I share your views and optimistic outlook on the movements behind Ron Paul. Just imagine how much more visibility libertarian ideals will get if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination! RP vs Obama in the debates...that'd be a historic political time for this country for certain. It doesnt look good though thus far. Reports of voter fraud are coming in, and they're all skewed against RP.
@AttunedFlux I think it is very unlikely that he will get nominated. My prediction right now is that Romney will be nominated and lose the general election. Plan on 4 more years of Obama.
I also share your prediction..with obama getting another term. What do you think about voter fraud issues? Idea for a video: what would a fair election process look like in a "freer society"(as you define that to be)?
I couldn't agree with you more and I wish more libertarians understood this because I believe it is the actually purpose of his campaign, his campaign in my opinion is purely educational. One point were I do disagree with you is on his personal ideology, I believe he is in fact at heart an anarcho-capitalist. I mean to the extent that he praises Rothbard and associates LvMI I think it would be hard for him not to be.
I'm personally glad that Ron Paul's writings provide conclusive evidence for the seething racism that masquerades itself behind so-called liberty considerations in the right libertarian rejection of civil rights legislation. The mask is off and now the fraud has been exposed.
@DanaGarrett It does not follow from the fact that someone opposes the use of force to make someone not be a racist that they support racism. You'll need to logically connect those two concepts.
@XOmniverse The Civil Rights Act does not compel anyone to cease to "be" a racist. It merely prohibits people from acting in a racist manner in some respects in the marketplace.
It does not follow from the fact that someone opposes the use of force to make someone not make racist business decisions that they support racism. You'll need to logically connect those two concepts.
@XOmniverse It may not mean that Ron Paul is a racist, but it certainly means that he supports racism, if not morally than politically. If someone is being treated unfairly, then they should be helped. Besides, if a man can't be fired because their boss just doesn't like them, why should they be fired for their ethnicity?
@SixthStanza I don't think it should be illegal to chop your own fingers off. Does that mean I support chopping your own fingers off?
And I would argue that a man ought to be able to be fired for any reason. Employment is a two-person agreement that should be able to be terminated for any reason by either party. Imagine if we said that a person shouldn't be allowed to quit a job because he doesn't like his boss.
@XOmniverse There are only so many openings for good jobs. Do you think it's right that a man can spend years on his training to become a dentist, but be denied because of the colour of his skin? Employment is more than just a two-person agreement. It is a necessity to survive, and in many cases a legal requirement. It is a right to have employees who don't harm the company, it is not a right to have employees who you like. Wanting something doesn't make it a right, necessity does.
@XOmniverse I pretty much just said no, and explained why. An employer can make the choice not to start a company, and if they decide to start one then they're accepting the responsibility to provide jobs for people who are qualified to carry them out, an employee get's a job because they NEED a job.
Businesses should NOT private, because they're an integral, necessary part of society. So no, they should not be able to fire someone unless they're directly hurting the company.
@XOmniverse Starting a company takes money, particularly if your talents lie in a profession that requires expensive equipment. And as for freelancers, there's still no certainty that they'll find work which, once again, is ESSENTIAL.
@SixthStanza Ultimately, even if I accept your basic premise, you'd need to demonstrate why one person's needs are a claim on the labor or property of others.
@XOmniverse That might actually mean something if it weren't for the fact that the employer is still getting skilled, useful employees. That's why I said it should be illegal 'unless it harms the company'.
@MechanicV8 the state is the biggest criminal enterprise, but I think your asking 'what do we as a society when people enact suffering on others?' My answer is the same thing human beings have always done throughout all cultures and history. We intervene. Intervention is a very natural reaction, the problem with government intervention is the ability to corrupt the justification for intervention. Governments are handed blank checks by society that basically say 'You can intervene in _____".
@Sparkygravity Regardless, people have been intervening forever and that's not going to change. You have the freedom and ability to do anything despite whatever laws or systems tell you otherwise. It's a tendency that if you don't treat that freedom responsibly it will be stripped from you... government or no government.
Government it's not a necessity, we invented it hoping it would provide solutions to social problems. Has it worked? Does government fix problems or do people fix problems?
Yes, the internet has definitely been an essential tool for the acquisition of knowledge. More and more people are educating themselves on important social issues, and are more aware of the constructs of political philosophy, and are learning from the mistakes of the past. Who knows...maybe one day, we will have a libertarian majority.
Do you essentially agree with Noam Chomsky's idea that (from his libertarian socialist perspective) that personal ownership of production of goods is a tyranny, that it is a threat to everyone's liberty, and also one that can't be solved by the current "libertarian view-set".
Why not vote for him? Voting is simple and takes hardly any of my time... it serves my interest to vote for him, simply because his policies will bring us closer to minarchism, which will eventually hopefully lead to anarcho-syndicalism, which I think humans aren't prepared for yet.
@XOmniverse You have to think of a collective. If 200,000 people were to see this people and follow it, that would make an impact on the support of Ron Paul. He gets RECOGNIZED with votes, not by talking. That's why people need to vote in order to contribute to the cause of educating the people.
Rephrasing some of what XOmni has said in the comments here:
"Culture is the aggregate of the ideas floating around in a given population.
There is no way to force a regime change over a population that doesn't want it. If people still believe in democracy, the culture is still broken. Democracy is a decision making process, not a tool for changing cultures.
Mob rule isn't freedom.
If enough people did not believe in democracy, the whole system would just fall apart on its own."
@SomethingNothingSea ... But anarchists should be in favor of democracy. Bakunin/Chomsky anarchism dictates that socialist order is required in order for the proletariat to overthrow the shackles of wage slavery. Is this vlogger not an anarchist, and by extension most of his viewers? Perhaps I've misjudged this mob, maybe you fellows are the ones that still hold on to the principles of "chaos anarchism", in which case, I can only frown.
@SomethingNothingSea Oh dear, I've misjudged this little cult you have going. You fellows aren't educated in the least. Just capitalist anarchists chasing their unobtainable factually-absurd dreams. Any intelligent anarchist knows that man can only be liberated when all forms of "undeserved" coercion are eliminated, that includes capital coercion, along with your demonized state coercion the immature anarchists preach about. The government isn't the only societal problem you nitwits.
@SomethingNothingSea In fact, I think you may be uneducated as to what socialism/democracy is. Socialism is not social programs owned by the state, socialism is when the workers own the means of production. Socialism works EXTREMELY well with anarchist societies. STATE socialism is something to be feared and rejected. Democracy in itself is simply a self-governed populace. Democracy is the tool that allows socialism to perform. Ex: 40 workers each have a vote in the operations of one company.
