Question to purists- Do you want progress?

[Ender]

I did read what you wrote. Perhaps you did not covey your meaning very well.



Also, the Constitution says nothing about your rights. And it doesn't refer to them as the basis of law.


It is the Declaration of Independence that says:



The Declaration came a full ten years before the Constitution. And it was not designed to limit government. It was designed to expand the power of the government by replacing the Confederation of the Thirteen Sovereign Nation-States with one centralized bureaucratic government to regulate and control the everything.

The Declaration is THE most important American document- nothing else comes close.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Not really. You quit and walk away. Done. Finito. That simple.

Yeah, right. Words from an expert? You've never been married, Pierz, much less divorced. Am I right?

But you're correct about rights not being granted by the Constitution, nor by any other document. Not that Euphemia would disagree with that in the least.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I detest the term purist. It's a weasel word. Given that to be libertarian simply means to be against government-over-man, there is only fundamental. Fundamental is not purist. Fundamental is fundamental. So either The Individual or a group of Individuals support and defend the fundamental principles of (as well as the primary foundation for moral code for) Individual Liberty as an Indivisible whole or the Individual or group of Individuals do not. It's relatively simple. When you start inserting terms like purist into the terms of controversy all it really demonstrates is one's arbitrary sacrifice of fundamentals without actually acknowledging so. Weasel words like "purist" are intellectually dishonest.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

How do you expect to make progress in America? Your strategy seems to be convert everyone to become paleoconservatives or libertarians and then elect an entire government full of Ron Pauls. Does that really sound realistic to you?

It's entirely unrealistic-which is why I don't participate in politics.

 

[Natural Citizen]

It's entirely unrealistic-which is why I don't participate in politics.

Sad but true. Heck if I know what to do aside from trying to get through to people out there.

 

[AuH20]

How do you expect to make progress in America? Your strategy seems to be convert everyone to become paleoconservatives or libertarians and then elect an entire government full of Ron Pauls. Does that really sound realistic to you?

You are missing the big picture. America was not stolen in one day and will not be taken back in one day either. It was stolen incrementally. There wasn't just a surge of globalist wrong on everything politicians that suddenly were elected and took control of the government. They slowly shifted the political landscape. They didn't instantly create the Fed, end the gold standard, create heavy taxes, police the world, create the war on drugs all in one swoop.

By not understanding the value of electing politicians who at least are good in certain areas, only supporting Ron Paul purity level candidates, and equating politicians who have some good views in critical areas with bad on everything politicians (like equating trump to bush or hillary) you are making your efforts in vain. Your strategy is awful.

Thankfully most people don't have this view, which is why there is a surge of support for anti-trade anti-globalist and anti-immigration politicians etc in Europe and America. Brexit and the future certain fall of the European Union would not be possible with your mindset.

I supported Rand Paul for president first. He lost and normally I wouldn't have voted after that for the big 2 candidates...but I voted for Trump because he is not some puppet shill like McCain Romney or Bush. He has some good views.

Consider the following:

Hillary wants to antagonize Russia and basically build up a massive conflict further while Trump is friendly with Russia. Its possible the election outcome may have prevented a war. Is there no value in that for you?

Trump will crack down on illegal immigration and finally end open borders. No value in that? What about establishing voter ID laws? Huge improvements in free trade deals at min or repealing them? No value? Cutting taxes? Cutting welfare? Ending Obamacare (even if you think he will replace it with bad at the very least he will open competition by ending state lines, repealing the individual mandate etc). What about how Politicians like Bush and Hillary directly fund terrorists, while trump will end that. At the very least foreign aid will be cut down and other countries will have to pay us for any services. At best he will slash foreign aid significantly....will crack down on islam... campaign finance reform.... This can go on and on.

In football terms you are basically trying to throw a hailmary every drive , going for it on 4th down every time and only accepting drives that end up with 7 points with no regard to field position, time of possession, field goals, plays that go for intermediate or short gains.. going for that madden bomb on every play.

Some of the hardcore purists (not many though) are so extreme that they refuse to even support Rand Paul.

You don't seem to know how to get things done.

You make too much sense. Please leave.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Sad but true. Heck if I know what to do aside from trying to get through to people out there.

I've found that I can have *some* influence on people I know personally. Hopefully it makes a difference in the grand scheme of things. I expect it to take at least generation or 2 at least before people get sick of statism and still longer for them to want to do something meaningful about it.

