. Governments are controlled by outside interests. More people than ever see the New World Order for what it is and want no part of it. I know you don't like to talk about "conspiracy theories" but there is a lot of evidence that they exist, I know because I have spent years researching it.
What's wrong with fear & hatred? Mexicans want maize flour, cooking oil and whatever the compromised American gov. can give them. If you think lines on a map and the nation state is just mass murder, then you abdicate all ideas of collective defense. You get mugged? Robbed? Who cares? You didn't defend yourself. Yes, the Mexicans should be deported, weeping children, the whole lot. But all the things that should happen will never happen.
rand was a bank supporter,i suppose your a globalist ?you keep talking about others being cattle,but you seen to have blinders on when it comes to elite conspiratorial control,what do you think about people saying the country is being destroyed intentionally
Everyone was fleeing the BANKSTERS communism feminism was all invented by theBANKSTERS,the only moral position to take is to charge the BANKSTERS with fraud and bribery deport them or jail them,and start from the top down,like you say its not immigrants you go on to blame everyone but the people responsible,THE BANKSTERS.Who you refuse to talk about
its all about the wellfarestate wich the elite takes as a tool to destroy the moddleclass by letting the immigrants in !! for example anker babbies etc. !
mexico got much more natural ressources than usa..think 3 times more??
the immigrants are used as pawns to destroy the us from within... i think thats the whole point !
Most of this video is on the immigration issue? What about ending the wars, introducing currency competition, and Ron Paul's transitional policies that you fail to acknowledge?
I agree with your goals Stef, but your argument that "if they couldn't do it then, we can't do it now" isn't very strong. Also, Ron Paul is more about the message than politics. His politics has allowed the message to spread and has awoken many people. Education is more his goal than any kind of political victory.
The reason why it fails is due to the fact the FED needs to be abolished. The Rotschilds have been funding wars since Napoleon. That is why they never loose.
I disagree with stefbot on a handful of issues...(mis)charactrization of Ron Paul.
Unfortunately, he's very correct on many fronts...very practical, logical, in touch with reality, funny. So I guess it's reality I'm not happy with.
In genral, it appears stefbot is all about 'no govt' (not a bad goal), while a Ron Paul type is all about constitutionally limited govt, which for stefbot is a contrdction because the state is all about force. I see RP's goal as more reachable than stefbot's.
Roughly speaking, the immigrant problem of Europe is arguably one of intergenerational "benign neglect", practiced by the host government, rather than there being the expectation of assimilation (some family members, in spite of living decades in the host country, never learning the language and respecting laws and customs, as an example). Traditionally, American immigrants, for good and bad, were compelled to assimilate, and most quite readily. Different immigrant history.
There is nothing immoral or unnatural about wanting to live with people that are the same ethnicity as yourself. Racism if anything is a social construct and it is almost exclusively applied to whites.
Man.. You are all over the map in this series with strawman arguments. The issue from a minarchists point of view isn't illegal immigration OR taxation. The problem in their minds is illegal immigration AND taxation. Granted, minarchists support minimal taxation, which I agree is violence, however, I would still argue that w/o recent attention RP, Jacob Hornberger, Michael Badnarik, Peter Schiff, etc. are getting, the anarchist movement wouldn't be near where it is now.
You change the debate here. RP is a minarchist and you are an anarchist. RP is a constitutionalist and believes a representative republic is just, while you don't.
From a minarchist POV, some aggression is justified to maintain law and order.
So, you are really only debating minarchism vs. anarchism in this video rather than defending your straw man arguments from the first video.
As I stated in my post on the 1st video, minarchism growth brings more and more ppl to anarchism.
Immigration would not be as much of a problem if there were no welfare state.
Before America had income taxes the immigration policy was less restrictive. So it is not fair to compare what happened in the past to what is happening now. Stefbot cries racism which is a strawman. Another thing... Mexicans and Asians are choosing to come here so why do you say they are living in fear of "whitey"? They fear whites so much that they can't wait to come here? Your argument is strange.
I'm already a minority, I'm the ultimate minority the individual, ... but if there is bunch of people sinking a boat, is it not logical to stop boat from sinking in the moment and then when we set example open up to help them once u are able? I think R.P. said same thing as well on immigrants. He solution get rid of state, he tells u this can't happen peacefully, so he sort of talks in circles, unless you be a happy multi generational slave. Perhaps this is why revolution gets so bloody.
Your analysis would presuppose that nonwhites are completely for illegal immigration. This is statistically not true. Once again you ignore the economic question. Instead you make it about racism or xenophobia. I'm sure in some cases that plays a part, but as far as the Revolution goes its about law,economics, and ethics. If there is fear it has more to do with foreign mentalities that may not have the background to understand the complexities of liberty and free market economics.
Deportation of all people who cost money to the function system is a strawman. It creates the false principle that whatever is applied to one scenario is universally applicable and that is simpley false. But as Ron Paul supporters we argue against the income tax and therefore the police and IRS agents would not be performing any tax collecting functions and so (according to your strawman logic) they would not need to be deported. Punishment for crime must be appropriate TO the crime.
The aggression principle is not limited to physical violence. The aggression principle can be viewed economically. When hospitals have to shut down because they illegals use the ER for a physician office it is an act of economic aggression. When they send billions of US dollars earned here to foreign markets it is an economic aggression that harms the Legal American people as a whole. There is no contradiction here, your argument is refuted. Next point.
Mexico to Canada. Let me know how it goes :c) (Ron Paul the only one helping to stop it.... Oh, never mind we will just wait for things to happen rather than trying to do something NOW. I will WAIT and WAIT to see what is going to happen.) Ronald Regan was a true republican. Ron Paul is a Libertarian running as a republican because of the system. North American Union you will be a part of America soon enough... no borders YAY.. I get it Just WAIT.
Reagan was a true republican? You might want to read a history book, particularly a history involving the republican party. Ron Paul is as much a libertarian as Thomas Jefferson- the first Republican president.
Police ENFORCE laws. The term "illegal" implies BREAKING the law. Ron Paul is consistent. Your theories are not justified or plausible. I am against ILLEGAL immigration, yet my fiancé is Asian, my step mother is Hispanic. Your "whitey outnumbered" theory reminds me of "Penis Envy" theory for all the Freudian psychological drives of the female psyche lol. SURE. Fear of Penis being chopped off is the drives of human psychology lol. But you said it: Your just some guy on Youtube
No amnesty! Ron Paul is for legal immigration. We can't afford our current path. Evading Taxes? Using a fake SS number, without caring if it is already someone's SS number, creating problems for US citizens? Forcing immigrants to have to sneak in and do everything illegally before being forgiven? No amnesty! Amnesty supports having to break laws in order to become a citizen.
@stefbot The plan is outlined by Paul. Our government wasn't growing (in relation to the GDP) and inflation didn't exist as long as we didn't have central banking. END THE FED. Free market banking is the first most important step. If that can be done (a big if) the concurrent step would be to have free market currencies (they have that in Indonesia - the gold dinar and silver dirham competing with the rupiah). Other steps include vouchers in education - chipping away at the public ed monopoly.
@GoLuckyOops What moral justification do you have for refusing others, who have done you no wrong, going anywhere? Or are you just afraid of sinister Asians, terrorist Arabs and dirty Mexicans?
@GoLuckyOops i think what we need to realize is there is no illegal immigrants, just crossing a border isnt a crime.
The problem you point out isnt the immigrant, its that the system requires people provide SS# to work, so because the govt uses force, people resort to fraud to just work.
I agree that amnesty isnt the solution. A path to citizenship is just another bureaucratic hoop to jump through. It's not striking the root.
Respond to this video... you clearly dont know the history of your own country. america was invented 250 years ago and required the genocidal purging of the true american citizens
you are the descendants of illegal immigants, you asinine fool
By subsidizing something you support it. Current Immigration policy is a welfare state, by illegally coming here you are dictated by courts free health Medicare and education. Immigrants with a strong work ethic who honestly and legally obtain citizenship, pay their taxes, should have the opportunity to legally come to the United States and deserve the success. I pride the USA on our diversity. Your "whitey outnumbered" theory? You are not critically analyzing or tolerating opposing views.
Yes Illegal Immigrants VIOLATE the rule of non Aggression. It's called Trespassing. They forced themselves into an area they were not invited. Unless the whole world becomes stateless society you have to have boarders. This is an intellectual circle jerk.
