Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government • Hacker News Board

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#41

Post by timr » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:45 AM UTC

snitko wrote: post #33

What makes me sad is that a lot of people, even here, discharge Ron Paul as some sort of crazy guy without even listening to what he says. In comments to this post "thesagan" wrote that some of his ideas are "batshit crazy" as if his ideology is composed of many different unrelated parts. Not true, Ron Paul ideas are ideas of libertarianism and if you study them diligent enough, you'll eventually be used to thinking…

"Ron Paul ideas are ideas of libertarianism and if you study them diligent enough, you'll eventually be used to thinking in this framework"

I'm trying not to violate rule #1 of the internet ("never argue with an internet libertarian"), but you're making a classic Nerd Error: if you have to say the words "you'll eventually be used to thinking in this framework", you've already lost the war.

Politics are not about logically consistent philosophical frameworks, and even if they were, there's certainly no inherent reason that "liberty" has to be your guiding value for establishing such a framework (you could just as easily chose "safety" or "health" or, for that matter, "happiness"). There are a number of practical situations where people will happily, sanely support reductions in liberty to gain other benefits. People who do not recognize this reality are doomed to marginalization.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#42

Post by mbetter » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:47 AM UTC

snitko wrote: post #38

astrodust wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is Ron Paul is a crazy guy. He's trying to rigorously apply principles from the 1700s to today's world. He's not willing to compromise in the face of evidence that contradicts his firmly held opinions. I've studied Libertarianism to the point of finding out that, not unlike other extremist philosophies, it's too far-fetched to ever work. People are too "human" for Libertarianism to ever work. It's too eas…

I challenge you to give me one very specific example of how something is not going to work in a libertarian world and I'm going right here right now to prove you how it actually would work. (because, with all due respect, I think writing comments that basically say "it's not gonna work because it's puppies and rainbows" is not helping us find out the truth).

Ugh, I hate haggis.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#43

Post by jlgreco » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:48 AM UTC

smokeyj wrote: post #29

jlgreco wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Been there recently? Reddit, as far as you can say it "likes" or "dislikes" anything, does not like Paul.

Everyone hates him. He's too liberal for liberals and too conservative for conservatives.

No, he is too socially conservative for liberals.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#44

Post by marshray » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:52 AM UTC

slurgfest wrote: post #31

"The Internet" is not democratically elected. Why should it have a mandate to defeat what is decided democratically?

The internet as an institution is far more democratic than the current US election system.

Anyone can exchange ideas online, and better yet, most people do!

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#45

Post by mixmastamyk » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:54 AM UTC

wyclif wrote: post #3

mixmastamyk wrote: post #2

The real thing: http://washingtonexaminer.com/transcript-ron-pauls-farewell-... Some great stuff in there, I just wish it was about half its length. Would tighten up the points a lot.

Keep in mind this was his Farewell Address. He was going to get his licks in, esp. that bit about "psychopathic authoritarians" (which I took to include the other members of Congress). There was absolutely no reason or incentive for him to make it shorter than the allotted time he had. Ron Paul is the only US politician I've ever wanted to cross the street for. I'm hoping his youth movement produces more leaders who…

The reason would be the message would be communicated better. I got lost in a few places down the page. This length might be better as the first few chapters of a book.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#46

Post by mindslight » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:55 AM UTC

snitko wrote: post #38

astrodust wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is Ron Paul is a crazy guy. He's trying to rigorously apply principles from the 1700s to today's world. He's not willing to compromise in the face of evidence that contradicts his firmly held opinions. I've studied Libertarianism to the point of finding out that, not unlike other extremist philosophies, it's too far-fetched to ever work. People are too "human" for Libertarianism to ever work. It's too eas…

I challenge you to give me one very specific example of how something is not going to work in a libertarian world and I'm going right here right now to prove you how it actually would work. (because, with all due respect, I think writing comments that basically say "it's not gonna work because it's puppies and rainbows" is not helping us find out the truth).