 

[otherone]

 

[jmdrake]

The root word of "progressive" is "progress."

We should not have blind opposition to progress but rather opposition to blind progress. [MENTION=4906]nbhadja[/MENTION]. You're pushing for voter ID and e-verify right? Are someone who says he's for liberty, do you not see the danger in a national ID card?

 

[KEEF]

Lol. The big picture?! I'm not a "purist" by any means, but I do understand moving towards or away from a goal. Rand Paul would be moving towards the right goal. Maybe not as fast as some would like, but definitely in the right direction.

When your goal is liberty, it is not achieved through protectionism, government spending projects, and stricter government controls. (Whether that be moar border force, moar government databases, moar campaign finance control, moar crack down on Islam [whatever that means], or moar State control of media)

Cutting foreign aid would be great! I doubt that we'll see that, but even if we did, the other costs to liberty are too great! You've got yourself convinced your taking baby steps towards liberty, but you're really fumbling the snap and losing yardage! It'd be better for us all if you'd just knelt!

^THIS^

 

[osan]

How do you[SUP]1[/SUP] expect to make progress[SUP]2[/SUP] in America?

1: To whom do you refer, specifically?

2: Without the specificity from 1, we have no idea what you mean by "progress". Please elaborate in detail.

Your strategy seems to be convert everyone to become paleoconservatives or libertarians and then elect an entire government full of Ron Pauls. Does that really sound realistic to you?

A valid question, but your insinuation that this is what all "purists" are about fails rather notably. It is no different in principle from "they all look the same to me".

You are missing the big picture.

Some, perhaps, but you paint with what seems an overly-broad brush.

America was not stolen in one day and will not be taken back in one day either.

Now you appear to be talking some sense.

It was stolen incrementally. There wasn't just a surge of globalist wrong on everything politicians that suddenly were elected and took control of the government. They slowly shifted the political landscape. They didn't instantly create the Fed, end the gold standard, create heavy taxes, police the world, create the war on drugs all in one swoop.

Well stated, though the Fed was pretty much instantly created.

By not understanding the value of electing politicians who at least are good in certain areas, only supporting Ron Paul purity level candidates, and equating politicians who have some good views in critical areas with bad on everything politicians (like equating trump to bush or hillary) you are making your efforts in vain. Your strategy is awful.

I cannot disagree with anything you wrote there. I just wrote on this very topic this morning, prior to discovering this thread.

Thankfully most people don't have this view,

Perhaps, but theirs are generally worse, but coming from another direction. A great plurality of Americans subscribe not only to the bankrupt tenets of progressivism, but are quite comfy with the violation and even murder of anyone standing in the way of realizing their political wet-dream of free lunch, death to white people, and the freedom to butt-sex on the courthouse steps with no fear.

Brexit and the future certain fall of the European Union would not be possible with your mindset.

I would not go quite that far.

I voted for Trump because he is not some puppet shill like McCain Romney or Bush.

We don't know that yet. It is my hope you prove right on this matter, but I'm not putting my eggs in anyone's basket just yet.

He has some good views.

He has EXPRESSED some good views. Whether they are indeed his remains to be seen. Let us hope you are correct.

Consider the following:

Hillary wants to antagonize Russia and basically build up a massive conflict further while Trump is friendly with Russia. Its possible the election outcome may have prevented a war. Is there no value in that for you?

You are assuming this to be the case. It may well be, but I maintain that it is an unproven belief. Let us not turn away from the fact that we live in a world of spin and outright lies. The art, craft, and technology of the lie, and of bullshit, are as never before. Every passing day shows it ever more difficult to tell who is telling truth, who is lying, and who is mixing the two. Actions will prove more eloquent than words. Net results will demonstrate the truer measure of Trump than his speak. At this point, only time will reveal the deeper truth, so my recommendation to everyone is to chill the hell out, get on the skeptic's fence, and keep your eyes peeled.

In football terms you are basically trying to throw a hailmary every drive , going for it on 4th down every time and only accepting drives that end up with 7 points with no regard to field position, time of possession, field goals, plays that go for intermediate or short gains.. going for that madden bomb on every play.

This is an excellent analogy. Kudos and rep.

You [purists] don't seem to know how to get things done.