I like this post, roughly agree with it, but still support Ron Paul for a couple of reasons:
1) I know more about why libertarian minarchists fail more than they succeed than most people do.
2) I think that "killing these specific bad guys" is a net good. (The superhero doesn't need to kill all bad guys, or stop all rapes. It's enough to stop one or two, and leave behind a replicable strategy --such as FIJA activism)
3) Political action is not perfectly mutually exclusive to your ideas...
This video chain is painful to watch. I have so much respect for you, stefbot, but you've gossly missed the mark. It seems that you have missed an essential premise on what RP is talking about. Philosophy is your main shtick and RP has repeatedly stated the same ideal. Listening to all this blathering is painful because you go on-n-on about things when you've started on the wrong foot.Irespect your perspective andagree with most of your philosophy, you simply have misrepresented RP position.
Sorry, I am having a hard time trying to put what I want to say into words but think about when someone immigrates through legal channels they will swear an oath to this country and it's laws. That is a personal contract. It means something. Yes they are just moving but they make a contract with the new nation they are moving to when they come the legal way. The people who started this country understood this.
Ran out of room. Search Goggle images for people from Mexico carrying the Mexican Flag. This is what I am getting at. They wish to bring their laws and beliefs here. They need to accept this country's laws if they want to live here. If they never make that contract and personal commitment then there is a conflict.
I have watched some of your videos. From watching your videos, I know you won't believe this but here goes. The problem with aliens is that their allegiance still lies with Mexico (or wherever they are from). Maybe you could accept that a person is somehow tied or loyal to their place of birth. You might think this a simple solution but if they were willing to renounce their allegiance and swear allegiance to this country and it's laws, we would be fine.
you don't understand the issues nearly as well as you think you do. it has to do with national sovereignty. explain how RP is non-interventionist vs. you believing that he hates mexicans. he wants every country to do whatever they want and promote free trade.
RP is a politician. Political change must take sociology into account. (I am just arguing here, not expressing my views per say). If we are to transition back to minarchy, we cannot do it all at once. You have to at least stand for supporting immigration laws, because that's what gets you elected. We all know they can do whatever they want once elected anyway...so RP would on paper support immigration, his true goal is to eliminate the teets that divide us on immigration to begin with.
C'mon, stef...you know as well as I do there are things that you don't say in your videos.
That said, RP does the same and it is one of the reasons he was not elected.
While he told the truth for the most part, he was not and he is not playing to win.
I've not seen enough of your work to be sure, (I will check out PA and revise my view accordingly) but thus far (ie, not in this generation & not through political revolution-but by personal example) your view puts us in the same boat.
RP is not anti-immigration. As he has stated for anyone who cares to listen, we should allow people to come and go as they please. The problem is that immigrants many immigrants come here to take advantage of our welfare system. If we abolished the welfare system there would (good solution) or if we excluded immigrants (bad solution because it favors and interest group) then most people wouldn't care about immigration. At best, people would have no valid claim as to why they shouldn't come here
It is not a compromise of idea. "RP is a politician" -this is rubbish. this supporter doesn't understand RP's position on immigration at all. I do not fault him though if he really wishes to further the cause of liberty it would do him well to be more informed. I shudder to think of the responses you have gotten to this video that have in his defense missed the mark completely of what RP is saying and doing but I hope you will read more of his work at both mises and lewrockwell if you havent yet
How can you have liberty without sovereignty? How can you have sovereignty without enforcing borders? How can you enforce borders without closing them to people who want sneak across them to take advantage of your naivety? It is not simply a matter of law. It is a matter of survival as a nation. Does this guy think borders are evil? That is what it seems like, therefore, one should ask if he likes a world without borders and therefore a One World system of government.
I don't get what stops a preacher from supporting the NWO? You can't be both an anarchist AND support one world government. They are diametricly opposed in every concievable way imagineable.
I assumed the guy was 'saying anyone who wants X does so because X will lead to world government' The same way leading Democrats / Republicans either openly and knowingly want world government or they simply support it unknowingly. Either way, the stated party line principles have nothing to do with it.
The meaning of the speakers words and actions that says it. Again I am not expressing views. I am clarifying the argument.
Personally? He wants world non-aggression & non-coercion.
It's really quite simple really: we want less government. Whose the presidential candidate who will get us that? Easy, that's Ron Paul. So, why not support Ron Paul, because of his pro-life stance? Or his no amnesty stance? No, because he wants to limit government and go back to the constitution. Therefore, to listen to these babbling idiots who denounce Ron Paul is a waste of time, a disastrous waste of time. Follow your own mind! Seriously, doubt everything this twit says. Don't buy his books
Paul hasn't said that he would deport 12 million illegal immigrants. He has said that he would remove the incentives for those coming here illegally. Then fix some of the inhibiting fines and time lengths for Legal immigration. Those already here would begin getting in line of their own accord to get the benefits of citizenship.
I would agree that allowing the citizens who live along the border to protect their own private property would be the ideal situation.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This guy is like the Kenny G of speakers. It's like... how many words can I say that mean nothing, in the shortest period of time. Some will pretend to think this guy knows what he is talking about, but he's just an asshole. Damn. What a waste of time.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
No, seriously guy, you're wrong on the most important issues, so why would I spend the time to listen to your face for 33 minutes!? Not gonna happen. I hope everyone will use their brain and boycott crap like your opinions.
"This guy is like the Kenny G of speakers. It's like... how many words can I say that mean nothing, in the shortest period of time. Some will pretend to think this guy knows what he is talking about, but he's just an asshole. Damn. What a waste of time."
I still agree with Steph that we should live free and become role models of the virtues of freedom.
The best way to do that, however, is to not pay taxes. Otherwise we're not really living free, and if we're not free then how can we show the world what true freedom is like?
What we'd be showing the world is what slavery of income tax is like, and we'd be trying to uphold that with false happiness - the very situation Steph describes as what props up the state.
Yea i must say that I have heard RP say that immigration would not be a problem if he could get rid of welfare and taxes and everything....but it still doesn't change the fact that he's not anti-government initiation of force, so he's not quite viable yet for me...
In regards to immigration, remember that libertarianism is based on non-aggression AND private property. So, someone moving does not violate the former, but with the latter it constitutes trespass.
Furthermore, with the welfare issue, the immigration problem is drastically complicated. RP does not have an easy choice. I think you're simplifying this a bit.
Ron Paul's stance on immigration is that he wants a free economy, so that illegal immigration would no longer pose a threat to jobs, welfare, etc, and so it would therefore become legal. Then, immigration would be a benefit to all- by increasing production and thus the standard of living.
Also, where does RP say he's going to deport 20 million people?
Exactly, Ron Paul said that we use 'illegal immigrants' as a scape goat because of our economic problems.
Ive also never heard him say he wants to deport. Though he has said its impracticle but he wants to stop giving amnesty because it does not help our welfare problems or whatever at all.
Out of the available choices for president of the United States, are there any that are less hypocritical than Ron Paul? The way I see it, Ron Paul wants to kick out the mafia and the bell boys.
@snipa4lyfe "The way I see it, Ron Paul wants to kick out the mafia and the bell boys." Ron Paul is focused on the size of government, so he wants to make the payments to the mafia smaller.
Two words: pocket veto. This combined with open communication with the public and executive pardon are the 3 main ways in which Paul can eliminate the worst excesses of the State, as well as educate the citizenry to the extent they can be educated. (You're right, the state will still grow, but perhaps we won't be jailing so many people)
O.K. Shill. I've already summed up your original video as, 'O.K. lets give up, Instead, we should 'thinkfreedom' using our MIND. Lets just sit back and enjoy servitude. It's only then that we become free.' What kind of drunken zen yoga class did you attend? Freedom has always come out of political upheaval! There is no "freedom" if those being crushed just accept it! No one can just "think" free. Action must be taken for change to plant itself in the minds of men!
I agree. You can't be free and still pay taxes at the same time. I believe the appropriate action is to stop paying taxes. Sure, there will be consequences. But you don't control the consequences, you can't. The only thing you can control is whether or not the evil men who implement those consequences are going to use your own labor to do so. And that should be the definition of perpetual slavery - paying for your own chains.
thankfully, stef is here to wake us up to the danger of exchanging one system of control for another. everyone is participating in the reality of this world, so be true to yourself and act accordingly. don't step out of line, pay your taxes on time and you can live out a life of miserable ironies always wondering "why,,, oh why??? didn't i take the RED pill..."??
