I have to wonder, why we are the minority??

[AuH20]

I see 2 main reasons:

(1) People enjoy the illusion of being in control when they're clearly not. Our movement embodies a realistic, no frills approach which scares the bejesus out of the coddled mainstream

(2) Infighting and ridiculous trivial squabbles in this movement. It almost appears like the Spanish Inquisition at times. You have libertarians calling their paleo brethren the overused & derisive 'Neocon' tag. And then you have some of the paleos reciprocating back with 'leftist', when it probably the farthest from the truth. We're not of the size to divide ourself into little camps over pettiness.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Hispanic people aren't sheep being individualistic but they are even poorer

its very simple.

in the sheep mind, the "authority" behind an idea or personality makes more of an impression than the logic or merit of an idea or individual.

If I were to build a car tomorrow that is superior to a Benz in both price and cost, no one would buy it because no one has even heard of me. Only when Car and Driver review my car will the sheep start to beleive me.

its human nature. He who controls the hype machine (media) owns the sheep. The sheep will eat media approved crap sandwiches instead of the "extremist" steak we offer.

Point 1: The majority have always been too busy and weary to think logically.
Point 2: It is a buy or sell society. What is the best way for one to avoid selling everything they own? Buy their junk.
Point 3: All politics is propaganda when juxtaposed to the natural law declared by our Founding Fathers. We can't go wrong by revering our Civil Purpose as the self evident and unalienable Truth over all legal precedents, past traditions, and future happenings yet to occur.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

I see 2 main reasons:

(1) People enjoy the illusion of being in control when they're clearly not. Our movement embodies a realistic, no frills approach which scares the bejesus out of the coddled mainstream

(2) Infighting and ridiculous trivial squabbles in this movement. It almost appears like the Spanish Inquisition at times. You have libertarians calling their paleo brethren the overused & derisive 'Neocon' tag. And then you have some of the paleos reciprocating back with 'leftist', when it probably the farthest from the truth. We're not of the size to divide ourself into little camps over pettiness.

(1) The control the people have is very limited. When people are led away into thinking their power can be greater than it needs to be, they are led away unto ruin.
The people own the property as in the national dinner table while the government's job is to sit at the head of the table as the necessary tyranny. When the king does not submit to the unalienable Truth in his or her conscience, he or she is deemed unfit to rule and thus divorced from the table as a tyrant. This is the limited power of the people.

(2) The only true American movement is the one that returns people to the self evident and unalienable Truth. A movement with any other purpose is a false one based on a lie that opposes the natural law declared by our Founding Fathers.
(Think how absurd it is to think our enriched economy exists for any other reason than our nation was based on a self evident and unalienable Truth!)

 

[Romulus]

Yes, we have an uphill battle in getting out a message. But it's not insurmountable. I'm just not sure we're comfortable in getting it out. I've told this story before. During the campaign we did "sign waving". Our meetup nixed any message that might be controversial. "9/11 was an inside job" was obviously out. But so was "end the war" or "end the federal reserve" or "end the IRS" or anything. Everybody could think of some group of voters that might get offended by anything we said. So we were left with "Who is Ron Paul" and "Google Ron Paul". The theory was that people driving by would see the signs, decide to look up Ron Paul for themselves and be so "wowed" by what the saw that they would vote for him. In retrospect this was the dumbest possible approach! Long after the election people would come up to me and say "Just who is Ron Paul? I kept seeing these signs around town and never knew what that was about". At one point we started holding up "End the War" signs next to our "Google Ron Paul" signs and we started getting something of a positive reaction.

So what could we (I especially) have done differently? Say if we had shown up en masse with "Bush = Obama = War Criminal" signs at the Tea Parties? That might have made folks mad but it would have gotten a message out. I'm considering having more purely educational events that reach out to beyond our core audience. It's just in the planning stage now. I'll post what happens.

Going back to William Cooper.. some people need to be shocked into the truth..and they'll get angry about, but that is OK. They aren't going to like it all the time, but when you have 9/11 signs waiving, how does that support RP? It does not. I do like the idea of the other signs.. End the Fed/War. I think too..the best way is to lead them to listen to RP himself.. let them make up their own mind.. Google Ron Paul signs are good next to the others.. People may know him, but they need to know exactly what he's about.

 

[Endgame]

I think people just love to suffer. They don't want prosperity. They also hate making decisions for themselves and like conformity. Its probably been bred into humanity over thousands of years of tyrannical civilization. You can breed a fox to be docile in a few decades. Why not people? If its not nature, its certainly nurture as well. From the moment you can understand language you're bombarded with bad ideas most of which are designed to enslave you.

 

[shenlu54]

“Men in general judge more by their eyes than their hands: everyone can see, but few can feel. Everyone sees what you seem to be, few touch upon what you are.”—— Machiavelli

 

[idirtify]

In my opinion, there are far more liberty-minded people than you might think. If you can get far enough into good discussion, you will find that most people are libertarians at heart. But most of those people don’t vote libertarian because they think they have no chance of winning. At least that’s what they will tell you. While I believe it, I suspect the bigger reasons typically go unsaid. Most people associate their identity with a big party (are brainwashed / treat party affiliation like religious belief, or sports-team loyalty).