Can Tea Party reconcile libertarianism and social conservatism?

[ClayTrainor]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=220029


Clay, what you don't seem to grasp is that self-government is largely what our Founders designed for us.

So that's why they created a central government?

We were always intended to primarily govern ourselves. Government was supposed to be very small and extremely limited in it's scope.
You have just taken the concept to the extreme and claimed the concept as an anarchist concept and that just is not reality.

Believing a piece of paper with some words on it can limit governments is not reality. Even Jefferson violated it once he took office.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Well, Ron Paul is trying to use government action and has asked our help in doing this, to achieve our goals.

Imagine what we could accomplish if we helped him, instead of spending so much of our time in these stupid arguments about anarchy vs a limited Constitutional government. We are so far from either, that it's not even funny. Why do we do this? It's not helping a thing. But, it sure must screw up people's minds if they happen across this place thinking that it remotely resembles what Ron Paul is working towards.

 

[LibertyEagle]

So that's why they created a central government?

The central government was not supposed to be anything like what we have today. Remember the enumerated powers? The vast majority of the power was to remain with the states and the people. We went to sleep and didn't stay vigilant and voila, we have lost most of what our Founders fought and died to give us.

Believing a piece of paper with some words on it can limit governments is not reality. Even Jefferson violated it once he took office.

For the hundredth time, no one I have seen on this site has EVER said that a piece of paper could do one damn thing. And since you have taken part in more than a few of those conversations, you know that.

No, no piece of paper can do it. The Constitution was a framework for government. It is only as good as what we enforce. We were told to be vigilant and we stopped doing it. Nor, does BSing about stuff do anything to change what has happened. It requires real action and involvement.

 

[ClayTrainor]

Well, Ron Paul is trying to use government action and has asked our help in doing this, to achieve our goals.

I recently helped Mr. Scheuer get his website set up, amongst the dozens of other liberty projects i've been involved in since joining this forum. I'm personally into education efforts, and am not to fond of the idea of voting or the pursuit government office.

You disagree, that's fine. We can both work whatever way we feel is best.

Imagine what we could accomplish if we helped him, instead of spending so much of our time in these stupid arguments about anarchy vs a limited Constitutional government. We are so far from either, that it's not even funny. Why do we do this? It's not helping a thing. But, it sure must screw up people's minds if they happen across this place thinking that it remotely resembles what Ron Paul is working towards.

I think these anarchy vs limited government debates are a natural consequence of the positions we hold. i.e. Conservatives believe in using the government to enforce immigration, voluntaryists do not. And yes, I do these discussions are very important to have, when our activism is based upon them.

When you start flashing the mission statement around as if we don't belong here, expect controversy.

 

[ClayTrainor]

The central government was not supposed to be anything like what we have today.

Supposed to or not, it is.

For the hundredth time, no one I have seen on this site has EVER said that a piece of paper could do one damn thing.

Than why should we support the Constitution?

No, no piece of paper can do it. The Constitution was a framework for government. It is only as good as what we enforce. We were told to be vigilant and we stopped doing it.

Even Jefferson stopped being vigilant, once he got a hold of the power to tax. The constitution does absolutely nothing whatsoever, to limit government. It created the government that we all despise today.

LE, you said in your last post that these discussions are a waste of time. Why are you continuing it?

 

[constituent]

If something infringes on the rights of others, it should be illegal.

Unless it's for the express purpose of enforcing immigration laws, correct?

 

[someperson]

Actually, if I recall correctly, Dr. Paul has stated on several different occasions that he doesn't believe that, in the end, electing new politicians to Washington will work. He has, instead, stated that he believes change will occur when, not if, the system finally falls apart, resulting in a de facto secession, and, at that point, those individuals who have been educated in the philosophy of liberty will need to step up and pick up the pieces.

Hopefully, you've heard him say this, as well. That's not to say that trying to send some help to Washington is worthless. He's said that each individual must decide on their own how they will spread these ideas. I support the efforts of all those who will promote the philosophy of liberty in their many ways.

 

[tremendoustie]

Actually, if I recall correctly, Dr. Paul has stated on several different occasions that he doesn't believe that, in the end, electing new politicians to Washington will work. He has, instead, stated that he believes change will occur when, not if, the system finally falls apart, resulting in a de facto secession, and, at that point, those individuals who have been educated in the philosophy of liberty will need to step up and pick up the pieces.