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Also, how many of the illegals that cross the Mexican border are terrorists? I thought we were fighting a war on terror? Can you guarantee that no terrorists have come to the US thru Mexico. I didn't think so. You seem like and intelligent person. Why are you taking such an antiAmerican/socialist position?
Shill? Hack? Traitor? Corporate whore? Take your pick.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Part 2. The illegals cut in line in front of the millions that are going thru the legal channels. They are stealing the place of honest people that are going thru the legal process of emigrating. They are here illegally and you are defending them. So that makes you as criminal as they are. A lot of the people that want to come here legally have good educations and can offer something of value to the economy. Most of the illegals are uneducated, and taking all of the service jobs.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You irritate me so much that I can't even put a coherent thought together! If not Ron Paul, then who! Who the fuck are you going to vote for? Hitlery? There are over 30 million illegal's in the country. Coming into the country ILLEGALLY with their illiteracy, and disease (NO HEALTH OR BACKGROUND CHECKS). part 1
Well by your own logic, freedom will NEVER be achieved which I believe is obvious to anyone. You mistake Ron Paul supporters for fools who think they will attain heavenly freedom which has never been seen before, but in fact, all we want is to shift the pendulum of time back in the proper direction of living BETTER. That all we CAN do as a human race. Why just say forget it and let our primal retardedness take over and live in the darkness?
You take the logical approach of law and subject it to an irrational feeling that everyone should be able to do whatever they want and if they can't then thats not freedom.
Your views are now becoming more liberal than anything new and enlightening. The law isnt there for the sake of it. Law is to maintain order. When you have masses of illegals coming here unchecked, it causes economic unbalance, crime waves, and massive cultural shift which can cause civil war.
Another area would be the withdrawal of soldiers closure of bases in the middle east. The Saudis and Israelis wouldn't like it nor any one with infested interest in oil. The navy and soldiers petrol the hole region to protect there interests.
Ron Paul reminds me in some ways of Margaret Thatcher. If he was to close down or even privatise different areas of government. There would be scenes like the miners protests in the late 70's and 80's in England. He stated he would get rid of the CIA. Could you imagine the CIA on strike. ha-ha. It would create even more secretive and underhand. wings in the governments arsenal.
As for movements I do not give a fuck about them movements are for collectivist assholes. I am selfish and only care about my happiness and I do not see how going into a depression or WW3 will make my life better. I think RP could end American Imperialism and prevent WW3 and a responsible fiscal policy could keep the dollar from collapsing and keep me from a life of misery.
If you AnCaps believe that the purpose in life is happiness why would you not vote for Paul. If the dollar totally collapses in a Wiemar Republic fashion that would seriously destroy my quality of life. If the policies of American Imperialism start WW3 my happiness will be greatly affected. My vote for RP is a vote for me to use what little power I have, to prevent what I mentioned above from happening.
You know I tink it's only on the immigration issue that RP is pandering... he simply could not be a principled libertarian on this subject, it would kill his chances.
I'd rather he back down on his "big government promises" than his "small government promises".
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I think the legalization process just needs to be more comprehensive. I don't think people should have to wait for so long to become a citizen. I understand Ron Paul's concern with selling short those that actually wait and try to become a citizen the right way if we just grant everyone that cheated the system amnesty. But deporting everyone still won't solve the "bottleneck" problem that happens in the immigration process. Just fund and fix the immigration system.
Stef I believe the principles of freedom are so strong that if they are even moderately implemented they will make life better for most of us. So if RP accomplishes a few of his goals I think it would be beneficial for the majority of working people. I agree with you on personal freedom but I still do not see why voting for RP is so wrong at worst my vote is worthless and its only 15 minutes of my life.
Wrong - at worst, your vote is counterproductive and will help set back the cause of liberty 5 to 10 generations. Did you watch his previous video on RP?
Yes I watched it and I disagree with it. When/if the state falls capitalism will be blamed no matter who the president is. Just like the free market was blamed when Enron went down.
p.s. Ron Paul explicitly states that immigration is only a problem because of the welfare state, so your manic laughter about the maffia-busboys metaphor is wholly inappropriate and unfounded. btw, you still have a lot of replying to do to my comments on your prev video
Well but of course you haven't apologized to me for publically and falsely accusing me of "slandering" Ron Paul when I stated that RP wants to deport illegal immigrants, so if you don't have the basic decency to admit mistakes, why on earth would I debate abstracts with you?
dude, have you even read my prev posts? you have NOT demonstrated that Ron Paul wants to deport 10-20 million people and have thus NOT justified your slanderous comparison (on your board) that Ron Paul's plans resemble those of Hitler who had 6 million Jews killed
btw, if admitting mistakes is a *universal* value, then I'd like to refer you to some threads on your forum where you do exactly what you are accusing others of.
finally, the metaphor that you give towards the end of the video (and repeat two times, though one is a variation rather than repetition) doesnt prove anything as I can just as easily give a different metaphor that would be in line with the opposite conclusion. e.g. as more and more people climb on the wagon where all the statists (who you left out of your metaphor) are on as well, there'll be an ever greater chance of being able to stop them.
as for your idea that the past 150 years have proved that poltical action by libertarians is at best fruitless, you still havent responded to the points I made on your board and in response to the previous video. Also, do you have any idea how very very few libertarians there say the second half of the 20th century, and how many there are now? it's quite the huge difference
You say 'well, he only doesn't do it because it is impractical. in his heart he wants to do it'. That may be very true, but it is impossible to prove or disprove for you or me. So you cannot back up that accusation.
post may have not come through: anyway, it is clear that with your deportation-accusation you didnt mean to say that Ron Paul wants it in his heart but wont do it as president. Instead you wanted to create this nightmarish vision of police state actions, of Nazi-like raids etc. On your own forum for example you defend the Nazi/Holocaust comparison with Ron Paul which is quite bad dude...
as for your accusation that Ron Paul wants to deport 10-20 million people and your comment that you have proven that he wants to do that: you have not proven that. Ron Paul says that mass deportation is unpractical or unfeasible and elsewhere he talks about the police state that would entail. So clearly as a president he does not want to do that.
agreed on him being very unlikely to do that. However he will not be far from placing soldiers on the borders. Though I suppose that is far less hideous than having them constantly around the globe...
I disagree with your statement that it is impossible for people who hold the Non-Aggression Principle to object to 'illegal immigration'. I think there is a legitimate debate about whether they do or not through their voluntary participation in the welfare state. Too bad that on your forum you said that you wouldnt discuss immigration with me anymore 'until I have resolved my family issues because then things will make more sense to me' (paraphrased somewhat)
I agree with you that Ron Paul's reason for saying that illegal immigrants should not be rewarded with citizenship etc. because they have broken our laws is confused at best and hypocritical at worst. He cannot appeal to natural rights on the one hand and then use legal positivism on the other.
It is not fine that politicians are not challenged in their religious beliefs. The other policies/beliefs those other candidates bring they believe (falsely)are moral and that is also not fine and should be challenged more rigourously than Ron Paul. Savaging the one closest to your position and neglecting the others is positively counter productive at least for those who tend to vote.
The thing that bothers me about Ron is that he RECOGNIZES that government is the problem, he ADMITS it, but still supports getting rid of the bus boys.
I like Ron Paul as much as I can like a politician and would think that him taking office would probably turn out better than others. Its nice to see a liberal thinker again, but hes certainly with fault and so is thinking he will be a savior
My understanding is that Ron Paul would be less opposed to illegal immigration if American tax payers weren't footing the bill for their expenses. You failed to address that.
actually... he DID address that. The problem with immigration is not immigrants, its the government. Swating at the moths when you have your porch light on is pretty stupid.
we have person A
B robs A to perform various actions that attract or even benefit C (as well as B of course)
My mistake - I take it back fully. In any case, I like most RP supporters, are in love with an idea. I can't help believing that everybody's at least a little bit curious about the idea of a man like Ron Paul being elected president.
Ron Paul is an incremental step to help others see that they can be free.
We should be motivated to help others understand freedom by the expectation that we will all be more free in a society of freedom lovers as opposed to a society of statists. Vehicles are for spreading that message and are incremental steps towards a more free society not by government but by the governed.