Ok, nvm, you're not worth talking to. Besides being an idiot, you are resorting to yelling, ad hominens, as well as condescension, and you're clearly not going to listen to what I have to say. Bad day, sir.
"socialism is when the workers own the means of production."
Ok, so if you make a process and items and need people to work those items, all of those people who then work on those items own them? You have a 'tragedy of the commons' coming up.
"Socialism is not social programs owned by the state"
"The State" doesn't exist. People exist, and those who are "official" are assumed to have super-human properties... that they don't.
"Democracy in itself is simply a self-governed populace."
No, that is not Democracy. Demos - people, cracy - rule. Rule of the people by the people. That's not self-governance. That's people ruling other people. Don't see a difference? It's the difference between buying yourself a carton of milk, verses pooling your money together with 130 other people to buy a carton of milk, skittles, calf meat, broccoli, and so forth, and you pay a lot more into the pot, too, interestingly enough.
"Democracy is the tool that allows socialism to perform."
Sounds like the perfect hell. Oh, wait... we're getting there. We've got crony capitalism parroted as if it were the free market, while corportism/statism/democracy continues to flourish socialism. Look around - your dream manifest! Looks nice, huh? Oh, except that it's not as socialist yet as it could be - need to have the "means of production" owned by the workers and have the tragedy of the commons destroy the rest of it.
@Xylogeist I'M NOT YELLING WITH TEXT RIGHT NOW. I JUST HAPPEN TO HAVE THE CAPS LOCK ON, WHICH IS WHAT PEOPLE CONSIDER, TEXTUALLY, TO BE YELLING. HI THERE.
This is why the government would love nothing more than to censor the internet.... IF they could. Call me paranoid, but I always have my TOR browser bundle at hand.
@XOmniverse Sorry, I still don't get it. If armed rebellion is out of the question, how else are we to change our government without voting? An individual vote may not be very effective but it seems that not voting guarantees failure. For a libertarian, aren't Ron Paul and/or Gary Johnson the only hopes available?
@XOmniverse True, however increasing the population of those who demonstrate politically that they do want a replacement of governance is politically done through voting, is it not? If one's wants a more libertarian government, doesn't one help effect that by his or her vote? Doesn't cultural change follow behavioral change? If we're only led by slave masters, many of us will become slaves will we not? Most elections don't make much difference but this one does, don't you think?
@XOmniverse Isn't democracy about the only tool that we have to help change the culture? Isn't nonviolence the only way to avoid certain annihilation by the police state? Perhaps I don't really understand exactly what your political advice is?
@BrotherWoody1 Democracy is a decision making process, not a tool for changing cultures. A culture is just the aggregate of the ideas floating around in a given population. We have to change the minds of individual people until enough of them have changed that the culture itself is now changed.
The idea that you can vote away your neighbor's liberty is not compatible with liberty. If enough people did not believe in democracy, the whole system would just fall apart on its own.
I've been out of the loop, regarding politics, for some time now. In fact, I find I am happier avoiding the matter all together.
But, I have found, in my day to day conversations, no influx of people professing libertarian ideals or principles. If anything, I hear only a rush to statism, even after listening to the same people decrying the evils of the state.
You might be right, at least, I hope you are, but I seriously doubt that there is some cultural revolution happening.
Though he is a minarchist, he might well be like von Mises in that he may support unlimited secession. In that case, his minarchism is so weak that he would allow others to disavow and dissolve coercive unions, and I couldn't ask for much more from an incredibly prominent libertarian figurehead such as him. How many actual full-blown anti-statists are as prominent as he? None. Rothbard is big, but not that big; same with all of the LVM Institute duders.
Polite requests? lol Is that what you call it? " I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox"... Dude before I commented here you had like 10 comments!
To be honest I thought you might actually appreciate the conversation!
@666or999 Spam? Do you know what spam is? Are you saying that I've copied and pasted my comments or something? lol
This is ridiculous! So tell me, where is the disclaimer that says you're only allowed to post a certain amount of comments? What is the accepted limit on the amount of comments?
Do you realise that people like you and omniverse actually do nothing for the cause of freedom and libertarianism? Perhaps the pair of you could look up what these terms actually mean?
@666or999 You obviously don't understand that no-one owns their bloody youtube channel! If you do, post some porn on here! Or some copy-write material!
That's right, youtube owns every channel on here!
Besides have I said he couldn't delete my comments? He is free to do whatever he likes! The fact you and your pal are pulling out the property rights card for this is pretty pathetic!
Non of the content I wrote has been answered, it seems to me the guys ego is all that has been hurt here!
You may not "own" the channel just as you do not "own" anything in statist USA, since one pays income tax on their labor, property taxes on land, and consumption taxes or capital gains taxes on those relevant items. The thing is that one of the conditions of your "lease" from YouTube is that you can block people. Quit bickering. He is not inconsistent, just as libertarians who don't allow others to rape and steal from them are not inconsistent. We are not pacifists or cosmopolitans.
@doucher337 Did I say he wasn't allowed to block me? In fact I invited him to! I really couldn't give a damn if he does or doesn't block me!
Comparing a guy peacefully and respectfully posing some questions and theories on a youtube video to someone raping and stealing is somewhat of a stretch wouldn't you say? lmao
I'm sorry but when you post a video which ALLOWS comments then you have got to expect comments! And one would think that you would be happy to receive them!
@snaz27 Oh btw I find it amusing that on one hand your telling me "We are not pacifists or cosmopolitans" but then go on to say "Quit bickering"... For a start who is "we"? And do those two statements you make not contradict each other?
We are not pacifists, but stop fighting! lmao. You guys are too funny!
Anyway I've wasted far too much of my time here, I'll leave you all to have fun, play nice kiddies.
No, they don't contradict each other. My request that you stop whining was simply because I don't see what you're achieving here. You're wasting energy and everyone else's time.
The "we" is the libertarian who is anything like me. There are pacifists in the libertarian movement, but they're a nominal minority. I think you posted valid points - before you were claiming that he's a hypocrite for any request to self-censor or inclination to block you.
@doucher337 You seem to have the up-most respect for the guys "property rights" yet you seem to think you can tell me what to do with mine! lol... If you had followed what happened I left him some comments and then he snapped " I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox"... To which I replied that I didn't realise libertarians had such rules (free speech). Then I told him that he was free to delete my so called essay (if it really bothered him and offended him) and even block me!
If he was that bothered by multiple comments then perhaps he should let people know in the description?
He can say whatever he likes as can I. I don't need nor want his advice though.
