Should Dr. Paul keep on using the word "Empire"?

[VoluntaryMan]

If we continue to defend the world at our own expense, we are an empire (and a foolish one). If we continue to defend the world at their expense, we are a mercenary force (and an overstretched one). If the nations we are currently policing begin to defend themselves at their own expense, then they and we are republics, as it should be.

 

[RonPaulNLiveFree]

i say yes because its true, we're no longer a sovereign nation, we're a dictatorship, we march into other countries, with no real threat against us, wage war, expand the 'empire'. so yea, it's an empire the american empire, and we're running out of money

 

[raiha]

When the heroes of the American Revolution did what they did, I believe they felt they were in rebellion against the British Empire. It has an historical resonance i would be sorry to see disappear, especially when the present Revolution (peaceful of course) gains traction.

 

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

i think he's speaking the truth, no doubt; however, pointing out the however many bases in 130+ countries is also speaking the truth.

To take it a step further, i wonder if it would be more easily received if RP continued the path of his reasoning all the way down into the working American's pocket (quoting the budget to keep all the bases going and then pointing out that since the government is not 'employed', its only source of income is from those of us who are). Drawing the parallel and displaying the rational clearly could help the people that "just don't get it" get it.

 

[DrCap]

Read about the Roman empire's history and you will find we are very much doing what they did, only on a much faster pace. They also devalued their money by secretly mixing silver and other metal in their coins, gradually decreasing the silver content, mostly so they could fight their wars. The Romans, over centuries, decreased the value of their coins around 50%... of course we have decreased ours about 98% in just 30 years.
We are an empire, like it or not.

 

[evadmurd]

It's a good word, but alas, probably is lost to the average Joe who begins thinking of the last Star Wars movie they saw.

 

[CelestialRender]

Absolutely. Every time he says it, people become a slight bit more likely to believe the truth.

 

[wfd40]

Much more than 130 bases, it's bases in a 130 countries.

+1000

Anyone who voted "yes" simply does not get it

 

[R_Harris]

It's a good word, but alas, probably is lost to the average Joe who begins thinking of the last Star Wars movie they saw.

LOL, exactly.

I think he should carefully explain

(1) what the political definition of "empire" is
(2) give historical examples of empire that MOST people, with any reasonable level of post high school education, should pick up on
(3) then demonstrate how we fit that definition

Folks, we have 737 bases in 131 countries (Source: Chalmers Johnnson, from his last book Nemesis: the last days of the American Republic. He got the figure from a Pentagon white paper). That is an average of 5.5 bases per country!!!! There are exactly 163 sovereign nations on the planet. When you have military installations in 80% of all the nations on the planet, and you have them there because you are wanting to protect your "interests," then yes, you are an empire.

As usual, the challenge is being able to do all of the above in 60 seconds or less. THAT is what makes this so challenging, frustrating, and disturbing.

There is a lot of work to do, folks. Ron Paul is only able to touch just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what has to be done.

I am glad he is making this effort, but alas, it is probably too little too late to save the country from its incremental decay to destruction.

 

[FreeTraveler]

Bottom Line...

Okay, who's going to go tell Dr. Paul that he needs to change his language? OP, since you proposed it, I guess it's your job.

Is it possible there might be a more productive way to use this time, since nobody's going to do the above anyway? Canvas, make calls, even sign-wave?

This thread is a textbook example of why Dr. Paul is going to lose. Everybody wants to be a chief, and nobody wants to be an indian.

 

[mudhoney]

At first I was shaky on his use of the word empire so much. Now, however, I'm all for Ron Paul's in-your-face-establishment style of talk. He has an opinion that opposes the establishment, and their supporters, and he's not going to tip-toe around it, it's an empire. He's not going to persuade anyone with a more politically correct approach to explaining our foreign policy, so he might as well say what it is with brutal honesty and keep saying it until it's planted in the people's minds.

 

[mnewcomb]

No.

A *VAST* majority of Americans see us as the moral leader of the world and therefore we would *NEVER* have an 'empire'.

I think he just needs to keep hammering home the fact that we are have soldiers in 60+% of the countries in the world and did we really need all of them overseas instead of home protecting the border, defending this country, etc...

 

[kigol]

"neo-colonial empire" would work better.

haha

 

[mysticgeek]

Absolutely he should use Empire! It is what America has become ... as with Rome we shall fall too! Unless the Revolution can save The Republic.

Besides, it sure beats the crap out of mAcaynes "straight talk" lame-o line

 

[Gimme Some Truth]

No. Simple reason is that it turns away moderate neocons - who are the people we need to "convert".