Ron Paul doesn't have all the right answers but hes the closest thing we have toward's true freedom in America! You have some valid points but it's not something new your bringing to the table. Thanks for your opinions and keep sharing. RON PAUL 08~
I also like you mafia metaphor. Rather than breaking down the Ron Paul supporters on details, I can't help but hope that it turns into something more substantial. Before you can take on the mafia, you have to get enough people to stand against it. Before that, the smartest thing to do is to keep making your "protection" payments.
Hahaha! Good stuff. The truck is a great metaphor. I'd rather throw Ron Paul in the drivers seat with the intent of slowing the truck down than Giuliani or Clinton who are sure to put the pedal to the metal. I'm not so sure Reagan, with his "trickle down economics", ever applied pressure to the brakes.
Perhaps you as a Canadian would rather we Yanks had Ron Paul in office so the North American Union doesn't bring more of our 20million illegals your way...you don't have that many lawns to mow as we do.....hope you enjoy tacos in AmeriCanaDexico
But my friend Stefan, isn't non-documented immigration, with its miasma of counterfeiting and subterfuge, at the very least, fraud, if not economic aggression?
th3giv3r 3 days ago
How can we be free? I have hope but am skeptical. Why do nothing as far as voting for him, aren't we slaves regardless, what would be the harm, considering the alternative which is really just giving up and accepting slavery?
ElectricEntertaiment 2 weeks ago
What about trespassing or sovereignty? You're asking for a Libertarian ideal on a statist framework.
razerfish 1 month ago
Actually, moving can be seen as a form of initiation o violence if seen as trespassing in somebody's territory. Its simple to understand. For example, if a stranger enters your personal bubble without first asking or warning, it will be perceived instinctively as a threat.Same thing if you wake up one morning to find somebody you dont know in your kitchen.
LuathHans 1 month ago in playlist Ron Paul and Personal Liberty - From Freedomain Radio
really makes you think....my idea is to abandon this country and form a new community somewhere were everybody would have this filosophy, therefore a bit of isolationism...i know...it must be somewhere really far so the corrupted ideologies of government ca;t reach us... i al all ears to your proposals.
boghdan2000 2 months ago
Stef, You keep making it about the person and not the idea. Its the idea that ron paul represents thats attractive. The message man not the messenger!
goldsmithstudent 2 months ago
Stef, please interview RP!
imposteryau 2 months ago
stefan, so isn't a PT-type of lifestyle the only real option for one who would be free, both idealistically and in actual practice?
thefreedomartist 2 months ago
In principle you sound logical.Now in my opinion, in the idea of personal freedom,I think we share the same common goals but my question to you is this. Is the massage of spreading freedom best delivered and most effective under a Ron Paul Government with Political leaders of like minded principles or under a Obama's, Reagan's or Bushes' political elites in power?
Ron Paul has done a lot of good for the freedom movement.You may not agree,but having the biggest bull horn in the country does work
adrenalinejunkie2008 2 months ago
who was the last libertarian president? ill read ur books if you wanna send them my way. i just feel like im missing something that maybe ur books will explain better. ron paul is more of an anti-federalist, one of the first political parties in america.
deathSSghost 3 months ago
Ron Paul would "stop the truck" when it's going 120 MPH when no one before had been able to slow it down by phasing out the Fed with competitive money. Our last two assassinated presidents both tried to introduce interest-free money into the economy. THAT is why the truck continues to go faster. If we remove the weight of the Fed from the gas pedal, the truck will at least have the ability to slow down and maybe eventually stop. As long as we have a debt-based economy, it's zoom to the moon.
jomel77 3 months ago
Stefan, could I nonviolently move myself into your home and eat all your food? Can I bring some family and friends, UFC is on this saturday!
I understand and agree with you in principle, but all bets are off while we exist under the gun in practice.
Malbrojia 4 months ago
Look, I'm not going to say you live in lala land because I too sometimes wish things could be that way. But their not. What your preaching is very New Age, I know all about New Age because I used to be a black belt in it if there where such thing. Here's where the problem comes in. Are you perfect? Don't answer that, no your not. As long as that's the case, we will always have not just the use of violence, but those who seek to conquer. This is way "A" state will always be needed.
Manofheart777 5 months ago
i must humbly disagree, "illegal" immigrants do violate the NON AGRESSION PRINCIPLE by using the subsidies for education and healthcare and roads and all else. by ur own definition (and mine) taxation is theft and force and i am being forced to subsidize someone against my will at the barrel of a gun...in a perfect world there are no borders, but there are also no subsidies...so yes NO AMNESTY...
funkysnarf 6 months ago
@funkysnarf But aren't non-immigrants violating the non-aggression principle just as much? Why is it worthy of punishment to take these subsidies from taxpayers after moving here but not worthy of punishment to do it after being born here?
newperve 1 month ago
yeah I liked the bus boy analogy
Benjamin42079 6 months ago
Ok well then this brings the whole Capitalist system into question. Ultimately it is capitalism that is used as the excuse or even the reason that illegal immigrants are a problem. So how then do we accomplish non-agression and afford through Capitalism the problem of "over immigration"?... State or not.
Benjamin42079 6 months ago
Barren land that once filled a need Are worthless now, dead without a deed Slipping away from an iron grip Nature's scales are forced to tip The heartland cries, loss of all pride To leave ain't believing, so try and be tried Insufficient funds, insanity and suicide Now with new hope some will be proud This is no hoax, no one pushed out Receive a reprieve and be a pioneer Break new ground of a new frontier New ideas will surely get by No deed, or dividend. Some may ask "Why?"
Benjamin42079 6 months ago
Not voting for a person who wants to end the murder of people overseas and might have some success in doing that over this one issue just strikes me as ideological blind and completely neglectful of human reality.
sterlinguini 8 months ago
"Deport the police and politicians." Where can I sign up for that?
I used to be a huge fan of Ron Paul, but not so much these days. What Stef is saying here is essentially correct. One of the fundamental aspects of Paulian philosophy is rigid constitutionalism. But hey, I never consented to any constitution -- just strikes me as an invalid contract.
Voting is the slaves' suggestion box. People who put their faith in such a process are brainwashed dupes.
wjkathman 8 months ago
I think Reagan and others still achieved a lot in terms of convincing people ideologically that government is the problem, not the solution, by showing that, for example, lower taxes helps growth. And Reagan was much less committed ideologically to the ideal of small government than Ron Paul. Even if Reagan failed to really slow down the "train" in the broader sense, he helped change people's minds. A Ron Paul presidency could change a lot more minds, which could move us in the right direction.
onyomi 8 months ago
The only way I can see that happening (the average guy on the street believing the state is unnecessary) is for small government policies to succeed--i.e., we elect Ron Paul, he succeeds in pushing forward a small government agenda, great prosperity ensues, people say "look, we get more prosperity with less government--let's keep pushing in that direction." Certainly it's very hard. But I think you're also not being fair to Reagan and others. I don't think they absolutely failed.
onyomi 8 months ago
Here's the thing I think you're missing. You say all these people have been piling on to the "shrink government" truck, but I don't think that's true. Von Mises and others have never truly won the intellectual battle. Their arguments were brilliant, but their thinking has never become mainstream. If anarchism is ever to really work, I think it will have to be because a great majority of regular people in a geographic area are convinced they don't need a state.
onyomi 8 months ago
"The law is an opinion with a gun" I'm stealing that idea! Don't call the intellectual property police!
MrGreeneggsnham 8 months ago
@MrGreeneggsnham read frederic bastiat on law... its available on mises . org
phroto13 8 months ago
The important message is protection and preservation of freedom of information. Let's keep the dialogue open. Join the conversation at HumanitoriumDOTcom
HumanitoriumDOTcom 1 year ago
The reason why it can be done this time is we are starting to acknowledge the power behind the State. Governments are controlled by outside interests. More people than ever see the New World Order for what it is and want no part of it. I know you don't like to talk about "conspiracy theories" but there is a lot of evidence that they exist, I know because I have spent years researching it.
Richman6625 1 year ago
What's wrong with fear & hatred? Mexicans want maize flour, cooking oil and whatever the compromised American gov. can give them. If you think lines on a map and the nation state is just mass murder, then you abdicate all ideas of collective defense. You get mugged? Robbed? Who cares? You didn't defend yourself. Yes, the Mexicans should be deported, weeping children, the whole lot. But all the things that should happen will never happen.
hozayamz 1 year ago
I know how to stop the truck of destruction.