Personal stewardship of nuclear weapons.

Please don't "prove to me how it actually would work". Just think about it a while for yourself, and learn to accept that there's limits to the philosophy. Libertarianism is ultimately a heuristic, and you do it no favors by handwavingly claiming that you can prove desirable large scale behaviors based on a small set of axioms.

Signed - a libertarian.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#47

Post by snitko » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:55 AM UTC

timr wrote: post #41

snitko wrote: post #33

What makes me sad is that a lot of people, even here, discharge Ron Paul as some sort of crazy guy without even listening to what he says. In comments to this post "thesagan" wrote that some of his ideas are "batshit crazy" as if his ideology is composed of many different unrelated parts. Not true, Ron Paul ideas are ideas of libertarianism and if you study them diligent enough, you'll eventually be used to thinking…

"Ron Paul ideas are ideas of libertarianism and if you study them diligent enough, you'll eventually be used to thinking in this framework" I'm trying not to violate rule #1 of the internet ("never argue with an internet libertarian"), but you're making a classic Nerd Error: if you have to say the words "you'll eventually be used to thinking in this framework" , you've already lost the war. Politics are not about log…

I recognize very well that politics is not about logic. This is why I'm very pessimistic about prospects of libertarianism and especially anarcho-capitalism. Because especially the latter has nothing to do with politics at all.

Generally, I think the idea that the majority of people can vote for something and restrict freedoms of other people who opposed the idea is something completely crazy and it's so sad that a lot of people will, I'm sure, continue thinking that is the way to go.

Update: also, let me ask you, cos I'm not sure, why do you think it's a bad idea to argue with a libertarian?

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#48

Post by mbetter » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:57 AM UTC

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #9

ataggart wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's certainly letting his voluntarist-anarchist flag fly: "What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The retort to such a suggestion is always: it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal. The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of governmen…

"What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The retort to such a suggestion is always: it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal. No, my objection is that Ron Paul wants to pretend property titles are not acts of aggression backed by the state. I'm no anarchist, but…

My thoughts, yet expressed more eloquently than I ever could.

Would you happen to have an opinion on which of your books I should read first?

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#49

Post by scarmig » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:57 AM UTC

hypersoar wrote: post #14

SpikeDad wrote: post #12

The Internet was vital in exposing his naive and harmful behavior. His hypocritical pronouncements and racist background would never have come to the public without it. Don't let Washington hit your ass on the way out.

Can you elaborate? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you - I just haven't followed him enough to know what you're talking about.

As far as the racist background, the Ron Paul newsletters certainly have explicit racism (and sexism, and homophobia) in them (as opposed to implied racism, such as opposing the civil rights legislation of the 60s). Most Ron Paul fans argue that it was actually Lew Rockwell who wrote most of that, under Ron Paul's name, and Ron Paul never read or approved of them.

Take that for what it's worth--I personally suspect it's somewhere between "Ron Paul wrote all the virulently racist stuff in his newsletter" and "Ron Paul had no idea of anything going on in his newsletter."

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#50

Post by ericHosick » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 2:58 AM UTC

snitko wrote: post #33

What makes me sad is that a lot of people, even here, discharge Ron Paul as some sort of crazy guy without even listening to what he says. In comments to this post "thesagan" wrote that some of his ideas are "batshit crazy" as if his ideology is composed of many different unrelated parts. Not true, Ron Paul ideas are ideas of libertarianism and if you study them diligent enough, you'll eventually be used to thinking…

Most people seem to have good intentions but good intentions don't always lead to good results.

The intentions of laws with compulsory fees (taxation) and compulsory who marries who are based on good intentions (in the minds of those who create them).

In both cases, these good intentions are based on theft of basic rights. But, in the long term, how can you make society better off when your core beliefs are based on theft? ("Unlike both parties' ideologies, which are, indeed, crafted out of many different unrelated parts serving special interests.")

The "batshit crazy" ideals of libertarians is to base your good intentions on non-aggression: not theft.