Freedomain Radio

Surprised no one has discussed this over here. I know we're anti-politics, but the developments in the GOP are historical. Ron Paul is leading in most of the polls in Iowa. Even if he still has no shot at winning the GOP, he has been instrumental in their implosion. The old guard is furious and the youth is moving forward with these radical ideas of freedom. It's a fascinating thing to see what is happening with this sudden rise of Ron Paul and his ideas.

The GOP is imploding before our eyes and it's wonderful. Hopefully the Democrats are next. Ideas are spreading rapidly and I think the US is ripe for anarchism, we may achieve it sooner than we once thought.

Perhaps part of me would be giddy if Ron Paul had a chance, (the part where electing people to office is the spectator sport of "Yay For People Like Me!") but one of Stef's scenarios really sucked all the life out of that; the idea of the libertarian guy getting the gig and having everything go to hell anyway and everybody blaming the idiot libertarian for it; followed of course by 1000 Years Of Darkness.  Okay maybe not so much the last part, but something like that.

In a sick way, electoral politics really does represent the views of the majority and I'm just not feeling a collective, Ron Paul-esque,  Screw The Government vibe out there.  It's all about There Outta Be A Law and Where's My Free Stuff?

Perhaps you're right. However, I can't help but think of how wonderful life would be without the IRS for one. :)

It may mean that the non-conscious conspiracy is preparing to make the best case for the failure of freedom ever in the history of the USA.

That said... I don't know what polls you're referring to, but I recall similar things being said about this poll and that poll in 2008... and those polls were not reflected in the actual vote, so I am skeptical of their significance.

Oh man, the end of the income tax would cause me to do cartwheels down the middle of the street.  I remember getting wide-eyed like a kid on Christmas morning when Harry Browne described all the stuff he'd do on his first day in office.  Unfortuntely it all seems like a superhero fantasy now.  The government is no more going to slash its own income into pieces than anyone else would.

It means Ron Paul's campaign organization is strong, that his core of supporters are as fervent as ever, and that none of the other candidates has the kind of "middle-america" folksy appeal that Paul is able to affect with his aw-shucks manerisms, and "unpolished" delivery.

It also means there's a great deal of discontent with the well-known names, in the people who think that being "engaged" in politics is a good and useful way to spend your time.

If you think this has anything to do with the ascendency of the ideology of libertarianism, forget it...

JamesP:

It may mean that the non-conscious conspiracy is preparing to make the best case for the failure of freedom ever in the history of the USA.

That said... I don't know what polls you're referring to, but I recall similar things being said about this poll and that poll in 2008... and those polls were not reflected in the actual vote, so I am skeptical of their significance.

Actually the polls were dead on accurate to the results in 08. We all thought they were underestimating Paul, but the reality is they were right. So they are indeed significant.

GregG:

It means Ron Paul's campaign organization is strong, that his core of supporters are as fervent as ever, and that none of the other candidates has the kind of "middle-america" folksy appeal that Paul is able to affect with his aw-shucks manerisms, and "unpolished" delivery.

It also means there's a great deal of discontent with the well-known names, in the people who think that being "engaged" in politics is a good and useful way to spend your time.

If you think this has anything to do with the ascendency of the ideology of libertarianism, forget it...

i disagree. I don't think Paul is going to win and I don't think politics is the answer. However, there IS a discontent out there, and many people first turn to politics to let out there frustrations. And, a lot of the folks that are now supporting Paul are former neocons and liberals. They jumped on the Paul bandwagon because of the ideas, not because he's folksy. He won't win, but he is helping to bring down the GOP, and open up people's minds to new ideas, both of which I do believe advance the cause of liberty, certainly not overnight, but as the US empire collapses, this will fertilize the grounds for even more radical ideas like anarchy.

Interesting question:  I'm ambivalent:

 

The cynical side of me says this:

If we look at politics as a whole:  it represents the short run over the long run, the image over the ideal, the seen over the unseen, focus on symptoms rather than causes, power over principal, the ignorant masses over the noble few.

Politics is designed to destroy the good things above and amplify the bad things.

So, even if elected freedom will be shown as the bad guy.

It is praxiologically set up this way.  Government has the power.  Freedom can't compete under the rules of non-freedom.

 

In practice, imagine 1,000,000 people laid off from the Federal government.  These people will be used as 'proof' that capitalism destroys the lives of people. 

So, Ron Paul will get booted.  After that, the economic boom caused by Ron Paul will be 'proof' that his successor (a socialist) has saved the nation.

The only way to win is to not play.