"There are many other examples, and those two are the most concise. I'll show others as responses to other parts." Crack on but it's not like I give a damn. lol
@doucher337 My energy is mine to waste, ok bud? I can not control what people read or how they spend their time! If they didn't like what I said they were free to stop reading! Right?
You then go on to speak for libertarianism saying that pacifism is a "nominal minority". When the whole philosophy of libertarianism is against the use of force! Which is pacifism! Do you understand libertarianism?
The last bit was just a plain lie as I've already explained.
@doucher337 To put it more clearly I am free to write whatever I like wherever I like! If he doesn't like it then he is free to remove my comments and block me if he so wishes.
I would find it very strange in this circumstance as I've not said anything to offend him (until he acted like a jerk, which he is free to be but I am also free to comment on) and I would of thought he'd be happy for feedback/input.
I don't care if he wanted to censor me but I think it's sad all the same.
"Anyway I've wasted far too much of my time here, I'll leave you all to have fun, play nice kiddies."
'Yeah, I'll just take this giant shit in the room, let you guys smell it and complain about it, and then just leave, 'cause I simply don't understand why you didn't appreciate it. Hateful bastards.'
@SomethingNothingSea "Yeah, I'll just take this giant shit in the room, let you guys smell it and complain about it, and then just leave" Where is the giant shit? Still after all these comments no-one has addressed the content of my original comments! Only complaining about the amount of comments I left! Btw you have left multiple comments but I don't see anyone complaining about it! Is that because you are licking the guys bum?
@snaz27 Licking it real good. It's because everyone has the same complaint, and it's about you. I wouldn't be doing multiple posts on here like this if it were to tell you to stop making so many posts because you're essentially spamming. Get a fucking blog already or ask for emails so you can IM instead of spamming.
"I'm sorry but when you post a video which ALLOWS comments then you have got to expect comments! And one would think that you would be happy to receive them!"
C'mon. Even you can see how silly you're being here.
@doucher337 Is it the case that only comments licking his bum are accepted? You are telling me not to bicker? Did I start any bickering?
What does pacifism have to do with any of this? Did I say that you were? To be honest is seems like you guys are buthurt that I posed some valid points... I only aim to join the conversation, but I tell you what, I wish I hadn't lol... I've never heard anything quite like it!
Yes, all of it imagined by you. You take offense to people saying that you're spamming. You can't imagine that anyone wouldn't want to talk with you, and wouldn't see your cause as just, good, and infallible. It is this insecurity that propels you and colors your view toward polarization, seeing everyone who disagrees with you slightly as the enemy, and so you exaggerate their words, centering the premise of yourself in the victim and those around, hateful.
@SomethingNothingSea I find it ironic that your comments are deleted as spam! lol...
No-one has disagreed with my original comments! That was the thing I found the most strange! I've got no problem with people disagreeing with me, and I'm more than up for a debate about it! If it helps to bring freedom closer then I'm all for it... So far though this has been a pointless exercise because people are just jumping on the band wagon and ignoring the original comments!
@666or999 And that wasn't even my intention! I want to see freedom in my lifetime! I do not see how else it is going to be achieved!
To be honest I'm gob-smacked et the pettiness because I wrote a few comments! I wasn't abusive or belittling the guy! I merely posed some questions and put my point across, sometimes you need more than one or two comments to do that!
I've been posting for years and never had anyone react the way they have here! It's unbelievable!
Honestly, you might consider getting a blog somewhere and just linking to the blog if you want to go on about something for 500 or more words. YouTube isn't a great place for intricate text debates and discussions because of the character limit.
@doucher337 Now you go on to tell me how exactly I should reply to people! I find it ironic that people who stand for individual freedom would want to tell me how to comment.
YOU may not find youtube a great place for "intricate text debates and discussions" (although I feel that is what we are doing right now! lol) but that is not my experience over the years and I have NEVER come across this problem until now.
@doucher337 One final thing, the only reason the "debate" was extended was because other people decided to put their noses in! Which you are free to do but don't then complain that I'm "whining", I'm only replying to your comments! You are free at any time to stop replying and that will be that!
Exchanges like this does make me wonder how libertarianism would work in the real world! If writing multiple friendly comments is compared to rape and theft!
"Exchanges like this does make me wonder how libertarianism would work in the real world! If writing multiple friendly comments is compared to rape and theft!"
Rewriting history to suit your purpose works when people can't refer to the data. But everyone can see your comments. The comparison is about defending private property. Yes, YouTube owns all YouTube channels. And landlords own all rented houses. People on YouTube have an agreement with YouTube about the channels.
@SomethingNothingSea No dude I'm referring to my original comments! The ones I got accused of being on my soapbox for! I already said many times that the guy is welcome to delete my comments and ban me! I find it sad but still it doesn't violate any bloody property rights!
You are the sort of person that would shoot someone for stepping one toe on your land!
@SomethingNothingSea "If you want me to stop whining, then stop replying to my whining! It's YOUR FAULT that I'm whining!" It is his opinion that I'm whining and my point was that the conversation between me and the op was over! Then people were jumping in and complaining even though it had nothing to do with them. Extending an already tedious exercise!
It is my opinion that people are whining at me! But there you go!
@SomethingNothingSea "Again, if you're going to write an essay, maybe you want to make a video response instead." I don't see 4 or 5 comments as an essay! When I was at school at essay was a few thousand words not characters!
Perhaps I couldn't be bothered to make a video? Perhaps I don't care if my comments got buried? I was talking to the op as for as I was concerned, he saw them but chose not to see them and just tell me off for writing an "essay" lol.
It makes a perfect sense to choose Ron Paul. He is the best candidate who is a human.
What I noticed is that other candidates and new prestitutes like Anderson Cooper, Blitzer, Maedow !>@ is that they lack empathy. They are very cold inside like a different non-human fabric. They are afraid of Ron Paul like a devil afraid of the holy water. There is something to it.
I mean come on, how exactly do you see it going down? Give me your theory of how it could go without ron paul being there at the helm to guide people a little?
There has to be an alternative! You can't just say, well I want freedom NOW and I will not accept any alternative!
I would love it to be possible, but it just isn't!
It's going to have to be a gradual thing, or I don't see it happening!
@snaz27 I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox. Sharing your opinion is fine, but if you're going to write an essay, post a video response.
What is the worst that could happen? Well the economy could crash and then they people could blame libertarianism. This is true, but without giving him a chance we will never know and more than likely never see freedom in our lifetime!
You think the powers that be will just give up tat power? They would kill every one of us before letting that happen!
I want true freedom as much as you do but you have to see that a complete instant collapse would leave a HUGE power vacuum that god knows what will fill...
But if ron paul can get in perhaps he can glide down to earth rather that a crash?
