Meet the Paultards: Inside the Young Libertarian Movement

philipped

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
1,232
http://www.vocativ.com/usa/us-politics/paultards-young-libertarians/?page=all

The article said:
Before he became an evangelist for the libertarian movement, Jacob Pritchett was just another young Republican with a thing for Rush Limbaugh. But during his senior year at Fork Union Military Academy in Virginia, Pritchett had a conversion experience. It was 2011, and he heard about Ron Paul, a semi-obscure Republican congressman from Texas then running for president. Paul had generated buzz for deviating from the party line. Curious, Pritchett googled him and came across the YouTube video that changed his life.

The article said:
Pritchett soon learned that Paul was a Republican only in name. Really, he was a libertarian, an ideology with a deceptively simple ethos: People are born free, and in America, the Constitution gives citizens the right to retain absolute freedom in every facet of their lives. The government has no authority to impose its will on its own people any more than it does the nations it invades, a philosophy that also applies to the markets, which similarly must remain untouched. Whenever and wherever the government gets involved, the theory goes, it makes everything worse, creating waste and economic disparity. But leave people alone, and out of self-interest they will generally do the right thing, and by extension, what is right for society.

The article said:
YAL began in 2008, when Paul made an earlier run for president and generated support among a certain segment of Generation Y. Daniel Cassino, a political scientist and author of Consuming Politics: John Stewart, Branding, and the Youth Vote in America, calls them the “Dungeons and Dragons kids.” These were kids who—reared on the self-governing spirit of the Internet and coming of age in the tumultuous post-911 era—fostered a not unreasonable distrust of government and general skepticism about politics. Some of them may have supported Obama in 2008, only to grow disillusioned after he embraced drones and locked up hackers and Internet freedom activists. Uninspired by Republicans and Democrats, they were instead drawn to Paul and the libertarian movement.

The article said:
YAL’s rapid rise parallels the trajectory of libertarianism from a fringe thought experiment to an increasingly mainstream movement. Rand Paul, an outspoken critic of drug laws who objected to the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, is now a viable Republican presidential candidate. And Justin Amash, a 30-something Republican congressman from Michigan who almost killed the NSA’s metadata collection program, appears to have genuine staying power. Amash often bucks the GOP’s leadership on constitutional grounds and explains every vote he makes on Facebook. With his frequent Star Trek references and mordant sense of humor, he’s fawned over by young libertarians as if he were the movement’s John Lennon.

I'm part of YAL @ FIU and I posted this to seek Opinions, comments on this article? Do you think the establishment will acknowledge the growing libertarian faction starting with the under 30 crowd in this country?
 
Howell’s introduction to the cause was much different. He tells me that, after taking the hallucinogen peyote, he blacked out for two days and woke up in his pool, where he had a strange vision. “I led a revolution for humanity’s freedom. It was during the 2012 Republican primaries. I turned on the TV, saw Ron Paul and went, ‘Oh.’”

That's awesome.
 
http://www.vocativ.com/usa/us-politics/paultards-young-libertarians/?page=all

I'm part of YAL @ FIU and I posted this to seek Opinions, comments on this article? Do you think the establishment will acknowledge the growing libertarian faction starting with the under 30 crowd in this country?



Yes, I've read/heard talking about small 'L' as being a segment of the GOP, which I think is better than saying they are 'Tea Party' or big 'L'. About people like Rand and Amash, the ones who don't call them 'isolationists' are calling them 'libertarian-leaning Republicans'. By next year, they may realize it is attracting young people regardless of party affiliation.
 
Has "Paultard" become a term of endearment? I'll take it. Have a good weekend, fellow Paultards
 
I would dispute that "Pritchett soon learned that Paul was a Republican only in name." because the entire GOP up through Robert Taft was identical to Ron Paul, and some remnant factions have continued to hold the philosophy to this very day. It's the neocons who are RINO's. This part of the article helps the neocons make their case against is, and it's just not true. It's certainly not helpful in a primary, and may be actively harmful to our cause in a Primary. "See? Even their own leaders say they aren't really Republicans!" Best way to lose a GOP primary is to promote an article claiming that libertarians and Constitutionalists aren't really Republicans.
 
I would dispute that "Pritchett soon learned that Paul was a Republican only in name." because the entire GOP up through Robert Taft was identical to Ron Paul, and some remnant factions have continued to hold the philosophy to this very day. It's the neocons who are RINO's. This part of the article helps the neocons make their case against is, and it's just not true. It's certainly not helpful in a primary, and may be actively harmful to our cause in a Primary. "See? Even their own leaders say they aren't really Republicans!" Best way to lose a GOP primary is to promote an article claiming that libertarians and Constitutionalists aren't really Republicans.

Yeah, RINO has a completely different meaning to me as well.
 
Yeah, RINO has a completely different meaning to me as well.