It requires a speed of 88 mph and a flux capacitor with 1.21 JiggaWatts.
billybbob18 1 year ago
rand was a bank supporter,i suppose your a globalist ?you keep talking about others being cattle,but you seen to have blinders on when it comes to elite conspiratorial control,what do you think about people saying the country is being destroyed intentionally
Haplesshiccuper 1 year ago
Everyone was fleeing the BANKSTERS communism feminism was all invented by theBANKSTERS,the only moral position to take is to charge the BANKSTERS with fraud and bribery deport them or jail them,and start from the top down,like you say its not immigrants you go on to blame everyone but the people responsible,THE BANKSTERS.Who you refuse to talk about
Haplesshiccuper 1 year ago
its all about the wellfarestate wich the elite takes as a tool to destroy the moddleclass by letting the immigrants in !! for example anker babbies etc. !
mexico got much more natural ressources than usa..think 3 times more??
the immigrants are used as pawns to destroy the us from within... i think thats the whole point !
infokriegerBerlin 1 year ago
I made my way to Stefan Molyneux via Ron Paul Constitutionalism. Just sayin ...
eli123ky 1 year ago
Roni P
insearchofsomthing 1 year ago
Most of this video is on the immigration issue? What about ending the wars, introducing currency competition, and Ron Paul's transitional policies that you fail to acknowledge?
I agree with your goals Stef, but your argument that "if they couldn't do it then, we can't do it now" isn't very strong. Also, Ron Paul is more about the message than politics. His politics has allowed the message to spread and has awoken many people. Education is more his goal than any kind of political victory.
mindinclined 1 year ago
The reason why it fails is due to the fact the FED needs to be abolished. The Rotschilds have been funding wars since Napoleon. That is why they never loose.
lucretiuscaro 1 year ago
I disagree with stefbot on a handful of issues...(mis)charactrization of Ron Paul.
Unfortunately, he's very correct on many fronts...very practical, logical, in touch with reality, funny. So I guess it's reality I'm not happy with.
In genral, it appears stefbot is all about 'no govt' (not a bad goal), while a Ron Paul type is all about constitutionally limited govt, which for stefbot is a contrdction because the state is all about force. I see RP's goal as more reachable than stefbot's.
seanannapolis 1 year ago
Are you a fan of the Agorist approach?
Surhotchaperchlorome 1 year ago
Comment removed
whiff1962 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Roughly speaking, the immigrant problem of Europe is arguably one of intergenerational "benign neglect", practiced by the host government, rather than there being the expectation of assimilation (some family members, in spite of living decades in the host country, never learning the language and respecting laws and customs, as an example). Traditionally, American immigrants, for good and bad, were compelled to assimilate, and most quite readily. Different immigrant history.
whiff1962 1 year ago
Comment removed
whiff1962 1 year ago
There is nothing immoral or unnatural about wanting to live with people that are the same ethnicity as yourself. Racism if anything is a social construct and it is almost exclusively applied to whites.
ChaosPilote666 2 years ago
One more thing. Do you have a better chance stopping a truck going 150 down to 150 or stopping a truck going 150 down to 0?
RiseUpRadio 2 years ago
Man.. You are all over the map in this series with strawman arguments. The issue from a minarchists point of view isn't illegal immigration OR taxation. The problem in their minds is illegal immigration AND taxation. Granted, minarchists support minimal taxation, which I agree is violence, however, I would still argue that w/o recent attention RP, Jacob Hornberger, Michael Badnarik, Peter Schiff, etc. are getting, the anarchist movement wouldn't be near where it is now.
RiseUpRadio 2 years ago
You change the debate here. RP is a minarchist and you are an anarchist. RP is a constitutionalist and believes a representative republic is just, while you don't.
From a minarchist POV, some aggression is justified to maintain law and order.
So, you are really only debating minarchism vs. anarchism in this video rather than defending your straw man arguments from the first video.
As I stated in my post on the 1st video, minarchism growth brings more and more ppl to anarchism.
RiseUpRadio 2 years ago
hilarious and very informative.
radscorpion8 2 years ago
Immigration would not be as much of a problem if there were no welfare state.
Before America had income taxes the immigration policy was less restrictive. So it is not fair to compare what happened in the past to what is happening now. Stefbot cries racism which is a strawman. Another thing... Mexicans and Asians are choosing to come here so why do you say they are living in fear of "whitey"? They fear whites so much that they can't wait to come here? Your argument is strange.
Entropy56 2 years ago
I'm already a minority, I'm the ultimate minority the individual, ... but if there is bunch of people sinking a boat, is it not logical to stop boat from sinking in the moment and then when we set example open up to help them once u are able? I think R.P. said same thing as well on immigrants. He solution get rid of state, he tells u this can't happen peacefully, so he sort of talks in circles, unless you be a happy multi generational slave. Perhaps this is why revolution gets so bloody.
LibertyJedi 2 years ago
The first RP video was painful but helpful-Thanks.
landofthefreemyass 2 years ago
Comment removed
trevor920 2 years ago
Your analysis would presuppose that nonwhites are completely for illegal immigration. This is statistically not true. Once again you ignore the economic question. Instead you make it about racism or xenophobia. I'm sure in some cases that plays a part, but as far as the Revolution goes its about law,economics, and ethics. If there is fear it has more to do with foreign mentalities that may not have the background to understand the complexities of liberty and free market economics.
ProjektLament 2 years ago
Deportation of all people who cost money to the function system is a strawman. It creates the false principle that whatever is applied to one scenario is universally applicable and that is simpley false. But as Ron Paul supporters we argue against the income tax and therefore the police and IRS agents would not be performing any tax collecting functions and so (according to your strawman logic) they would not need to be deported. Punishment for crime must be appropriate TO the crime.
ProjektLament 2 years ago
The aggression principle is not limited to physical violence. The aggression principle can be viewed economically. When hospitals have to shut down because they illegals use the ER for a physician office it is an act of economic aggression. When they send billions of US dollars earned here to foreign markets it is an economic aggression that harms the Legal American people as a whole. There is no contradiction here, your argument is refuted. Next point.
ProjektLament 2 years ago 4
I can't wait until they finish the road from
Mexico to Canada. Let me know how it goes :c) (Ron Paul the only one helping to stop it.... Oh, never mind we will just wait for things to happen rather than trying to do something NOW. I will WAIT and WAIT to see what is going to happen.) Ronald Regan was a true republican. Ron Paul is a Libertarian running as a republican because of the system. North American Union you will be a part of America soon enough... no borders YAY.. I get it Just WAIT.
motavis 2 years ago
Reagan was a true republican? You might want to read a history book, particularly a history involving the republican party. Ron Paul is as much a libertarian as Thomas Jefferson- the first Republican president.
ProjektLament 2 years ago
Wow you are so smart :c) Thanks for educating me.
motavis 2 years ago
Police ENFORCE laws. The term "illegal" implies BREAKING the law. Ron Paul is consistent. Your theories are not justified or plausible. I am against ILLEGAL immigration, yet my fiancé is Asian, my step mother is Hispanic. Your "whitey outnumbered" theory reminds me of "Penis Envy" theory for all the Freudian psychological drives of the female psyche lol. SURE. Fear of Penis being chopped off is the drives of human psychology lol. But you said it: Your just some guy on Youtube
GoLuckyOops 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
christmcallister 2 years ago
No amnesty! Ron Paul is for legal immigration. We can't afford our current path. Evading Taxes? Using a fake SS number, without caring if it is already someone's SS number, creating problems for US citizens? Forcing immigrants to have to sneak in and do everything illegally before being forgiven? No amnesty! Amnesty supports having to break laws in order to become a citizen.