During his stay in office he could reintroduce the gold standard and put other countries to shame! He could educate people a little on responsible free market living!
I think the guy deserves a bloody chance! 35 years he's been raising awareness!
Yeah good video, I got to say I love ron paul and I think he is doing and has been doing the right thing for years!
Look people are not going to buy the option to drop the system we have now overnight! They are too scared of what might happen due to their conditioning! That is why when you talk about libertarianism to the average joe you get that look of shock horror and the inevitable questions of "but what about the murderers and rapists?".
@snaz27 I think it wouldn't be a bad idea for ron paul to get in and then spread the message world wide! I'm in the uk and there is zero mention of ron paul in the media! But what about if he became president? Could they get away with that then? How would they get away with dropping america off the map? They couldn't
If he got in he could begin to break down the monolith federal government in a controlled manner! As to not panic people.
@snaz27 After he has achieved this he could start to lobby or try to persuade local governments to allow more freedom, bit by bit rather than a complete panic driven collapse.
Trust me, that would be good for no-one!
Also wouldn't it create a sort of free market of government... Say texas had laws that you liked or they had more freedom that you liked you could move there!
It would definitely be a great start!
Just having his libertarian voice as the president would be monumental!
Great analysis - though the RP fanatics can get on my nerves, you've got to respect them many many times more than someone who votes for any of the other clowns under the circus tent.
One of the reason for his popularity is because whenever he says something controversial, he quickly follows it up with: "oh but the states could regulate it".
@erelpc That's probably my biggest complaint about him. If it's bad for the federal government to do X, why wouldn't it also be bad for state governments to do it?
@XOmniverse Well he would of course say in response because it's at a more local level so 'the people' have more influence over it. Now I'm sure he's smart enough to not buy this argument himself (especially when you consider a lot of US states are the size of countries), but he does actually want to win elections so anything to keep people listening lol.
@XOmniverse I agree on that argument, although from a (Objectivist) minarchist perspective. The argument that 'the people' having more influence on the local level (brought up in the other response by erelpc) is precisely what I don't want - on a village level there's ultimately only collectivism. I fully agree with you on Paul being a great advertisement for all the wonderful ideas that will heal the world and on your analysis. Good video.
So even though you think his campaign is effective at propagandizing your ideas in a practical, real-world way you will not encourage people to vote for him or give him money? Is that out of ideological purity?
@kindalyosha I think most people would benefit more from spending their money on stuff they want for themselves. If they want to help the cause of liberty, they'd be better off starting a blog or some other online presence (like Youtube videos) where they share the ideas.
I'm of the same opinion as you to a large extent. While I don't support Ron Paul as a desirable presidential candidate, what I do like is the fact that he is ABLE to become so popular and garner such support. It tells me that the culture is in the process of looking for new ideas, even if they're radically out of the mainstream.
I share your views and optimistic outlook on the movements behind Ron Paul. Just imagine how much more visibility libertarian ideals will get if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination! RP vs Obama in the debates...that'd be a historic political time for this country for certain. It doesnt look good though thus far. Reports of voter fraud are coming in, and they're all skewed against RP.
AttunedFlux 1 month ago
@AttunedFlux I think it is very unlikely that he will get nominated. My prediction right now is that Romney will be nominated and lose the general election. Plan on 4 more years of Obama.
XOmniverse 1 month ago
@XOmniverse
I also share your prediction..with obama getting another term. What do you think about voter fraud issues? Idea for a video: what would a fair election process look like in a "freer society"(as you define that to be)?
AttunedFlux 1 month ago
Worthy comments. Maybe you tend to do this already, but if not you might consider including suggested reading with the video description.
ponyfaces 1 month ago
good video
Sparkygravity 2 months ago
I couldn't agree with you more and I wish more libertarians understood this because I believe it is the actually purpose of his campaign, his campaign in my opinion is purely educational. One point were I do disagree with you is on his personal ideology, I believe he is in fact at heart an anarcho-capitalist. I mean to the extent that he praises Rothbard and associates LvMI I think it would be hard for him not to be.
cochranj24 2 months ago
I'm personally glad that Ron Paul's writings provide conclusive evidence for the seething racism that masquerades itself behind so-called liberty considerations in the right libertarian rejection of civil rights legislation. The mask is off and now the fraud has been exposed.
DanaGarrett 2 months ago
@DanaGarrett It does not follow from the fact that someone opposes the use of force to make someone not be a racist that they support racism. You'll need to logically connect those two concepts.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse The Civil Rights Act does not compel anyone to cease to "be" a racist. It merely prohibits people from acting in a racist manner in some respects in the marketplace.
DanaGarrett 2 months ago
@DanaGarrett Ok, I will rephrase:
It does not follow from the fact that someone opposes the use of force to make someone not make racist business decisions that they support racism. You'll need to logically connect those two concepts.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse It may not mean that Ron Paul is a racist, but it certainly means that he supports racism, if not morally than politically. If someone is being treated unfairly, then they should be helped. Besides, if a man can't be fired because their boss just doesn't like them, why should they be fired for their ethnicity?
SixthStanza 2 months ago
@SixthStanza I don't think it should be illegal to chop your own fingers off. Does that mean I support chopping your own fingers off?
And I would argue that a man ought to be able to be fired for any reason. Employment is a two-person agreement that should be able to be terminated for any reason by either party. Imagine if we said that a person shouldn't be allowed to quit a job because he doesn't like his boss.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse There are only so many openings for good jobs. Do you think it's right that a man can spend years on his training to become a dentist, but be denied because of the colour of his skin? Employment is more than just a two-person agreement. It is a necessity to survive, and in many cases a legal requirement. It is a right to have employees who don't harm the company, it is not a right to have employees who you like. Wanting something doesn't make it a right, necessity does.
SixthStanza 2 months ago
@SixthStanza Should it be illegal for am employee to quit because his boss is black?
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse I pretty much just said no, and explained why. An employer can make the choice not to start a company, and if they decide to start one then they're accepting the responsibility to provide jobs for people who are qualified to carry them out, an employee get's a job because they NEED a job.
Businesses should NOT private, because they're an integral, necessary part of society. So no, they should not be able to fire someone unless they're directly hurting the company.
SixthStanza 2 months ago
@SixthStanza "they decide to start one then they're accepting the responsibility to provide jobs for people who are qualified to carry them out"
How does this follow?
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse It's a basic human need, and they're the only ones who can provide.
SixthStanza 2 months ago
@SixthStanza People can start their own businesses or work freelance.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse Which aren't always choices.
SixthStanza 2 months ago
@SixthStanza When are they not choices?