Aye, and anybody who has actively campaigned for a Constitutionalist or libertarian Republican has been whacked with the "not really a Republican" charge and watched as a bunch of long-time Republicans just sort of turn away when it's said. Giving these people ammunition to use against us is probably a bad idea.
 
Aye, and anybody who has actively campaigned for a Constitutionalist or libertarian Republican has been whacked with the "not really a Republican" charge and watched as a bunch of long-time Republicans just sort of turn away when it's said. Giving these people ammunition to use against us is probably a bad idea.

IIRC it was a term for Republican "moderates". Those who leaned left. That's hardly where the donkey pin lies. One can't call me an larger government "moderate" and an lesser government "extremist" at the same time. The two are incompatible.
 
IIRC it was a term for Republican "moderates". Those who leaned left. That's hardly where the donkey pin lies. One can't call me an larger government "moderate" and an lesser government "extremist" at the same time. The two are incompatible.

Yes, yes they are. And neocons are to the left of moderates.
 
Aye, and anybody who has actively campaigned for a Constitutionalist or libertarian Republican has been whacked with the "not really a Republican" charge and watched as a bunch of long-time Republicans just sort of turn away when it's said. Giving these people ammunition to use against us is probably a bad idea.

I have found, that MOST people, struggle to define a democracy from a republic.

and if they cannot do that simple thing. should you pay attention to them?

:toady:
 
I have found, that MOST people, struggle to define a democracy from a republic.

and if they cannot do that simple thing. should you pay attention to them?

:toady:

Well, when you are running a campaign, you kinda have to. Stupid people vote too.
 
I would dispute that "Pritchett soon learned that Paul was a Republican only in name." because the entire GOP up through Robert Taft was identical to Ron Paul, and some remnant factions have continued to hold the philosophy to this very day. It's the neocons who are RINO's. This part of the article helps the neocons make their case against is, and it's just not true. It's certainly not helpful in a primary, and may be actively harmful to our cause in a Primary. "See? Even their own leaders say they aren't really Republicans!" Best way to lose a GOP primary is to promote an article claiming that libertarians and Constitutionalists aren't really Republicans.

You're right. It's propaganda. None of these establishment profiles on Rand Paul or any libertarian should be promoted.
 
You're right. It's propaganda. None of these establishment profiles on Rand Paul or any libertarian should be promoted.

Meh. I'd promote a Rachel Madcow article if she ever actually told the truth. I don't care where it came from just the contents. Promoting the "not really a Republican" theme is a good way to lose a Republican Primary. Trust me on that, I know.
 
I would dispute that "Pritchett soon learned that Paul was a Republican only in name." because the entire GOP up through Robert Taft was identical to Ron Paul, and some remnant factions have continued to hold the philosophy to this very day. It's the neocons who are RINO's. This part of the article helps the neocons make their case against is, and it's just not true. It's certainly not helpful in a primary, and may be actively harmful to our cause in a Primary. "See? Even their own leaders say they aren't really Republicans!" Best way to lose a GOP primary is to promote an article claiming that libertarians and Constitutionalists aren't really Republicans.

Yep. Too many in our movement still mistake us for being a majority. Sadly, we are not... yet.
 
That's perfectly apt.

lol. More like describing the scent of a rose to someone who's head is shoved up his ass.

Oh, I missed this:

article said:
the Constitution gives citizens the right to retain absolute freedom in every facet of their lives.

No libertarian believes this. What a deeply-entrenched authoritarian this clown is.
 
Last edited:
lol. I missed this:



No libertarian believes this. What a deeply-entrenched authoritarian this clown is.

Aye, the Constitution gives nothing. It merely restrains (assuming they bother to obey it) the government from infringing on such liberties of the States and the people, respectively; (in part) by recognizing our innate rights as human being.
 
I would dispute that "Pritchett soon learned that Paul was a Republican only in name." because the entire GOP up through Robert Taft was identical to Ron Paul, and some remnant factions have continued to hold the philosophy to this very day. It's the neocons who are RINO's. This part of the article helps the neocons make their case against is, and it's just not true. It's certainly not helpful in a primary, and may be actively harmful to our cause in a Primary. "See? Even their own leaders say they aren't really Republicans!" Best way to lose a GOP primary is to promote an article claiming that libertarians and Constitutionalists aren't really Republicans.

I understand the Taft, Old Right argument, but the truth is that Ron Paul is still by far more libertarian than the Republican Party ever has been. Harding and Coolidge represent the closest the GOP has ever come to Ron Paul and even they fell way short (Fed-stimulated 20s bubble and the enforcement of prohibition). Taft was close too but not even as good as Rand, let alone Ron. And before WWI the GOP was always the party of protectionism, high taxes, central planning, central banking, and general economic fascism. All the way back to the Whig party and Henry Clay. And in many ways it still is and always has been that same party. At some point we have to admit that the GOP has hardly ever actually represented a principled stand for limited government or libertarianism. Libertarian rhetoric has been used by several Republicans in the last century, but libertarian policy has never been a true plank of the GOP, ever.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top