GoLuckyOops 2 years ago
N o amnesty? So I assume that you are for the prosecution of all politicians for the theft of people's money through taxation?
stefbot 2 years ago 13
@stefbot The plan is outlined by Paul. Our government wasn't growing (in relation to the GDP) and inflation didn't exist as long as we didn't have central banking. END THE FED. Free market banking is the first most important step. If that can be done (a big if) the concurrent step would be to have free market currencies (they have that in Indonesia - the gold dinar and silver dirham competing with the rupiah). Other steps include vouchers in education - chipping away at the public ed monopoly.
megagagnon1 1 year ago
@GoLuckyOops What moral justification do you have for refusing others, who have done you no wrong, going anywhere? Or are you just afraid of sinister Asians, terrorist Arabs and dirty Mexicans?
mensoelrey 1 year ago
@GoLuckyOops i think what we need to realize is there is no illegal immigrants, just crossing a border isnt a crime.
The problem you point out isnt the immigrant, its that the system requires people provide SS# to work, so because the govt uses force, people resort to fraud to just work.
I agree that amnesty isnt the solution. A path to citizenship is just another bureaucratic hoop to jump through. It's not striking the root.
Pazrayna 10 months ago
Comment removed
vtran31 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Respond to this video... you clearly dont know the history of your own country. america was invented 250 years ago and required the genocidal purging of the true american citizens
you are the descendants of illegal immigants, you asinine fool
vtran31 4 months ago
By subsidizing something you support it. Current Immigration policy is a welfare state, by illegally coming here you are dictated by courts free health Medicare and education. Immigrants with a strong work ethic who honestly and legally obtain citizenship, pay their taxes, should have the opportunity to legally come to the United States and deserve the success. I pride the USA on our diversity. Your "whitey outnumbered" theory? You are not critically analyzing or tolerating opposing views.
GoLuckyOops 2 years ago 2
Yes Illegal Immigrants VIOLATE the rule of non Aggression. It's called Trespassing. They forced themselves into an area they were not invited. Unless the whole world becomes stateless society you have to have boarders. This is an intellectual circle jerk.
Keep them comming though. You challenge the mind.
bossman068410 3 years ago
great vid
DeeperBlueX16 3 years ago
I like this post, roughly agree with it, but still support Ron Paul for a couple of reasons:
1) I know more about why libertarian minarchists fail more than they succeed than most people do.
2) I think that "killing these specific bad guys" is a net good. (The superhero doesn't need to kill all bad guys, or stop all rapes. It's enough to stop one or two, and leave behind a replicable strategy --such as FIJA activism)
3) Political action is not perfectly mutually exclusive to your ideas...
heywoodjablohme 3 years ago
You're so ahead of your time Stefan. I'm with you 100% I hope an exponential 100 monkey syndrome happens around your philosophies.
Loveseekingmissile 3 years ago
adam smith almost 330 years ago? explain
smccarron55 3 years ago
This video chain is painful to watch. I have so much respect for you, stefbot, but you've gossly missed the mark. It seems that you have missed an essential premise on what RP is talking about. Philosophy is your main shtick and RP has repeatedly stated the same ideal. Listening to all this blathering is painful because you go on-n-on about things when you've started on the wrong foot.Irespect your perspective andagree with most of your philosophy, you simply have misrepresented RP position.
saithial 3 years ago
Sorry, I am having a hard time trying to put what I want to say into words but think about when someone immigrates through legal channels they will swear an oath to this country and it's laws. That is a personal contract. It means something. Yes they are just moving but they make a contract with the new nation they are moving to when they come the legal way. The people who started this country understood this.
rodgerdodger5 3 years ago
Ran out of room. Search Goggle images for people from Mexico carrying the Mexican Flag. This is what I am getting at. They wish to bring their laws and beliefs here. They need to accept this country's laws if they want to live here. If they never make that contract and personal commitment then there is a conflict.
rodgerdodger5 3 years ago
I have watched some of your videos. From watching your videos, I know you won't believe this but here goes. The problem with aliens is that their allegiance still lies with Mexico (or wherever they are from). Maybe you could accept that a person is somehow tied or loyal to their place of birth. You might think this a simple solution but if they were willing to renounce their allegiance and swear allegiance to this country and it's laws, we would be fine.
rodgerdodger5 3 years ago
you don't understand the issues nearly as well as you think you do. it has to do with national sovereignty. explain how RP is non-interventionist vs. you believing that he hates mexicans. he wants every country to do whatever they want and promote free trade.
sugarkang 3 years ago
RP is a politician. Political change must take sociology into account. (I am just arguing here, not expressing my views per say). If we are to transition back to minarchy, we cannot do it all at once. You have to at least stand for supporting immigration laws, because that's what gets you elected. We all know they can do whatever they want once elected anyway...so RP would on paper support immigration, his true goal is to eliminate the teets that divide us on immigration to begin with.
ybworld 3 years ago
Except that it did not get him elected... He just compromised rational ideals, and discredited the movement as a whole thereby.
stefbot 3 years ago 6
C'mon, stef...you know as well as I do there are things that you don't say in your videos.
That said, RP does the same and it is one of the reasons he was not elected.
While he told the truth for the most part, he was not and he is not playing to win.
I've not seen enough of your work to be sure, (I will check out PA and revise my view accordingly) but thus far (ie, not in this generation & not through political revolution-but by personal example) your view puts us in the same boat.
ybworld 3 years ago
To clarify 'same boat' ≠ 'compromised rational ideals.'
But same boat = freedom will take 3+ generations, while waiting for sociocultural (is that a word) change to occur.
Inaction & passive aggression = blood and war and famine.
Chaotic change takes chaotic measures, and again chaotic ≠ violent.
By and large, what I am saying is we can dismantle a bomb with one set of hands, or we can do it with several sets working together.
ybworld 3 years ago
RP is not anti-immigration. As he has stated for anyone who cares to listen, we should allow people to come and go as they please. The problem is that immigrants many immigrants come here to take advantage of our welfare system. If we abolished the welfare system there would (good solution) or if we excluded immigrants (bad solution because it favors and interest group) then most people wouldn't care about immigration. At best, people would have no valid claim as to why they shouldn't come here
belle4221 3 years ago
It is not a compromise of idea. "RP is a politician" -this is rubbish. this supporter doesn't understand RP's position on immigration at all. I do not fault him though if he really wishes to further the cause of liberty it would do him well to be more informed. I shudder to think of the responses you have gotten to this video that have in his defense missed the mark completely of what RP is saying and doing but I hope you will read more of his work at both mises and lewrockwell if you havent yet
belle4221 3 years ago
How can you have liberty without sovereignty? How can you have sovereignty without enforcing borders? How can you enforce borders without closing them to people who want sneak across them to take advantage of your naivety? It is not simply a matter of law. It is a matter of survival as a nation. Does this guy think borders are evil? That is what it seems like, therefore, one should ask if he likes a world without borders and therefore a One World system of government.
pjwalker911 3 years ago
"one should ask if he likes a world without borders and therefore a One World system of government."
Stefbot is an anarchist. How can an anarchist be for the NWO?
DaveDoggOwns 3 years ago
(just playing devils advocate here-not expressing MY views)
"Stefbot is an anarchist. How can an anarchist be for the NWO?"
The same way a preacher can be for the NWO.
ybworld 3 years ago
I don't get what stops a preacher from supporting the NWO? You can't be both an anarchist AND support one world government. They are diametricly opposed in every concievable way imagineable.
DaveDoggOwns 3 years ago
I assumed the guy was 'saying anyone who wants X does so because X will lead to world government' The same way leading Democrats / Republicans either openly and knowingly want world government or they simply support it unknowingly. Either way, the stated party line principles have nothing to do with it.
The meaning of the speakers words and actions that says it. Again I am not expressing views. I am clarifying the argument.
Personally? He wants world non-aggression & non-coercion.
ybworld 3 years ago
It's really quite simple really: we want less government. Whose the presidential candidate who will get us that? Easy, that's Ron Paul. So, why not support Ron Paul, because of his pro-life stance? Or his no amnesty stance? No, because he wants to limit government and go back to the constitution. Therefore, to listen to these babbling idiots who denounce Ron Paul is a waste of time, a disastrous waste of time. Follow your own mind! Seriously, doubt everything this twit says. Don't buy his books
superbaddeathmachine 3 years ago
did you not watch the video at all?
snailhands 3 years ago
Stef,
Paul hasn't said that he would deport 12 million illegal immigrants. He has said that he would remove the incentives for those coming here illegally. Then fix some of the inhibiting fines and time lengths for Legal immigration. Those already here would begin getting in line of their own accord to get the benefits of citizenship.