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse Starting a company takes money, particularly if your talents lie in a profession that requires expensive equipment. And as for freelancers, there's still no certainty that they'll find work which, once again, is ESSENTIAL.
SixthStanza 2 months ago
@SixthStanza Ultimately, even if I accept your basic premise, you'd need to demonstrate why one person's needs are a claim on the labor or property of others.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse That might actually mean something if it weren't for the fact that the employer is still getting skilled, useful employees. That's why I said it should be illegal 'unless it harms the company'.
SixthStanza 2 months ago
How would a anarchist solve the problem of crime? Your thoughts.
MechanicV8 2 months ago
@MechanicV8 The state is the biggest criminal enterprise, by far.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@MechanicV8 the state is the biggest criminal enterprise, but I think your asking 'what do we as a society when people enact suffering on others?' My answer is the same thing human beings have always done throughout all cultures and history. We intervene. Intervention is a very natural reaction, the problem with government intervention is the ability to corrupt the justification for intervention. Governments are handed blank checks by society that basically say 'You can intervene in _____".
Sparkygravity 2 months ago
@Sparkygravity Regardless, people have been intervening forever and that's not going to change. You have the freedom and ability to do anything despite whatever laws or systems tell you otherwise. It's a tendency that if you don't treat that freedom responsibly it will be stripped from you... government or no government.
Government it's not a necessity, we invented it hoping it would provide solutions to social problems. Has it worked? Does government fix problems or do people fix problems?
Sparkygravity 2 months ago
Yes, the internet has definitely been an essential tool for the acquisition of knowledge. More and more people are educating themselves on important social issues, and are more aware of the constructs of political philosophy, and are learning from the mistakes of the past. Who knows...maybe one day, we will have a libertarian majority.
AaronQ1222 2 months ago
Do you essentially agree with Noam Chomsky's idea that (from his libertarian socialist perspective) that personal ownership of production of goods is a tyranny, that it is a threat to everyone's liberty, and also one that can't be solved by the current "libertarian view-set".
MechanicV8 2 months ago
@MechanicV8 No, I disagree with Noam Chomsky and libertarian socialists in general regarding property.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
Why not vote for him? Voting is simple and takes hardly any of my time... it serves my interest to vote for him, simply because his policies will bring us closer to minarchism, which will eventually hopefully lead to anarcho-syndicalism, which I think humans aren't prepared for yet.
Xylogeist 2 months ago
@Xylogeist Given the likelihood of your vote affecting the election, even spending 15 minutes voting is essentially a poor use of time.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse You have to think of a collective. If 200,000 people were to see this people and follow it, that would make an impact on the support of Ron Paul. He gets RECOGNIZED with votes, not by talking. That's why people need to vote in order to contribute to the cause of educating the people.
Xylogeist 2 months ago
@Xylogeist
Rephrasing some of what XOmni has said in the comments here:
"Culture is the aggregate of the ideas floating around in a given population.
There is no way to force a regime change over a population that doesn't want it. If people still believe in democracy, the culture is still broken. Democracy is a decision making process, not a tool for changing cultures.
Mob rule isn't freedom.
If enough people did not believe in democracy, the whole system would just fall apart on its own."
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@SomethingNothingSea ... But anarchists should be in favor of democracy. Bakunin/Chomsky anarchism dictates that socialist order is required in order for the proletariat to overthrow the shackles of wage slavery. Is this vlogger not an anarchist, and by extension most of his viewers? Perhaps I've misjudged this mob, maybe you fellows are the ones that still hold on to the principles of "chaos anarchism", in which case, I can only frown.
Xylogeist 2 months ago
@Xylogeist
"But anarchists should be in favor of democracy. "
*facepalm*
"Bakunin/Chomsky anarchism dictates that socialist order is required in order for the proletariat to overthrow the shackles of wage slavery."
Egh. Bye. Here's how you overthrow "the shackles of wage slavery":
1. No minimum wage.
2. No income tax (no tax at all would be good).
Boom. Done.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@SomethingNothingSea Oh dear, I've misjudged this little cult you have going. You fellows aren't educated in the least. Just capitalist anarchists chasing their unobtainable factually-absurd dreams. Any intelligent anarchist knows that man can only be liberated when all forms of "undeserved" coercion are eliminated, that includes capital coercion, along with your demonized state coercion the immature anarchists preach about. The government isn't the only societal problem you nitwits.
Xylogeist 1 month ago
@Xylogeist
I think you're a nitwit as well, and will respond to parts of your comments that aren't simply ad hominems.
"The government isn't the only societal problem"
Yes, the myth of "government" isn't the only society problem. It's simply the biggest one, and the cause of many to most of the other ones.
"man can only be liberated when all forms of "undeserved" coercion are eliminated"
What a clusterfuck. Superstition results in "undeserved coersion". Just look at Christians.
SomethingSea1 1 month ago
@SomethingNothingSea In fact, I think you may be uneducated as to what socialism/democracy is. Socialism is not social programs owned by the state, socialism is when the workers own the means of production. Socialism works EXTREMELY well with anarchist societies. STATE socialism is something to be feared and rejected. Democracy in itself is simply a self-governed populace. Democracy is the tool that allows socialism to perform. Ex: 40 workers each have a vote in the operations of one company.
Xylogeist 1 month ago
@Xylogeist
Ok, nvm, you're not worth talking to. Besides being an idiot, you are resorting to yelling, ad hominens, as well as condescension, and you're clearly not going to listen to what I have to say. Bad day, sir.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@Xylogeist
Fuck it, I'll go against my better intentions:
"socialism is when the workers own the means of production."
Ok, so if you make a process and items and need people to work those items, all of those people who then work on those items own them? You have a 'tragedy of the commons' coming up.
"Socialism is not social programs owned by the state"
"The State" doesn't exist. People exist, and those who are "official" are assumed to have super-human properties... that they don't.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@Xylogeist
"Democracy in itself is simply a self-governed populace."
No, that is not Democracy. Demos - people, cracy - rule. Rule of the people by the people. That's not self-governance. That's people ruling other people. Don't see a difference? It's the difference between buying yourself a carton of milk, verses pooling your money together with 130 other people to buy a carton of milk, skittles, calf meat, broccoli, and so forth, and you pay a lot more into the pot, too, interestingly enough.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@Xylogeist
"Democracy is the tool that allows socialism to perform."
Sounds like the perfect hell. Oh, wait... we're getting there. We've got crony capitalism parroted as if it were the free market, while corportism/statism/democracy continues to flourish socialism. Look around - your dream manifest! Looks nice, huh? Oh, except that it's not as socialist yet as it could be - need to have the "means of production" owned by the workers and have the tragedy of the commons destroy the rest of it.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@SomethingNothingSea I was yelling? I didn't know that volume was a property of text.
