Michael Ratner on Ron Paul and "soft fascism" in the US

More at http://www.therealnews.com/c.php?c=080107MR
Michael Ratner accesses the Presidential candidates on civil rights issues in US

Monday January 7th, 2008

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• therealnews
• ron
• paul
• fascism
• united
• states

[AllForChange]

In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.

-Mark Twain

[AllForChange]

And imagine he is fighting for freedom and rights for people like you.

[mrearlygold]

Ron Paul would have made the best president since Thomas Jefferson. We would have seen a year of really tough times while President Paul allowed the markets to re-adjust. Pres Paul would be cutting spending down to Constitutional limits and by the end of his first term this country would be having a giant party of prosperity the likes of which we haven't experienced in a long long time. Ron Paul 2012!

[MadXMax187]

I'd say probably Kucinich or Ron Paul would have been the best choice for America, Obama turned out to be a global government goomba and McCain would have been the same thing. Bush = Obama = McCain see the choices we have here in America? All roads lead back to Rome, America is a fascist dictatorship

[WTFworld49]

@atlantoon lol he isnt!!

[atlantoon]

I would like Ron Paul if he wasn't a raging anti-semite!

[arconus]

that is not true today but only because we have an enormous government that sponsors most of the research and deals with most of our money.

If you have small government most money is in the hands of the people and most funding for research comes from private hands which gives more power to the people.

Plus without technology you might be free as a bird. But it has to be a total lack of technology and then what kind of freedom do you have. Freedom to hunt all day for a scrap of raw meat ??

[Earthlazarus]

If civilians have access, but of course that's not true. That would only be a false sense of freedom, living under the shadow of those who would continue to use the technology to their advantage. Technology is momentous. It requires more of itself to keep up with itself. Soon, it comes to control us. We are no longer in control. This entity, this Progress we seek to sustain, is running the show. Freedom is a perception. I wonder how free the Borg think they are?

[arconus]

plus look in my opinion there is no way back ... without technology there is no progress without progress we are no better then cows. We have to move forward otherwise our intellect is frozen. We should do our best to limit the power of the government so that it does not have the upper hand over the people. Then technology can work in our advantage. Example: implanted chips soon enough can wire tap every individual. But if civilians have access to personal jammers it has no impact on freedom.

[arconus]

I believe that what we both should be concerned about is more and more power in the hands of individuals. That is a far more difficult problem to tackle. 1000 years ago for a person to kill somebody you had to stab him and probably if in a public space you would be stabbed back after one kill. Today you can take a rifle and shoot 40 people. Tomorrow you can blow up new york. That said I try to think positively.

[arconus]

it was your claim was not sometimes technology leads to decrease of freedom your claim was perhaps poorly stated nevertheless it was like for all A -> B in that case all you need to show that there exists A such that not B and thats what I did. In other words you said technology leads to lack of freedom, I showed u an example where it does not. Plus look there is not a single example to the contrary. Sorry but so far every single time we have access to more technology the more free we are.