Ron Paul & voluntarists

torchbearer said:
I agree with everything Conza says in his OP, but i will add that Ron still believes in using the political process. which diverts from the teachings of Apostle Rockwell.
Click to expand...

Apostle? Has Lew met Yeshua?

a·pos·tle

   [uh-pos-uh
thinsp.png
l] Show IPA
–noun 1. any of the early followers of Jesus who carried the Christian message into the world.

2. ( sometimes initial capital letter
thinsp.png
) any of the original 12 disciples called by Jesus to preach the gospel: Simon Peter, the brothers James and John, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot.

3. the first or the best-known Christian missionary in any region or country.
 
BuddyRey said:
Conza!!!
Great to see you back, man!!! I missed you!
Click to expand...
Heya Buddy! :D

torchbearer said:
I agree with everything Conza says in his OP, but i will add that Ron still believes in using the political process. which diverts from the teachings of Apostle Rockwell.
Click to expand...
Thanks. My main issue has been with people who deny it, contrary to his own words. It's hard to take someone seriously when they call themselves a supporter, but then deny the guys own statements which are crystal clear. The debate about strategy is secondary. I agree with using the political process for educational purposes.

“Ideas are the only things that count, and politicians are, for the most part, pretty much irrelevant,” Ron Paul told the London Independent in December.

Wesker1982 said:
I planned on making a thread on this subject, didn't know if I would get in trouble for posting it in general, but since I didn't make this thread I will post what I was going to post here...
Click to expand...
Haha... so not much has changed?
Those are some great quotes. Here's another:

“In reality, the Constitution itself is incapable of achieving what we would like in limiting government power, no matter how well written.” ~ Ron Paul, End the Fed

heavenlyboy34 said:
Nice Rothbard piece-I haven't read that one before. Welcome back, Conzilla! :D
Click to expand...

Hey HB! Yeah, he later went with the term anarcho-capitalism. Voluntarism is good show though when talking to the uneducated.

Austrian Econ Disciple said:
To Rothbardians (which Ron is) Rothbard and the Thomist/Natural Law tradition are our guiding light so to speak.
Click to expand...

Yep... though don't forget argumentation ethics :D

"Nevertheless, by coming out with a genuinely new theory (amazing in itself, considering the long history of political philosophy) Hoppe is in danger of offending all the intellectual vested interests of the libertarian camp. Utilitarians, who should be happy that value freedom was preserved, will be appalled to find that Hoppean rights are even more absolutist and "dogmatic" than natural rights. Natural rightsers, while happy at the "dogmatism" will be unwilling to accept an ethics not grounded in the board nature of things. Randians will be particularly upset on the satantic immanual kant and his "synthetic a priori".

Randians might be mollified, however, to learn that Hoppe is influence by a group of German Kantians (headed by mathematician Paul Lorenzen) who interpret Kant as a deeply realistic Aristotelian, in contrast to the Idealist interpretation common in the U.S.

As a natural rightser, I don't see any real contradiction here, or why one cannot hold to both the natural rights and the Hoppean rights ethic at the same time. Both rights ethics, after all, are grounded, like the realist version of Kantianism, in the nature of reality. Natural law, too, provides a personal and social ethic apart from libertarianism; this is an area Hoppe is not concerned with." - MNR, pg 2
 
Last edited:
Conza's back?! Dude/ma'am, I missed you!

Were you banned temp and just didn't come around again or were you just uncensored (hard to imagine that happening here and I thought I saw you over at Mises)
 
Liberty Rebellion said:
Conza's back?! Dude/ma'am, I missed you!

Were you banned temp and just didn't come around again or were you just uncensored (hard to imagine that happening here and I thought I saw you over at Mises)
Click to expand...

Ha, dude.

There's probably some threads discussing it at the time. I was perm banned. But then I was eventually unbanned (making it temp) after I dunno 6 months? This is from memory and it was years? ago. I decided not to come back out of principle. Others had said nothing had changed, so why waste my time there? I had 'moved' to Mises Forums in the interim & hung around there for awhile. I still do, but to a far lesser degree.

But let's not focus on the negative and dredge up the past aye? :D

Why am I back now? To see if this place has changed. To enjoy the revolution. But also get 'inspired' by folks here to thus indirectly help me finish a project I've been working on for awhile now. That and the help this place offers in spreading material that deserves to be. To help those question their premises. Who doesn't want to properly understand reality & the world we live in? To quite frankly ask... Ron Paul is a voluntarist, why aren't you?

For eg. I have a few things saved from the memory hole. One being a video which has excerpts from a book Ron Paul recommends in his Liberty Defined. :cool:

[video=vimeo;20009475]http://www.vimeo.com/20009475[/video]​
 
Last edited:
The climate here is far more hospitable to Voluntaryism than it was during the height and denouement of the '08 campaign, and I think our presence has increased a good deal (both from new forum members and seasoned ones who eventually shed the last vestiges of uncertainty). Old resentments may resurface now that campaign '12 is rolling (though I certainly hope they don't), but we've enjoyed a great few months generally free from drama.
 
Conza88 said:
Haha... so not much has changed?
Click to expand...

I had just heard horror stories, they scared me lol. It seems pretty friendly around here. I noticed your post on this subject on the mises.org forum, I lurk/sometimes post there.
 
conza's been back 2 days and so far not one single wall-o-text-copy-paste from mises?

not one single ranting video from that crazy bald guy?

you're losin' your touch brother.


but welcome home :)
 
Last edited:
Sure, Ron Paul calls himself voluntaryist, but that doesn't mean for him that there should be no government, because he specifically rejected that idea.
 
YOUUU'RE BAAAAAAAAAAAAACK!!!! :D

You said you don't know if you'll keep posting, but it'd be nice if you did.
 
low preference guy said:
Sure, Ron Paul calls himself voluntaryist, but that doesn't mean for him that there should be no government, because he specifically rejected that idea.
Click to expand...
Voluntaryists don't argue that there should be no government-only that each person's relationship with any government should be voluntary, and that anyone can end their relationship with the government at any time.
 
heavenlyboy34 said:
Voluntaryists don't argue that there should be no government-only that each person's relationship with any government should be voluntary, and that anyone can end their relationship with the government at any time.
Click to expand...

QFT. There is also a difference between people voluntarily governing themselves and the State.

I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as "taxation"; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state.-Murray Rothbard
Click to expand...

(1) If we as a nation continue to believe that that paying for civilization through taxation is a wise purchase and the only way to achieve civilization, we are doomed. -Ron Paul

Ron Paul may support completely voluntary governance but this is very different than supporting the State. As shown in my earlier post, (2) Ron Paul not only advocates the private production of a select few defense services, but advocates the private production of all defense services.

Ron Paul + his beliefs on (1) and (2) = voluntaryist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
Masters of Our Fate, Captains of Our Souls
Replies
0
Views
93
PAF
PAF
PAF
Social Peace through Government Retrenchment
Replies
0
Views
92
PAF
PAF
PAF
Libertarianism vs. Microlibertarianism
Replies
0
Views
94
PAF
PAF
PAF
True Privatization
Replies
1
Views
104
TheTexan
TheTexan
PAF
Why Do We Live in a Two-Faced World?
Replies
1
Views
105
TheTexan
TheTexan
Back
Top