Xylogeist 1 month ago
@Xylogeist I'M NOT YELLING WITH TEXT RIGHT NOW. I JUST HAPPEN TO HAVE THE CAPS LOCK ON, WHICH IS WHAT PEOPLE CONSIDER, TEXTUALLY, TO BE YELLING. HI THERE.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@SomethingNothingSea Not a single one of my comments was all caps. I capitalized specific words that I want to put emphasis on.
Xylogeist 1 month ago
This is why the government would love nothing more than to censor the internet.... IF they could. Call me paranoid, but I always have my TOR browser bundle at hand.
UnschoolingEagle 2 months ago
Featuring this video on this channel and my main channel.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
Question: If Ron Paul is helping you toward your political goals, why are you suggesting that your viewers don't "go out & vote for him?"
BrotherWoody1 2 months ago
@BrotherWoody1 Voting for him isn't going to do anything to help him spread libertarian ideas. Voting is effectively a waste of time.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse Sorry, I still don't get it. If armed rebellion is out of the question, how else are we to change our government without voting? An individual vote may not be very effective but it seems that not voting guarantees failure. For a libertarian, aren't Ron Paul and/or Gary Johnson the only hopes available?
BrotherWoody1 2 months ago
@BrotherWoody1 The culture has to change. There is no way to force a regime change over a population that doesn't want it.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse True, however increasing the population of those who demonstrate politically that they do want a replacement of governance is politically done through voting, is it not? If one's wants a more libertarian government, doesn't one help effect that by his or her vote? Doesn't cultural change follow behavioral change? If we're only led by slave masters, many of us will become slaves will we not? Most elections don't make much difference but this one does, don't you think?
BrotherWoody1 2 months ago
@BrotherWoody1 I think if people still believe in democracy, the culture is still broken. Mob rule isn't freedom.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse Isn't democracy about the only tool that we have to help change the culture? Isn't nonviolence the only way to avoid certain annihilation by the police state? Perhaps I don't really understand exactly what your political advice is?
BrotherWoody1 2 months ago
@BrotherWoody1 Democracy is a decision making process, not a tool for changing cultures. A culture is just the aggregate of the ideas floating around in a given population. We have to change the minds of individual people until enough of them have changed that the culture itself is now changed.
The idea that you can vote away your neighbor's liberty is not compatible with liberty. If enough people did not believe in democracy, the whole system would just fall apart on its own.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse I hug you.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
I've been out of the loop, regarding politics, for some time now. In fact, I find I am happier avoiding the matter all together.
But, I have found, in my day to day conversations, no influx of people professing libertarian ideals or principles. If anything, I hear only a rush to statism, even after listening to the same people decrying the evils of the state.
You might be right, at least, I hope you are, but I seriously doubt that there is some cultural revolution happening.
Cailwyn 2 months ago
So Ron Paul is a gateway drug to Anarko-capitalism?
rafen8705 2 months ago
Though he is a minarchist, he might well be like von Mises in that he may support unlimited secession. In that case, his minarchism is so weak that he would allow others to disavow and dissolve coercive unions, and I couldn't ask for much more from an incredibly prominent libertarian figurehead such as him. How many actual full-blown anti-statists are as prominent as he? None. Rothbard is big, but not that big; same with all of the LVM Institute duders.
doucher337 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Polite requests? lol Is that what you call it? " I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox"... Dude before I commented here you had like 10 comments!
To be honest I thought you might actually appreciate the conversation!
Is this how you treat all of your listeners?
Perhaps that's why you only had 10 comments?
I'll leave you to your "private property!"
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27
"Dude before I commented here you had like 10 comments!"
Yes, and from 10 different people.
"Is this how you treat all of your listeners?"
Man, you remind me of my former stalker, BiteHunter.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SomethingNothingSea "Yes, and from 10 different people." And?...
"Man, you remind me of my former stalker, BiteHunter." This is the first and last time i've ever listen to or commented on the guys videos! lol
What is your point exactly?
snaz27 2 months ago
Jumped up little boy!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 mmmm spam.
666or999 2 months ago
@666or999 Spam? Do you know what spam is? Are you saying that I've copied and pasted my comments or something? lol
This is ridiculous! So tell me, where is the disclaimer that says you're only allowed to post a certain amount of comments? What is the accepted limit on the amount of comments?
Do you realise that people like you and omniverse actually do nothing for the cause of freedom and libertarianism? Perhaps the pair of you could look up what these terms actually mean?
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 You don't understand property rights?
666or999 2 months ago
@666or999 You obviously don't understand that no-one owns their bloody youtube channel! If you do, post some porn on here! Or some copy-write material!
That's right, youtube owns every channel on here!
Besides have I said he couldn't delete my comments? He is free to do whatever he likes! The fact you and your pal are pulling out the property rights card for this is pretty pathetic!
Non of the content I wrote has been answered, it seems to me the guys ego is all that has been hurt here!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27
You may not "own" the channel just as you do not "own" anything in statist USA, since one pays income tax on their labor, property taxes on land, and consumption taxes or capital gains taxes on those relevant items. The thing is that one of the conditions of your "lease" from YouTube is that you can block people. Quit bickering. He is not inconsistent, just as libertarians who don't allow others to rape and steal from them are not inconsistent. We are not pacifists or cosmopolitans.
doucher337 2 months ago
@doucher337 Did I say he wasn't allowed to block me? In fact I invited him to! I really couldn't give a damn if he does or doesn't block me!
Comparing a guy peacefully and respectfully posing some questions and theories on a youtube video to someone raping and stealing is somewhat of a stretch wouldn't you say? lmao
I'm sorry but when you post a video which ALLOWS comments then you have got to expect comments! And one would think that you would be happy to receive them!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 Oh btw I find it amusing that on one hand your telling me "We are not pacifists or cosmopolitans" but then go on to say "Quit bickering"... For a start who is "we"? And do those two statements you make not contradict each other?
We are not pacifists, but stop fighting! lmao. You guys are too funny!
Anyway I've wasted far too much of my time here, I'll leave you all to have fun, play nice kiddies.
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27
No, they don't contradict each other. My request that you stop whining was simply because I don't see what you're achieving here. You're wasting energy and everyone else's time.
