Recevez notre Marketbriefing
In the same category
Jim C.
Member since May 2012
463 commentaries - 3 followers
3 followers
has posted a comment on the article :
>Ron Paul and the Future  - Lew Rockwell - 
Lew Rockwell wrote in DOWN WITH THE PRESIDENCY: "The modern institution of the presidency is the primary political evil Americans face, and the cause of nearly all our woes." He added in a later paragraph: "The presidency – by which I mean the executive State – is the sum total of American tyranny."

He believes in a stateless society, one run only by the voluntary association of individuals. To achieve that end he has repeatedly endorsed Ron Paul for president. Why? One can logically assume for the purpose of dismantling the Presidency.

But would that have been Ron Paul's goal had he been elected? Let's consider one of his political stances. In the recent Republican debates, in a question about mandatory state health care Ron Paul said that (although he is against mandatory health care as might be decreed by the Federal Government) he would be powerless as President to stop an individual state from implementing such. In other words, he believes the Presidency has no power to intervene in state affairs -- even though those affairs violate individual rights. This is not an isolated position. In the past he has scolded Lincoln for interfering in the Southern Institution of slavery -- though disagreeing with the morality of that institution.

So Ron Paul would be President so that he could not nothing, so that he would be in place primarily to diminsh the power of the office -- a position Lew Rockwell would love to come about.

To my knowlege Ron Paul has never repudiated any of Rockwell's views on a stateless society -- the goal of which is to weaken American power and influence.

It is only logical to assume that Paul's position of limiting the power of the Presidency would carry over to limiting the power of State governments and on down the line -- leaving only individuals left to form voluntary associations for trade, policing, judicial proceedings, and defense.

Such a uptopian attempt would only end in disaster: a Hatfield and McCoy world of constant fueds with no objective authority to sort things out, enforce decisions. What would there be to prevent a group (a drug cartel or religious fanatics) from seizing power over others? Nothing -- but those others froming resistance groups. It would be a world of continous civil war.

The solution would be a return to the original Libertarian concept of a government limited to the defense of the nation -- a concept Rockwell and Ron Paul, I fear, have abandoned.



Commented
3551 days ago
-
Send
Beginning of the headline :One of the most thrilling memories of the 2012 campaign was the sight of those huge crowds who came out to see Ron.His competitors,meanwhile,couldn’t fil lhalf a Starbucks.When I worked as Ron’schief of staff in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Icould only dream ofsuch aday. Now what was it that attracted all these people to Ron Paul? He didn’t offer his followers a spot on thefederal gravy train... Read More
Reply to this comment
You must be logged in to comment an article8000 characters max.
Log in or Sign up
Top articles