---

But the other side of me says, "Hey, no income tax is awesome, and many people will be introduced to ideas of freedom"  Let's go for it!

 

 

 

Realist:

JamesP:

It may mean that the non-conscious conspiracy is preparing to make the best case for the failure of freedom ever in the history of the USA.

That said... I don't know what polls you're referring to, but I recall similar things being said about this poll and that poll in 2008... and those polls were not reflected in the actual vote, so I am skeptical of their significance.

Actually the polls were dead on accurate to the results in 08. We all thought they were underestimating Paul, but the reality is they were right. So they are indeed significant.

I am so sorry, you're entirely right... everybody was saying that the polls were wrong and that Ron Paul actually had much more of the vote.

I'm not sure I feel better about that...

I found this rant from Cenk about Iowa, Paul and the GOP quite amusing - good passion!

threebobs:

Interesting question:  I'm ambivalent:

 

The cynical side of me says this:

If we look at politics as a whole:  it represents the short run over the long run, the image over the ideal, the seen over the unseen, focus on symptoms rather than causes, power over principal, the ignorant masses over the noble few.

Politics is designed to destroy the good things above and amplify the bad things.

So, even if elected freedom will be shown as the bad guy.

It is praxiologically set up this way.  Government has the power.  Freedom can't compete under the rules of non-freedom.

 

In practice, imagine 1,000,000 people laid off from the Federal government.  These people will be used as 'proof' that capitalism destroys the lives of people. 

So, Ron Paul will get booted.  After that, the economic boom caused by Ron Paul will be 'proof' that his successor (a socialist) has saved the nation.

The only way to win is to not play.

---

But the other side of me says, "Hey, no income tax is awesome, and many people will be introduced to ideas of freedom"  Let's go for it!

 

 

 

I'm open to the idea that if Paul won, everything that went wrong would be blamed on "too much freedom" and libertarianism failing. However, I don't think it would actually take very long for things to BOOM with all the slashing and burning he's planning. Even if all he did was cut the IRS (which, I think most people would not be too upset about!), how big would that be in improving the lives of millions of Americans? I don't think it would take a lot of time to see the results of cutting way back. I suppose they could impeach him after a few months during the transition, and convince people that it was all Paul's fault and that we needed more government to fix things. However, even the "average American" I think realizes that there can't be any instantaneous fixes, and if they remotely undertood the principles behind actions like freeing up the currency, getting rid of taxes, and pulling out of wars, they would have a little more patience then it may appear.

Those 1M people laid off from the Federal government would indeed be forced to get jobs in the free market. However, I don't think that would take very long. Most of them would not suddenly be out on the streets. The anticipation of Paul's economic plan would create an instant outlay of capital into starting new businesses. Many jobs would transition easily to the free market. The TSA could work as private security for the airlines for example. Stef in the past has given the example of all the soldiers who would be unemployed as the wars ended and thousands of troops were pulled back from places like Korea and Germany. But what happened after WWII? Was there mass unemployment? No, quite the opposite. They brought everyone home and the economy boomed. Not much unemployment.

Another analogy I use is to cancer. Government is a cancer on society. Cutting most of the cancer out doesn't get rid of it- the tumor will just grow back. But right now, the cancer is growing larger, and spreading faster. The goal is to get rid of the cancer altogether. But what if we had a drug that would shrink the tumor and buy us a few years while we figure out how to get rid of it altogether? There is the risk that people may forget that we have cancer because things would be very good in the economy after the drug takes effect. But, the question is, do we have a better chance of spreading philosophy in that environment, or, wait until the government sends out the tanks?

As an anarchist, I try to not get too into US politics, but . . . Paul is making the abysmal shiver and shake to some degree, and that cannot be uninteresting. As of a report 9 hours old at the moment, Paul seems likely to indeed win in Iowa. The corruptocracy must have lifted at least one dragon eye lid about it.

If his campaign does gather some momentum, the present "racist hate letters" or whatever "issue" is going to seem like rose petals. The media whores are going to do loop de loops against an outsider like Paul, if ever he should really establish some popular backing. 

 

I really hope he wins, it will make it hard for the media to keep ignoring him like this:

Hope they don't rig it :-(

LovePrevails:

I really hope he wins, it will make it hard for the media to keep ignoring him like this:

Hope they don't rig it :-(

Oh man, LovePrevails, did I love that. The mainstream media zombies are getting those direct head shots that should encourage all the comics to attack. I recall Stef saying once that Statism will end up just being a joke that people will laugh at, in the end. Amen! Humour is a good way to go, die laughing. Or being laughed at . . . whatever.