The "we" is the libertarian who is anything like me. There are pacifists in the libertarian movement, but they're a nominal minority. I think you posted valid points - before you were claiming that he's a hypocrite for any request to self-censor or inclination to block you.
doucher337 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@doucher337 You seem to have the up-most respect for the guys "property rights" yet you seem to think you can tell me what to do with mine! lol... If you had followed what happened I left him some comments and then he snapped " I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox"... To which I replied that I didn't realise libertarians had such rules (free speech). Then I told him that he was free to delete my so called essay (if it really bothered him and offended him) and even block me!
snaz27 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@snaz27
You see gray as black and white.
1. "I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox"
=
"rules"
2. "you might consider getting a blog"
=
"Now you go on to tell me how exactly I should reply to people!"
There are many other examples, and those two are the most concise. I'll show others as responses to other parts.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SomethingNothingSea "rules" Yeah not a fan of these my friend lol.
If he was that bothered by multiple comments then perhaps he should let people know in the description?
He can say whatever he likes as can I. I don't need nor want his advice though.
"There are many other examples, and those two are the most concise. I'll show others as responses to other parts." Crack on but it's not like I give a damn. lol
snaz27 2 months ago
@doucher337 My energy is mine to waste, ok bud? I can not control what people read or how they spend their time! If they didn't like what I said they were free to stop reading! Right?
You then go on to speak for libertarianism saying that pacifism is a "nominal minority". When the whole philosophy of libertarianism is against the use of force! Which is pacifism! Do you understand libertarianism?
The last bit was just a plain lie as I've already explained.
snaz27 2 months ago
@doucher337 To put it more clearly I am free to write whatever I like wherever I like! If he doesn't like it then he is free to remove my comments and block me if he so wishes.
I would find it very strange in this circumstance as I've not said anything to offend him (until he acted like a jerk, which he is free to be but I am also free to comment on) and I would of thought he'd be happy for feedback/input.
I don't care if he wanted to censor me but I think it's sad all the same.
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27
"Anyway I've wasted far too much of my time here, I'll leave you all to have fun, play nice kiddies."
'Yeah, I'll just take this giant shit in the room, let you guys smell it and complain about it, and then just leave, 'cause I simply don't understand why you didn't appreciate it. Hateful bastards.'
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@SomethingNothingSea "Yeah, I'll just take this giant shit in the room, let you guys smell it and complain about it, and then just leave" Where is the giant shit? Still after all these comments no-one has addressed the content of my original comments! Only complaining about the amount of comments I left! Btw you have left multiple comments but I don't see anyone complaining about it! Is that because you are licking the guys bum?
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 Licking it real good. It's because everyone has the same complaint, and it's about you. I wouldn't be doing multiple posts on here like this if it were to tell you to stop making so many posts because you're essentially spamming. Get a fucking blog already or ask for emails so you can IM instead of spamming.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@snaz27
"I'm sorry but when you post a video which ALLOWS comments then you have got to expect comments! And one would think that you would be happy to receive them!"
C'mon. Even you can see how silly you're being here.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@SomethingNothingSea "C'mon. Even you can see how silly you're being here." I stand by my comment, what exactly is your problem with it?
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 Your idiotic behavior.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@doucher337 Is it the case that only comments licking his bum are accepted? You are telling me not to bicker? Did I start any bickering?
What does pacifism have to do with any of this? Did I say that you were? To be honest is seems like you guys are buthurt that I posed some valid points... I only aim to join the conversation, but I tell you what, I wish I hadn't lol... I've never heard anything quite like it!
So much hate in here, wow!
snaz27 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@snaz27
"So much hate in here, wow!"
Yes, all of it imagined by you. You take offense to people saying that you're spamming. You can't imagine that anyone wouldn't want to talk with you, and wouldn't see your cause as just, good, and infallible. It is this insecurity that propels you and colors your view toward polarization, seeing everyone who disagrees with you slightly as the enemy, and so you exaggerate their words, centering the premise of yourself in the victim and those around, hateful.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@SomethingNothingSea I find it ironic that your comments are deleted as spam! lol...
No-one has disagreed with my original comments! That was the thing I found the most strange! I've got no problem with people disagreeing with me, and I'm more than up for a debate about it! If it helps to bring freedom closer then I'm all for it... So far though this has been a pointless exercise because people are just jumping on the band wagon and ignoring the original comments!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 I don't. Common occurrence. I quote for reference.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
@666or999 And that wasn't even my intention! I want to see freedom in my lifetime! I do not see how else it is going to be achieved!
To be honest I'm gob-smacked et the pettiness because I wrote a few comments! I wasn't abusive or belittling the guy! I merely posed some questions and put my point across, sometimes you need more than one or two comments to do that!
I've been posting for years and never had anyone react the way they have here! It's unbelievable!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27
Honestly, you might consider getting a blog somewhere and just linking to the blog if you want to go on about something for 500 or more words. YouTube isn't a great place for intricate text debates and discussions because of the character limit.
doucher337 2 months ago
@doucher337 Now you go on to tell me how exactly I should reply to people! I find it ironic that people who stand for individual freedom would want to tell me how to comment.
YOU may not find youtube a great place for "intricate text debates and discussions" (although I feel that is what we are doing right now! lol) but that is not my experience over the years and I have NEVER come across this problem until now.
Like I've said it seems he was butthurt to me.
snaz27 2 months ago
@doucher337 One final thing, the only reason the "debate" was extended was because other people decided to put their noses in! Which you are free to do but don't then complain that I'm "whining", I'm only replying to your comments! You are free at any time to stop replying and that will be that!
Exchanges like this does make me wonder how libertarianism would work in the real world! If writing multiple friendly comments is compared to rape and theft!
Crazy stuff! lol
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27
"but don't then complain that I'm "whining", I'm only replying to your comments! You are free at any time to stop replying and that will be that!"
Essentially you're saying,
'If you want me to stop whining, then stop replying to my whining! It's YOUR FAULT that I'm whining!'
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@snaz27
"Exchanges like this does make me wonder how libertarianism would work in the real world! If writing multiple friendly comments is compared to rape and theft!"
Rewriting history to suit your purpose works when people can't refer to the data. But everyone can see your comments. The comparison is about defending private property. Yes, YouTube owns all YouTube channels. And landlords own all rented houses. People on YouTube have an agreement with YouTube about the channels.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@SomethingNothingSea No dude I'm referring to my original comments! The ones I got accused of being on my soapbox for! I already said many times that the guy is welcome to delete my comments and ban me! I find it sad but still it doesn't violate any bloody property rights!
You are the sort of person that would shoot someone for stepping one toe on your land!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 Yeah, totally. I'll make sure to get a damn good shot of you... and then post it online.
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SomethingNothingSea "If you want me to stop whining, then stop replying to my whining! It's YOUR FAULT that I'm whining!" It is his opinion that I'm whining and my point was that the conversation between me and the op was over! Then people were jumping in and complaining even though it had nothing to do with them. Extending an already tedious exercise!