You go too far. I am a purist of the deepest vein, and yet over the years I have learned the art of being pragmatic. I am still learning.

Purists are absolutely essential to the cause of liberty. They are the ones who enshrine, guard, and preserve the ideals toward which all should strive. Without them, those ideals end up trampled upon by the presumably well-intending oafs whose flagging virtues cause them to compromise away that which is right in exchange for that which feels good at the moment. It is the idealist who stands at the narthex of the temple, rifle in hand, saying "thou shalt not pass". Without him, truth stands to be lost at the hands of dullards and malefactors. Do not be too eager to drill holes in him. Think of him as the equivalent of the guards at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

 

[Jesse James]

Stolen from whom?

it was stolen by the federalists in 1787

 

[Jingles]

I'm pretty damn pure when it comes to Anarcho-Capitalism, but we also need to remember we live in reality as well. So we need to play some games with the system sometimes to gain some progress for ourselves. I think a Trump presidency is in that direction. If it were Romney or McCain I really wouldn't think so (also it was very different circumstances... Rand was hardly even in the primary this go around. Ron actually could have won, especially in 2012. Trump was always my second best pick this go around mainly because he wasn't owned).

In terms of the political system, if you refuse to participate in any form, you aren't going to be too effective changing anything within. I know we have civil disobedience and the like, but we need some of us in politics to at least try and lessen the damage government does to us (that's my view of what Ron Paul did).

And if anyone is a little awed by what I said, just read everything Rothbard has done in his life. He had a similar idea as well.

 

[Murray N Rothbard]

I want progress---- PERIOD. I do NOT necessarily require progress in the next 4 years, nor the next 40 years, or even my lifetime. As someone who has studied Libertarianism and politics extensively, I am resigned to, and content with, the fact that true liberty will never be achieved in my lifetime. I think progress comes from ideas. Bills and laws are sometimes nice, but they can be erased instantly. Ideas are forever.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

 

[John F Kennedy III]

I detest the term purist. It's a weasel word. Given that to be libertarian simply means to be against government-over-man, there is only fundamental. Fundamental is not purist. Fundamental is fundamental. So either The Individual or a group of Individuals support and defend the fundamental principles of (as well as the primary foundation for moral code for) Individual Liberty as an Indivisible whole or the Individual or group of Individuals do not. It's relatively simple. When you start inserting terms like purist into the terms of controversy all it really demonstrates is one's arbitrary sacrifice of fundamentals without actually acknowledging so. Weasel words like "purist" are intellectually dishonest.

Well said.

 

[oyarde]

Stolen from whom?

I would say it was on a downward spiral by the time white men crossed the Alleghenies and Cumberlands ( Mountains )in any number greater than a few. By then it was only a matter of time, next thing you know govt is blowing the peoples money on food stamps , Mango farms in Pakistan etc

 

[otherone]

it was stolen by the federalists in 1787

from whom?

 

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Technological and scientific progress are real things, so-called "social progress" is a myth.

But I digress. There's a certain kind of person who intentionally holds political opinions that cannot be tested or applied, and indeed, they don't want them to be. They don't actually want to do the work that it takes to move civilization in their preferred direction. Instead, they want to portray themselves as "above the fray" and take pot shots at the status quo. It gives them pleasure to view themselves as having transcended the mire that the rest of the masses wallow in.

These people don't want power. They talk endlessly about the kind of society they desire and complain about how little the one they live in resembles it while giving no plan of action to actually move toward that goal. The irony is, they'd be miserable living in the kind of civilization they crow about. If it came about, they'd be unable to be the critic, constantly talking about how the system sucks.

This phenomenon is far bigger than just libertarianism, but the vast majority of ancaps fall under this umbrella.

 

[Dangergirl]

And yet the man himself pursued the GOP, an imperfect party in order to gain progress for Liberty. His son also followed his father's lead, as well as other liberty-minded representatives. Does that mean Ron compromised his principals by abandoning a third party run and trying to convert the GOP? No, it was a brilliant move. It was a strategy that pushed a movement into the mainstream (God I hate that word now ). He worked with a party he resigned from in order to give himself and other like-minded people a platform that we needed.

If your goal is to win, then you need to take every advantage you can. A compromising position is not the same as compromising your principals if you are honest about yourself and to yourself and willing to strike when the time is right. The battlefield is not 2020, it's now and constantly will be.