Hopefully, you've heard him say this, as well. That's not to say that trying to send some help to Washington is worthless. He's said that each individual must decide on their own how they will spread these ideas. I support the efforts of all those who will promote the philosophy of liberty in their many ways.

I agree, absolutely. Frankly, I don't think the federal government is salvageable. But, that doesn't mean federal politics can't be effective, in many different ways.

 

[ClayTrainor]

I agree, absolutely. Frankly, I don't think the federal government is salvageable. But, that doesn't mean federal politics can't be effective, in many different ways.

Yea, I agree with that, I think. The hard proof is in Ron Pauls 2008 campaign. Do you think that there's a chance that political activism could be potentially destructive?

i.e. a lot of limited government conservatives have made border-enforcement one of their top issues, and seem to want their politicians to work towards that.

 

[tremendoustie]

Yea, I agree with that, I think. The hard proof is in Ron Pauls 2008 campaign. Do you think that there's a chance that political activism could be potentially destructive?

i.e. a lot of limited government conservatives have made border-enforcement one of their top issues, and seem to want their politicians to work towards that.

I think RP style republicans, who oppose warfare/welfare, the patriot act, the fed, etc, do far more good than harm. Hopefully they won't usher in a police state in the name of immigration enforcement. RP's criticism of the AZ bill makes it clear to me that he wouldn't -- if a candidate is truly a fire breather on this issue, wanting to crack down hard on businesses and landlords, and let police interrogate people on the street, I'd certainly be reluctant to vote for them.

 

[ClayTrainor]

I think RP style republicans, who oppose warfare/welfare, the patriot act, the fed, etc, do far more good than harm. Hopefully they won't usher in a police state in the name of immigration enforcement. RP's criticism of the AZ bill makes it clear to me that he wouldn't -- if a candidate is truly a fire breather on this issue, wanting to crack down hard on businesses and landlords, and let police interrogate people on the street, I'd certainly be reluctant to vote for them.

good insight, thanks.

 

[jmdrake]

I think that's an overstatement. They're pro-troops, especially in the South where a dignified military career is part of their heritage. I'm personally not a pacifist and I believe this grand military we've nurtured may be our only hope in throwing off these shackles of domestic tyranny. Many of the sergeants, colonels and privates know the deal as opposed to these "bought and paid for" 4 star generals.

I've been to two tea parties, but one I only caught the tail end of. The one I attended fully opened with a prayer that ended with "And Lord help us to support Israel through whom you will fulfill Bible prophecy and we will receive our salvation." So of these folks are more pro war than the worst neocons. That said its up to us to push our own message. Quit "going along to get along".

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I've been to two tea parties, but one I only caught the tail end of. The one I attended fully opened with a prayer that ended with "And Lord help us to support Israel through whom you will fulfill Bible prophecy and we will receive our salvation." So of these folks are more pro war than the worst neocons. That said its up to us to push our own message. Quit "going along to get along".

WTF?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Again, there's that 70's rehashing!

Remember when Murray, jealous of Nozick, commenced bashing?

That sure was a great, unproductive snit

for touchy, neurotic Murray to quit

because it was a waste of his fine wit.




Thanks for the insult, so cleverly disguised

However you should be advised

That failure to debate minarchism in verse

Will get you rocked, pwned, beaten,

and schooled, or perhaps worse!

​

Nozick is great, but he fails to logically follow his positions, same as you. If he truly believed that Voluntaryism would creat the minimalist state he desires, then he would become an Anarchist, yet he didn't. It is the odd conundrum now isn't it?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Hey LE. You like Woods right? You agree a lot right? Why are you so dismissive of both Paul and Woods arguments for total liberty? Why is partial liberty acceptable, but not total liberty? You like Bastiat right?

YouTube - Is Limited Government an Oxymoron? | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

This clearly shows that both Paul and Woods use the Constitution not as the end goal, but as a means to facilitate change towards their ultimate goals, a completely free and voluntary society. When you spend 20 to 30 years around the likes of Rockwell, Rothbard, Block, and the gang you think you might actually believe in the philosophy held (Especially considering his statements towards that end)?

 

[klamath]

Anarchists: We don't believe in the elected office. We don't believe in people trying to elect statists. The only way to change our country is to educate people and spread our message.

I'm kind of interested. I thought about anarchy when I was a teenager but thought we could never achieve it but maybe some of the young people have come up with some solutions to the problems I ran into as a teenager. I ask some questions about the problems I felt held anarchy back.
A few questions later and the irritated reply. Over and over anarchist after anarchist "Read the books! It isn't our job to educate you!"
Yeaw they are going to educate the country to freedom

 

[ClayTrainor]

Anarchists: We don't believe in the elected office. We don't believe in people trying to elect statists. The only way to change our country is to educate people and spread our message.