It is my opinion that people are whining at me! But there you go!
snaz27 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@snaz27
"To be honest I'm gob-smacked et the pettiness because I wrote a few comments!"
You show a skillful amount of self-blindness.
"I want to see freedom in my lifetime! I do not see how else it is going to be achieved!"
Certainly, acting like Alex Jones will achieve it. Yell at some more people. That'll make them listen.
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@snaz27
"I merely posed some questions and put my point across, sometimes you need more than one or two comments to do that!"
Again, if you're going to write an essay, maybe you want to make a video response instead.
Here are a few reasons why:
1. More people see what you have to say, instead of it being buried in the comments.
2. Now you can control the conversation as you wish, supposing you want to.
3. People can't exactly accuse you of spamming your own video, can they?
SomethingNothingSea 2 months ago
@SomethingNothingSea "Again, if you're going to write an essay, maybe you want to make a video response instead." I don't see 4 or 5 comments as an essay! When I was at school at essay was a few thousand words not characters!
Perhaps I couldn't be bothered to make a video? Perhaps I don't care if my comments got buried? I was talking to the op as for as I was concerned, he saw them but chose not to see them and just tell me off for writing an "essay" lol.
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 And perhaps you understand why we view your behavior as spammish. Moving on...
SomethingNothingSea 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SomethingNothingSea "You show a skillful amount of self-blindness." nonsense.
"Certainly, acting like Alex Jones will achieve it. Yell at some more people. That'll make them listen." more nonsense.
snaz27 2 months ago
Feel free to remove my "essay" and BAN me!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 Is this how you respond to all polite requests?
XOmniverse 2 months ago
Lmao I didn't realise libertarians had such rules on posting comments! I do apologise!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 Youtube channel = private property.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
It makes a perfect sense to choose Ron Paul. He is the best candidate who is a human.
What I noticed is that other candidates and new prestitutes like Anderson Cooper, Blitzer, Maedow !>@ is that they lack empathy. They are very cold inside like a different non-human fabric. They are afraid of Ron Paul like a devil afraid of the holy water. There is something to it.
Ron Paul 2012.
ngmyt2012 2 months ago
I mean come on, how exactly do you see it going down? Give me your theory of how it could go without ron paul being there at the helm to guide people a little?
There has to be an alternative! You can't just say, well I want freedom NOW and I will not accept any alternative!
I would love it to be possible, but it just isn't!
It's going to have to be a gradual thing, or I don't see it happening!
They have all the guns remember!
I'd rather they were in ron pauls hands for now!
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 I think you've confused my Youtube channel for a soapbox. Sharing your opinion is fine, but if you're going to write an essay, post a video response.
XOmniverse 2 months ago
What is the worst that could happen? Well the economy could crash and then they people could blame libertarianism. This is true, but without giving him a chance we will never know and more than likely never see freedom in our lifetime!
You think the powers that be will just give up tat power? They would kill every one of us before letting that happen!
snaz27 2 months ago
I want true freedom as much as you do but you have to see that a complete instant collapse would leave a HUGE power vacuum that god knows what will fill...
But if ron paul can get in perhaps he can glide down to earth rather that a crash?
During his stay in office he could reintroduce the gold standard and put other countries to shame! He could educate people a little on responsible free market living!
I think the guy deserves a bloody chance! 35 years he's been raising awareness!
snaz27 2 months ago
Yeah good video, I got to say I love ron paul and I think he is doing and has been doing the right thing for years!
Look people are not going to buy the option to drop the system we have now overnight! They are too scared of what might happen due to their conditioning! That is why when you talk about libertarianism to the average joe you get that look of shock horror and the inevitable questions of "but what about the murderers and rapists?".
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 I think it wouldn't be a bad idea for ron paul to get in and then spread the message world wide! I'm in the uk and there is zero mention of ron paul in the media! But what about if he became president? Could they get away with that then? How would they get away with dropping america off the map? They couldn't
If he got in he could begin to break down the monolith federal government in a controlled manner! As to not panic people.
snaz27 2 months ago
@snaz27 After he has achieved this he could start to lobby or try to persuade local governments to allow more freedom, bit by bit rather than a complete panic driven collapse.
Trust me, that would be good for no-one!
Also wouldn't it create a sort of free market of government... Say texas had laws that you liked or they had more freedom that you liked you could move there!
It would definitely be a great start!
Just having his libertarian voice as the president would be monumental!
snaz27 2 months ago
Great analysis - though the RP fanatics can get on my nerves, you've got to respect them many many times more than someone who votes for any of the other clowns under the circus tent.
BookofNick 2 months ago
One of the reason for his popularity is because whenever he says something controversial, he quickly follows it up with: "oh but the states could regulate it".
erelpc 2 months ago
@erelpc That's probably my biggest complaint about him. If it's bad for the federal government to do X, why wouldn't it also be bad for state governments to do it?
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse Well he would of course say in response because it's at a more local level so 'the people' have more influence over it. Now I'm sure he's smart enough to not buy this argument himself (especially when you consider a lot of US states are the size of countries), but he does actually want to win elections so anything to keep people listening lol.
erelpc 2 months ago
@XOmniverse I agree on that argument, although from a (Objectivist) minarchist perspective. The argument that 'the people' having more influence on the local level (brought up in the other response by erelpc) is precisely what I don't want - on a village level there's ultimately only collectivism. I fully agree with you on Paul being a great advertisement for all the wonderful ideas that will heal the world and on your analysis. Good video.
john42t 2 months ago
Why not support him and send him money so he can further get the message out and gain converts to the libertarian cause?
totheman 2 months ago
@totheman That money can be better spent on myself :)
XOmniverse 2 months ago
@XOmniverse ha, fair enough, good video non the less and happy new year btw :D
totheman 2 months ago
So even though you think his campaign is effective at propagandizing your ideas in a practical, real-world way you will not encourage people to vote for him or give him money? Is that out of ideological purity?
kindalyosha 2 months ago
@kindalyosha I think most people would benefit more from spending their money on stuff they want for themselves. If they want to help the cause of liberty, they'd be better off starting a blog or some other online presence (like Youtube videos) where they share the ideas.
XOmniverse 2 months ago 2
I'm of the same opinion as you to a large extent. While I don't support Ron Paul as a desirable presidential candidate, what I do like is the fact that he is ABLE to become so popular and garner such support. It tells me that the culture is in the process of looking for new ideas, even if they're radically out of the mainstream.
bma051000 2 months ago
Well put.
watcherjohnny 2 months ago