I would agree that allowing the citizens who live along the border to protect their own private property would be the ideal situation.
highstreet72 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This guy is like the Kenny G of speakers. It's like... how many words can I say that mean nothing, in the shortest period of time. Some will pretend to think this guy knows what he is talking about, but he's just an asshole. Damn. What a waste of time.
prof5759 3 years ago
...or you could try addressing my arguments... :(
stefbot 3 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No, seriously guy, you're wrong on the most important issues, so why would I spend the time to listen to your face for 33 minutes!? Not gonna happen. I hope everyone will use their brain and boycott crap like your opinions.
superbaddeathmachine 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@prof5759
"This guy is like the Kenny G of speakers. It's like... how many words can I say that mean nothing, in the shortest period of time. Some will pretend to think this guy knows what he is talking about, but he's just an asshole. Damn. What a waste of time."
Psychosmurf547 1 year ago
@prof5759 so your counter argument is "you're an asshole"? How pathetic and embarrassing.
TSMPimpDaddyPain 1 year ago
@prof5759 I know 1 Ron Paul supporter who'd say that's just an ad homimen attack.
Pazrayna 10 months ago
Excellent - 5 stars.
qtronman 4 years ago
I still agree with Steph that we should live free and become role models of the virtues of freedom.
The best way to do that, however, is to not pay taxes. Otherwise we're not really living free, and if we're not free then how can we show the world what true freedom is like?
What we'd be showing the world is what slavery of income tax is like, and we'd be trying to uphold that with false happiness - the very situation Steph describes as what props up the state.
RLore18 4 years ago
Yea i must say that I have heard RP say that immigration would not be a problem if he could get rid of welfare and taxes and everything....but it still doesn't change the fact that he's not anti-government initiation of force, so he's not quite viable yet for me...
errorspending 4 years ago
In regards to immigration, remember that libertarianism is based on non-aggression AND private property. So, someone moving does not violate the former, but with the latter it constitutes trespass.
Furthermore, with the welfare issue, the immigration problem is drastically complicated. RP does not have an easy choice. I think you're simplifying this a bit.
kulza23 4 years ago
Ron Paul's stance on immigration is that he wants a free economy, so that illegal immigration would no longer pose a threat to jobs, welfare, etc, and so it would therefore become legal. Then, immigration would be a benefit to all- by increasing production and thus the standard of living.
Also, where does RP say he's going to deport 20 million people?
kulza23 4 years ago 6
Exactly, Ron Paul said that we use 'illegal immigrants' as a scape goat because of our economic problems.
Ive also never heard him say he wants to deport. Though he has said its impracticle but he wants to stop giving amnesty because it does not help our welfare problems or whatever at all.
Seiku 4 years ago
Out of the available choices for president of the United States, are there any that are less hypocritical than Ron Paul? The way I see it, Ron Paul wants to kick out the mafia and the bell boys.
snipa4lyfe 4 years ago 5
@snipa4lyfe "The way I see it, Ron Paul wants to kick out the mafia and the bell boys." Ron Paul is focused on the size of government, so he wants to make the payments to the mafia smaller.
megagagnon1 1 year ago
Two words: pocket veto. This combined with open communication with the public and executive pardon are the 3 main ways in which Paul can eliminate the worst excesses of the State, as well as educate the citizenry to the extent they can be educated. (You're right, the state will still grow, but perhaps we won't be jailing so many people)
heywoodjablohme 4 years ago
O.K. Shill. I've already summed up your original video as, 'O.K. lets give up, Instead, we should 'thinkfreedom' using our MIND. Lets just sit back and enjoy servitude. It's only then that we become free.' What kind of drunken zen yoga class did you attend? Freedom has always come out of political upheaval! There is no "freedom" if those being crushed just accept it! No one can just "think" free. Action must be taken for change to plant itself in the minds of men!
ibsteven2 4 years ago
I agree. You can't be free and still pay taxes at the same time. I believe the appropriate action is to stop paying taxes. Sure, there will be consequences. But you don't control the consequences, you can't. The only thing you can control is whether or not the evil men who implement those consequences are going to use your own labor to do so. And that should be the definition of perpetual slavery - paying for your own chains.
RLore18 4 years ago
thankfully, stef is here to wake us up to the danger of exchanging one system of control for another. everyone is participating in the reality of this world, so be true to yourself and act accordingly. don't step out of line, pay your taxes on time and you can live out a life of miserable ironies always wondering "why,,, oh why??? didn't i take the RED pill..."??
matrixcmitech 4 years ago 2
thanx 4 makin me think
Shandalaybgood 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Also, how many of the illegals that cross the Mexican border are terrorists? I thought we were fighting a war on terror? Can you guarantee that no terrorists have come to the US thru Mexico. I didn't think so. You seem like and intelligent person. Why are you taking such an antiAmerican/socialist position?
Shill? Hack? Traitor? Corporate whore? Take your pick.
ChoDilly 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Part 2. The illegals cut in line in front of the millions that are going thru the legal channels. They are stealing the place of honest people that are going thru the legal process of emigrating. They are here illegally and you are defending them. So that makes you as criminal as they are. A lot of the people that want to come here legally have good educations and can offer something of value to the economy. Most of the illegals are uneducated, and taking all of the service jobs.
ChoDilly 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You irritate me so much that I can't even put a coherent thought together! If not Ron Paul, then who! Who the fuck are you going to vote for? Hitlery? There are over 30 million illegal's in the country. Coming into the country ILLEGALLY with their illiteracy, and disease (NO HEALTH OR BACKGROUND CHECKS). part 1
ChoDilly 4 years ago
Well by your own logic, freedom will NEVER be achieved which I believe is obvious to anyone. You mistake Ron Paul supporters for fools who think they will attain heavenly freedom which has never been seen before, but in fact, all we want is to shift the pendulum of time back in the proper direction of living BETTER. That all we CAN do as a human race. Why just say forget it and let our primal retardedness take over and live in the darkness?
Goldenmean87 4 years ago
You take the logical approach of law and subject it to an irrational feeling that everyone should be able to do whatever they want and if they can't then thats not freedom.
Goldenmean87 4 years ago
Your views are now becoming more liberal than anything new and enlightening. The law isnt there for the sake of it. Law is to maintain order. When you have masses of illegals coming here unchecked, it causes economic unbalance, crime waves, and massive cultural shift which can cause civil war.
Goldenmean87 4 years ago
Who are we kidding Ronnie won't get elected, it is between a women an Italian or a black president. Ronys is to scary for most voters.
1234567art 4 years ago
Another area would be the withdrawal of soldiers closure of bases in the middle east. The Saudis and Israelis wouldn't like it nor any one with infested interest in oil. The navy and soldiers petrol the hole region to protect there interests.
1234567art 4 years ago
Ron Paul reminds me in some ways of Margaret Thatcher. If he was to close down or even privatise different areas of government. There would be scenes like the miners protests in the late 70's and 80's in England. He stated he would get rid of the CIA. Could you imagine the CIA on strike. ha-ha. It would create even more secretive and underhand. wings in the governments arsenal.
1234567art 4 years ago
If you truly will mail the books for free I would love to get a copy and I will pay for them if I like them.
co3 4 years ago
wow... interesting views. great video.
immortal117 4 years ago
Very insightful and thought-provoking!
dakatesr 4 years ago
As for movements I do not give a fuck about them movements are for collectivist assholes. I am selfish and only care about my happiness and I do not see how going into a depression or WW3 will make my life better. I think RP could end American Imperialism and prevent WW3 and a responsible fiscal policy could keep the dollar from collapsing and keep me from a life of misery.
willyswear 4 years ago 5
If you AnCaps believe that the purpose in life is happiness why would you not vote for Paul. If the dollar totally collapses in a Wiemar Republic fashion that would seriously destroy my quality of life. If the policies of American Imperialism start WW3 my happiness will be greatly affected. My vote for RP is a vote for me to use what little power I have, to prevent what I mentioned above from happening.
willyswear 4 years ago 5
You know I tink it's only on the immigration issue that RP is pandering... he simply could not be a principled libertarian on this subject, it would kill his chances.
I'd rather he back down on his "big government promises" than his "small government promises".
