Thought y'all would want to know what Occupy DC thinks of Ron Paul

[PaulConventionWV]

Ron Paul isn't winning. If Ron had any true traction, he would have filled the void Cain leapt into. He's the John the Baptist of the movement. There is another to come. Not sure if it's Rand but there will be others.

Do you honestly think Ron Paul was in control of who that "gap" would be filled by?

 

[Carson]

I think the reason for Occupy Wall Street and the 99% er’s. Gaze upon it if you dare.

Maybe this will help make the danger of fiat money clear.

Imagine you and me are setting across from each other. We create enough money to represent all of the world's wealth. Each one of us has one SUPER Dollar in front of him.

You own half of everything and so do I.

I'm the government though. I get bribed into creating a Central Bank.

You're not doing what I want you to be doing so I print up myself eight more SUPER Dollars to manipulate you with.

All of a sudden your SUPER Dollar only represents one tenth of the wealth of the world!

That isn't the only thing though. You need to get busy and get to work because YOU'VE BEEN STIFFED with the bill for the money I PRINTED UP to get YOU TO DO what I WANTED.

That to me represents what has been happening to the economy, and us, and why so many of our occupations just can't keep up with the fake money presses.

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/followthemoney/Supersingle640x537.jpg

 

[PaulConventionWV]

So the purpose of that response was for you to remind Adam that you personally disagree with his views of the state, by agreeing with someone who misunderstood what Adam was up to, although you were well aware that they weren't on the same page as Ad. Is that correct?



That's great. I have a different perspective of Ron than you do.

Perhaps it has less to do with Ron's personal beliefs and more to do with reaching an audience of people like you who cry 'heresy against the state'.

See 5:50 @


& 2:48 @





Seriously?

Ok, and YOU were complaining about quotes taken out of context? That video is full of it. I realize you have the right to believe in ancap, but trying to call Ron Paul something he is not, especially when he cannot respond is just downright dishonest.

The problem with all those old, worn-out quotes you use for this whole spiel that Ron agrees with anarchy is that it takes everything he says and acts as if that's the only reasonable conclusion you could draw from those words. I agree 100% that the Constitution was inadequate to prevent, no matter how well written, the rise of the state. However, that doesn't mean I believe anarchy is a viable solution. Do you know why the Constitution is inadequate? Because we don't educate ourselves enough to know when government is overstepping its bounds. Education is the best tool we have, and anarchy is just not going to solve anything. In fact, it will only make it easier for tyrants to come to power.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

And because we are not there, those 3 people who know little of economics or political philosophy will become the intellectual leaders of others who show up to protest something they (feel) to be wrong.

They have attention and numbers and that will make people look that way. We all should do what we can to be a part of this and take over the intellectual core of the movement.

If the dollar collapses today, these people will become insanely powerful overnight and we have left it vacant to be filled with commys and saps.

I'm sorry, but am I the only one who doesn't think second-hand protest initiative is not necessarily a good thing? This is a socialist movement and coming late to the party and claiming we were in on it from the beginning would not only be dishonest, it would be counterproductive.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Your a free thinker AF. We disagree on little.

I disagree on your use of "your." If you can't say "you're" without making it into a possessive pronoun, then just say "you are."

Sorry, pet peeve.

 

[ClayTrainor]

I disagree on your use of "your." If you can't say "you're" without making it into a possessive pronoun, then just say "you are."

Sorry, pet peeve.

 

[Carehn]

I'm sorry, but am I the only one who doesn't think second-hand protest initiative is necessarily a good thing? This is a socialist movement and coming late to the party and claiming we were in on it from the beginning would not only be dishonest, it would be counterproductive.

I didn't say that. I said they are protesting for the same reason we are, Only they advocate the wrong solution because we are not their to guide them. the collages they came from are.

They are not hopeless. People are smart powerful beings and they have never been presented our philosophy in a good light. We have something in common and that is getting looted. That is getting beaten down by the media and the cops, Its being presented as idealists and radicals all the way to shit heads and dumb asses.

People, even the most brain washed sheeple are never lost. In fact they are our only hope and we need to wake up the active ones because that is the sign of someone who is groggy and just waking up. Why don't you want to be there to hand them that hot cup of joe?

Im going to be at every one i can in a non crazy, non threatening, non republican primary race way. I'm going to agree with them and their troubles. Im going to be apart of their protest against injustice, Then I'm going to speak the truth when the opportunity presents itself in any way. Just like at any event I guess.

 

[Carehn]

I disagree on your use of "your." If you can't say "you're" without making it into a possessive pronoun, then just say "you are."

Sorry, pet peeve.

Savage burn. Your quick on your feet.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

Ok, and YOU were complaining about quotes taken out of context? That video is full of it. I realize you have the right to believe in ancap, but trying to call Ron Paul something he is not, especially when he cannot respond is just downright dishonest.

The problem with all those old, worn-out quotes you use for this whole spiel that Ron agrees with anarchy is that it takes everything he says and acts as if that's the only reasonable conclusion you could draw from those words. I agree 100% that the Constitution was inadequate to prevent, no matter how well written, the rise of the state. However, that doesn't mean I believe anarchy is a viable solution. Do you know why the Constitution is inadequate? Because we don't educate ourselves enough to know when government is overstepping its bounds. Education is the best tool we have, and anarchy is just not going to solve anything. In fact, it will only make it easier for tyrants to come to power.