I'm kind of interested. I thought about anarchy when I was a teenager but thought we could never achieve it but maybe some of the young people have come up with some solutions to the problems I ran into as a teenager. I ask some questions about the problems I felt held anarchy back.
A few questions later and the irritated reply. Over and over anarchist after anarchist "Read the books! It isn't our job to educate you!"

Actually, it is our job to educate. If we can't articulate our positions and solutions clearly to other people, than we will never be of any significant influence, and we are only wasting our time.

I think you will find that most of the voluntaryists/anarchists on this forum are more than willing to engage in rational discussion on just about any topic. I was a minarchist/constitutionalist for my first couple of years here, but over time, and after many debates... I changed my mind.

Yeaw they are going to educate the country to freedom

As opposed to?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Anarchists: We don't believe in the elected office. We don't believe in people trying to elect statists. The only way to change our country is to educate people and spread our message.

I'm kind of interested. I thought about anarchy when I was a teenager but thought we could never achieve it but maybe some of the young people have come up with some solutions to the problems I ran into as a teenager. I ask some questions about the problems I felt held anarchy back.
A few questions later and the irritated reply. Over and over anarchist after anarchist "Read the books! It isn't our job to educate you!"
Yeaw they are going to educate the country to freedom

Honestly, the Market for Liberty is like 200 pages. If you are unwilling to even put in a slight bit of effort, that says more about you than me. Moreover, the voluntaryists here elucidate all the tenets of Voluntaryism and yet you still aren't satisfied. You are not seeking answers. What fundamental flaws of human nature are keeping anarchy back, that aren't also flaws of the State?

Seriously though, have you seen the explosive growth of libertarianism because of institutions like LvMI, FEE, FFF, etc.? Ron Paul didn't just magically build a base of millions. They were all ready there, he even acknowledged as such. Anyways, we only need a small fraction for success and I am wondering what the reaction will be when the voluntaryists in NH succeed. Will you be clamoring to join in? People want all the reward and no work. Sorry, but it doesn't work like that.

 

[CCTelander]

Anarchists: We don't believe in the elected office. We don't believe in people trying to elect statists. The only way to change our country is to educate people and spread our message.

I'm kind of interested. I thought about anarchy when I was a teenager but thought we could never achieve it but maybe some of the young people have come up with some solutions to the problems I ran into as a teenager. I ask some questions about the problems I felt held anarchy back.
A few questions later and the irritated reply. Over and over anarchist after anarchist "Read the books! It isn't our job to educate you!"
Yeaw they are going to educate the country to freedom

You know, I understand where you're coming from and even sympathize with you. But you have to look at the reality of the situation.

What you're asking/demanding is that we either take the whole vloume of literature and condense it down into a Reader's Digest form for you, or simply take you by the hand and spoon feed it to you line by line. The former is a VERY difficult undertaking, and both are extremely time consuming.

What about your own responsibility to educate yourself? You're here, therefore one assumes you make some claim at being a "liberty advocate" of some kind. Don't you feel that you have some personal responsibility to educate yourself?

And, say one or several of us do offer to spoon feed you the information you claim to want? Are you willing to adequately compenste us for the time we spend in doing so? Isn't OUR time of value?

Also, the fact that you have the temerity to criticise others for not investing the time and effort in educating you, while at the same time you pretty much refuse to invest the time and effort it takes to simply read a few books seems more than just a little hypocritical.

We can point you in the right direction. The rest is up to you.

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Anarchists: We don't believe in the elected office. We don't believe in people trying to elect statists. The only way to change our country is to educate people and spread our message.

I'm kind of interested. I thought about anarchy when I was a teenager but thought we could never achieve it but maybe some of the young people have come up with some solutions to the problems I ran into as a teenager. I ask some questions about the problems I felt held anarchy back.
A few questions later and the irritated reply. Over and over anarchist after anarchist "Read the books! It isn't our job to educate you!"
Yeaw they are going to educate the country to freedom

Don't attribute me with the education genie when no one can explain what the education genie is or how the education genie works. I advocate achievable strategies using goals that can be measured based on plans of individual action.

If you are unwilling to read it doesn't matter if you are advocating free markets or the constitution. You won't know anything anyway.