CorrosionX2 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I think the legalization process just needs to be more comprehensive. I don't think people should have to wait for so long to become a citizen. I understand Ron Paul's concern with selling short those that actually wait and try to become a citizen the right way if we just grant everyone that cheated the system amnesty. But deporting everyone still won't solve the "bottleneck" problem that happens in the immigration process. Just fund and fix the immigration system.
ahoblit 4 years ago
what is funding an immoral system going to accomplish?
haheyho 4 years ago
yeah, I should have reversed the words fund and fix in that statement..how about.."fix and then adequately resource the immigration system."
ahoblit 4 years ago
We need to vote for Ron Paul at cnn . com /am for tonights GOP debate on CNN! Spread the Word!
FreedomofSpeech911 4 years ago
Congratulations. You win the prize.
RussellsParadox 4 years ago
Stef I believe the principles of freedom are so strong that if they are even moderately implemented they will make life better for most of us. So if RP accomplishes a few of his goals I think it would be beneficial for the majority of working people. I agree with you on personal freedom but I still do not see why voting for RP is so wrong at worst my vote is worthless and its only 15 minutes of my life.
willyswear 4 years ago 4
Wrong - at worst, your vote is counterproductive and will help set back the cause of liberty 5 to 10 generations. Did you watch his previous video on RP?
RussellsParadox 4 years ago
Yes I watched it and I disagree with it. When/if the state falls capitalism will be blamed no matter who the president is. Just like the free market was blamed when Enron went down.
willyswear 4 years ago 2
This guy is talking nonsense!
devilmirror1 4 years ago
p.s. Ron Paul explicitly states that immigration is only a problem because of the welfare state, so your manic laughter about the maffia-busboys metaphor is wholly inappropriate and unfounded. btw, you still have a lot of replying to do to my comments on your prev video
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
Well but of course you haven't apologized to me for publically and falsely accusing me of "slandering" Ron Paul when I stated that RP wants to deport illegal immigrants, so if you don't have the basic decency to admit mistakes, why on earth would I debate abstracts with you?
stefbot 4 years ago
dude, have you even read my prev posts? you have NOT demonstrated that Ron Paul wants to deport 10-20 million people and have thus NOT justified your slanderous comparison (on your board) that Ron Paul's plans resemble those of Hitler who had 6 million Jews killed
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
btw, if admitting mistakes is a *universal* value, then I'd like to refer you to some threads on your forum where you do exactly what you are accusing others of.
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
LM, you seem rather desperate for an audience.
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago 3
finally, the metaphor that you give towards the end of the video (and repeat two times, though one is a variation rather than repetition) doesnt prove anything as I can just as easily give a different metaphor that would be in line with the opposite conclusion. e.g. as more and more people climb on the wagon where all the statists (who you left out of your metaphor) are on as well, there'll be an ever greater chance of being able to stop them.
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
as for your idea that the past 150 years have proved that poltical action by libertarians is at best fruitless, you still havent responded to the points I made on your board and in response to the previous video. Also, do you have any idea how very very few libertarians there say the second half of the 20th century, and how many there are now? it's quite the huge difference
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
ha! and you should know! oh, the countless times that I refuted your points on FDR and the zero change of opinion in you... ah, nostalgia sets in...
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
Dude, seriously, change your prescription. That obsession with stefan is not healthy.
neutrinoide 4 years ago
You say 'well, he only doesn't do it because it is impractical. in his heart he wants to do it'. That may be very true, but it is impossible to prove or disprove for you or me. So you cannot back up that accusation.
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
post may have not come through: anyway, it is clear that with your deportation-accusation you didnt mean to say that Ron Paul wants it in his heart but wont do it as president. Instead you wanted to create this nightmarish vision of police state actions, of Nazi-like raids etc. On your own forum for example you defend the Nazi/Holocaust comparison with Ron Paul which is quite bad dude...
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
as for your accusation that Ron Paul wants to deport 10-20 million people and your comment that you have proven that he wants to do that: you have not proven that. Ron Paul says that mass deportation is unpractical or unfeasible and elsewhere he talks about the police state that would entail. So clearly as a president he does not want to do that.
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago 2
agreed on him being very unlikely to do that. However he will not be far from placing soldiers on the borders. Though I suppose that is far less hideous than having them constantly around the globe...
thorsmitersaw 4 years ago
I disagree with your statement that it is impossible for people who hold the Non-Aggression Principle to object to 'illegal immigration'. I think there is a legitimate debate about whether they do or not through their voluntary participation in the welfare state. Too bad that on your forum you said that you wouldnt discuss immigration with me anymore 'until I have resolved my family issues because then things will make more sense to me' (paraphrased somewhat)
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
I agree with you that Ron Paul's reason for saying that illegal immigrants should not be rewarded with citizenship etc. because they have broken our laws is confused at best and hypocritical at worst. He cannot appeal to natural rights on the one hand and then use legal positivism on the other.
LiberatingMinds 4 years ago
It is not fine that politicians are not challenged in their religious beliefs. The other policies/beliefs those other candidates bring they believe (falsely)are moral and that is also not fine and should be challenged more rigourously than Ron Paul. Savaging the one closest to your position and neglecting the others is positively counter productive at least for those who tend to vote.
stratvic 4 years ago
The thing that bothers me about Ron is that he RECOGNIZES that government is the problem, he ADMITS it, but still supports getting rid of the bus boys.
I like Ron Paul as much as I can like a politician and would think that him taking office would probably turn out better than others. Its nice to see a liberal thinker again, but hes certainly with fault and so is thinking he will be a savior
I like Ron, but I hate government more.
thorsmitersaw 4 years ago
How about I hate the governemnt but would hate a Ron Paul government less.
At the same time live freely in the voluntary relationships you foster in your life.
Vote or rebel.
stratvic 4 years ago 4
My understanding is that Ron Paul would be less opposed to illegal immigration if American tax payers weren't footing the bill for their expenses. You failed to address that.
Exhibitionista 4 years ago
actually... he DID address that. The problem with immigration is not immigrants, its the government. Swating at the moths when you have your porch light on is pretty stupid.
we have person A
B robs A to perform various actions that attract or even benefit C (as well as B of course)
should person A should:
1 - stop person B from robbing them or
2 - get rid of all persons C?
I think its pretty obvious....
thorsmitersaw 4 years ago
My mistake - I take it back fully. In any case, I like most RP supporters, are in love with an idea. I can't help believing that everybody's at least a little bit curious about the idea of a man like Ron Paul being elected president.
Exhibitionista 4 years ago 2
Ron Paul and the campaign are vehicles for that idea (freedom) and therefore both are worth of supporting.
stratvic 4 years ago 3
They are vehicles for the idea of freer slaves ("less government"), not freedom.
RussellsParadox 4 years ago
Ron Paul is an incremental step to help others see that they can be free.
We should be motivated to help others understand freedom by the expectation that we will all be more free in a society of freedom lovers as opposed to a society of statists. Vehicles are for spreading that message and are incremental steps towards a more free society not by government but by the governed.
stratvic 4 years ago 3
A man like Ron Paul? You mean, somebody who wants to slow, stop, or reverse the growth of the state?
Yeah, nobody like that has ever been president.
RussellsParadox 4 years ago
RON PAUL AND STEFBOT FOR PRES
thielenm 4 years ago
Pure rationality. Great stuff. By the way, I love your book. I'll probably order another copy soon as a Christmas gift for my father.
BrightAnarchist 4 years ago
Ron Paul doesn't have all the right answers but hes the closest thing we have toward's true freedom in America! You have some valid points but it's not something new your bringing to the table. Thanks for your opinions and keep sharing. RON PAUL 08~
elihalz 4 years ago 2
I also like you mafia metaphor. Rather than breaking down the Ron Paul supporters on details, I can't help but hope that it turns into something more substantial. Before you can take on the mafia, you have to get enough people to stand against it. Before that, the smartest thing to do is to keep making your "protection" payments.
billbacon 4 years ago 2
Hahaha! Good stuff. The truck is a great metaphor. I'd rather throw Ron Paul in the drivers seat with the intent of slowing the truck down than Giuliani or Clinton who are sure to put the pedal to the metal. I'm not so sure Reagan, with his "trickle down economics", ever applied pressure to the brakes.
billbacon 4 years ago 3
Perhaps you as a Canadian would rather we Yanks had Ron Paul in office so the North American Union doesn't bring more of our 20million illegals your way...you don't have that many lawns to mow as we do.....hope you enjoy tacos in AmeriCanaDexico
patiodaddyo1 4 years ago