Why Ron Paul and Mike Gravel need each other...

Ron Paul's philosophy is focused on individual liberties and seeks to ensure that society doesn't infringe on individual liberties. Mike Gravel's philosophy is focused on societal liberties and wants to ensure that society grows, matures, and moves in the right direction. Sure, they have differences in application, but their philosophies are out to accomplish the same things. One is focused on parts, the other on wholes. Neither is wrong - both are right. We need to protect our individual freedoms while helping society (which is composed of those very individuals) grow and mature in the right ways.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• holon
• holons
• holarchy
• mike gravel
• ron paul
• ron
• paul
• mike
• gravel
• philosophy
• wholes
• parts

[wisechemicals]

I was with you until the car metaphor.

A free society is one that allows individuals to participate as much or as little as they want. It is not a system that forces individuals into roles based on what other individuals need. Despite what a lot of people think it is possible for human beings to cooperate with each other without the government forcing them to.

That being said, I still like the idea of a Paul/Gravel Ticket.

[myferalprofessor]

I agree with you on the government portion. Absolutely. What I don't agree with you on is that a free society is one that allows individuals to participate as muhc or as little as they want. There's always a minimum amount of 'opting-in' that is required in order to be part of a society. You could go live in the wilderness on your own, but then you wouldn't be part of society anyway.

[Bodhi510]

No, you are not going to create islands. A real group is created by each individuals free choice to join. Other groups are called fascism. Groups benificial to society are created by mutual dependency. I may want to be left alone. Your thesis is based on a negative view of human nature.

No, Ron Paul is not an objectionist. The Bushites are Ayn Rand devoties. Ron Paul is a a libertarian, a more accurte description of liberialism, not this fake liberialism that is benign elitism.

[myferalprofessor]

You have no choice but to join society. You've obviously made the decision by using computers and speaking English.

[vap0rtranz]

you look better with longer hair :)

anyways, i assumed everyone (who isn't an anarchist) understood the individual versus group dichotomy is false.  venn diagrams absolutely demonstrate this. are people stupid?? :)

[Eddoo1971]

Very good! I save this!

[rovellequartz]

Actually I think a Paul Huckabee ticket would not be bad

[PeaceCzar]

Excellent insight. A good talking point when I address Ron Paul supporters and consider their outlooks.

[oldhacks]

god damn socialist! (sarcasm*)

[kaksonen]

from the onset i'll state that i am simultaneously pro-paul and pro-gravel. also, i agree that both candidates are hoping in earnest to accomplish the same overarching goals.

[Tasadaru]

Very good analogy and reasoning. That is why I support the notion of Prez. Dr. Paul and Vice Prez. Mike Gravel. Instead of trying to bash head because you think one is better than the other is not wise. We should combine that best of both ideas to get something we can all appreciate. But, that is just my opinion. Nice job again. Peace.

[FansOfGravel]

'Youve no choice but to join society. Youve ... made the DECISION ["choice"?] by using computers....' We SHOULD have choice but dont. The real issues are 1)Paul's unabashed social Darwinism which makes GWB look like Che Guevara, & 2)MG trusts the PTB 2 much 2 inspire major confidence. I'm for MG; he's lesser of 2 evils. What each needs is not the other but to fix his OWN broken car, or both'll end up on history's junkpile. It's a race 2 C who can shape up 1st. IF they want to try!

[NortonYorksterdam]

You have the entire objection wrong. It's more specific to the political world - the larger the institutions of government are, the less people have control over them.