All I said was that I had a different perspective of Ron and I showed a few of the reasons why.

You're absolutely right. The failure of the Constitution, by itself, doesn't necessarily make anarchism a viable alternative, and I never claimed that was the case. I don't believe anarchism is viable simply because the constitution was a failure, that's obviously ridiculous.

Education is absolutely the best tool we have. Perhaps you could use it to become more acquainted with the position you're railing against.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I didn't say that. I said they are protesting for the same reason we are, Only they advocate the wrong solution because we are not their to guide them. the collages they came from are.

They are not hopeless. People are smart powerful beings and they have never been presented our philosophy in a good light. We have something in common and that is getting looted. That is getting beaten down by the media and the cops, Its being presented as idealists and radicals all the way to shit heads and dumb asses.

People, even the most brain washed sheeple are never lost. In fact they are our only hope and we need to wake up the active ones because that is the sign of someone who is groggy and just waking up. Why don't you want to be there to hand them that hot cup of joe?

Im going to be at every one i can in a non crazy, non threatening, non republican primary race way. I'm going to agree with them and their troubles. Im going to be apart of their protest against injustice, Then I'm going to speak the truth when the opportunity presents itself in any way. Just like at any event I guess.

I agree that anyone is fair game for education, but I don't think we should be making this "our" protest, as if actually helped create it through our frustration. We did not. If we go now and try to act like this is some libertarian protest, then we are second-hand protest initiators, which is not good and does not help. Oh, and they're not there for the same reasons we are. They're there because they think they are entitled to something. I'm not saying they can't be educated. I'm saying, we don't necessarily have as much common ground as some people act like we do. They're marching in the exact opposite direction, ideologically. It would be faulty to assume they only take that position because "they don't know better" or that they're simply ignorant. Many people are there because they are as set in their ways as we are and think they are right just as much as we think we are. I'm saying, not all of them are just low-hanging fruit. Don't be surprised if they act with animosity toward your ideas because you can't automatically assume that they will be open to them just because you have so much confidence in your persuasion abilities. Some people really just aren't open to it.

 

[MikeStanart]

+Rep Adam! Keep up the amazing work!

 

[PaulConventionWV]

All I said was that I had a different perspective of Ron and I showed a few of the reasons why.

You're absolutely right. The failure of the Constitution, by itself, doesn't necessarily make anarchism a viable alternative, and I never claimed that was the case. I don't believe anarchism is viable simply because the constitution was a failure, that's obviously ridiculous.

Education is absolutely the best tool we have. Perhaps you could use it to become more acquainted with the position you're railing against.

I honestly don't know what more I need to know to be "acquainted". I know it will never work. If men were all virtuous, we would never need government. The thing is, you think the failure of government means no government is better, when no government in reality, would only promote the rise of more authoritarian government. The failure of government is due to people's failure to educate themselves on the purpose of a government by the people and for the people.

 

[Carehn]

I'm saying, not all of them are just low-hanging fruit. Don't be surprised if they act with animosity toward your ideas because you can't automatically assume that they will be open to them just because you have so much confidence in your persuasion abilities. Some people really just aren't open to it.

I don't go around questioning my personal ability and worth, That is the kind of attitude that will lead you to the bad ideas of these well meaning left win collage kids. Some of them may be to far gone but that number is low. We need to stand with them, they are fellow slaves to the debt they just need to understand why. many may not even know its debt that is killing them.

If we don't jump on this we all will regret it.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

I honestly don't know what more I need to know to be "acquainted". I know it will never work. If men were all virtuous, we would never need government.

This already proves my point. You're displaying your limited understanding of the ancap argument perfectly here. ( We don't argue that men are all virtuous. In fact, the fact that not all men are virtuous is precisely one of the reasons why we say there shouldn't be a monopoly institution with the sort of power the state claims ).

 

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

This might even be better than the last video. Please don't forget to share it if you appreciate it!

Flight of the valkyries in the background - lol. Had to think of that scene in the Blues Brothers original film.

FYI - does the first speaker seem to look similar to the original video the organizers of this sent us?

 

[fisharmor]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems to me the demographic of "Republican primary voters who are smart enough to know what anarcho-capitalism is but dumb enough to confuse it with constitutionalism and not vote for someone based on that confusion" has to be pretty small.

I think I would have added a bunch of expletives, but this is money.
The man said openly in a presidential debate that he doesn't think heroin should be illegal.
What in the flying fuck can incidental mention of anarchy do to him that this openly self-stated position of his hasn't done already?

 

[libertybrewcity]

I disagree on your use of "your." If you can't say "you're" without making it into a possessive pronoun, then just say "you are."

Sorry, pet peeve.

It is my pet peeve as well, but I usually keep it to myself. I also hate 'an' and 'a' usage as well as 'know' and 'no' among many others.

 

[ClayTrainor]

I think I would have added a bunch of expletives, but this is money.
The man said openly in a presidential debate that he doesn't think heroin should be illegal.
What in the flying fuck can incidental mention of anarchy do to him that this openly self-stated position of his hasn't done already?

Also, arguably one of the greatest moments of the primary debates. He straight up mocked statist quo and had fun with it.

Almost as awesome as the tie he wore that same night...

 

[Cutlerzzz]

wtf why is it some guys sound girly and girls sound all manly. just weird.

That's generally the way it is with Leftist activist. Very feminine men, and very manly woman.

 

[FrankRep]

Nice work Adam!

+rep