Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (27 comments)

Ron Paul in 2008? Just Say No to Dr. No

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan   -- Page 2 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com

However, he has at least one very deep flaw which would almost certainly make his presidency an unmitigated disaster for the poor and the working class the world over:

Ron Paul ardently supports the libertarian notions of laissez faire, free markets, deregulation, and privatization. In an ironic and almost comical twist, the imperialism, corporatism, and prefigurements of fascism he has so accurately identified (and vowed to eradicate) are symptoms of monopoly capitalism, a mature form of the system that his libertarian principles would serve to buttress and amplify.

In “The Shock Doctrine” Naomi Klein amply documents the widespread murder, mayhem, and misery caused by implementing a libertarian economic doctrine (as the United States facilitated under the tutelage of Milton Friedman and his acolytes) throughout South America, Southeast Asia, Russia, and China. Savage capitalism at its finest. And for evidence that it CAN happen here (in our “enlightened” Western culture), one need only look back to the Gilded Age and Dickensonian England.

Regardless of how malformed it was due to the relentless pressure applied by the United States via the nuclear arms race we initiated to break it and our HUGE economic advantages, the Soviet Union represented a powerful counter-balance to the forces of unrestrained capitalism. Upon its collapse, the capitalists of the world united and set out to eliminate the hard fought gains the working class had made throughout the Twentieth Century. And Dr. Paul wants to hand those cynical bastards the keys to the kingdom by dismantling what is left of government restraints on the bourgeoisie.

Contrary to the agenda advanced by Ron Paul, “all government” is not inherently evil. It is true that the federal government we have now is an enemy to the masses in many respects. But Uncle Sam is not our foe because he “over-regulates” the parasitic capitalists who are raping the planet, “steals” our money through taxation, or acts as a “nanny state” by providing what has become a nominal safety net for the poor and elderly, as Paul suggests. He is our adversary because he is looking out for the wealthy elite and views people like you and me as disposable. In contrast to Lincoln’s vision—“of the people, by the people and for the people,” we have a government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.

While Ron Paul MIGHT be able to slay the dragons of the military industrial complex and undue Zionist influence, his adherence to a “prehistoric” form of capitalism has the potential to essentially eliminate what is left of the rapidly eroding gains the working class and poor have made over the last century.

Despite his apparent opposition to the powers that be, a vote for Ron Paul is still a vote for our continued enslavement by a system predicated on greed, selfishness, and the prosperity of the few at the expense of the many. In fact, unless by some miracle a viable candidate who opposes capitalism actually emerges, the act of voting in our bourgeois democracy is little more than a validation of our servitude.

So don’t participate. Our ruling elite can’t mouth hollow platitudes about democracy if they don’t have voters.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Jason Miller, Senior Editor and Founder of TPC, is a tenacious forty something vegan straight edge activist who lives in Kansas and who has a boundless passion for animal liberation and anti-capitalism. Addicted to reading and learning, he is mostly (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
27 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Yikes! by Bob Tracey on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 1:50:24 PM
IT JUST DOESN'T ADD UP by Jeremy Frombach on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 3:45:51 PM
Brilliant. by p henson on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 7:41:43 PM
Oh, brother, there is that 'Zionist' term again. It has by Steven Leser on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 2:01:30 PM
When did it happen? by Navyguy on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 2:07:11 PM
Sorry Jason by Darryl Schmitz on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 2:10:00 PM
Try Harder by Sam Liberty on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 2:28:43 PM
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong by Alfred Jones on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 3:28:12 PM
Communism failed for a reason by JohnMatthews on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 3:29:19 PM
China hasn't been Communist for a long time by Watching on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 3:34:47 PM
I maintain China is still "a little" communistic by JohnMatthews on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 4:08:26 PM
on further thought.... by JohnMatthews on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 4:26:28 PM
Your discussion is at the level of a brainwashed comic book. by Richard Mynick on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 9:57:26 PM
Kind of misleading.... by Ingrid on Monday, Dec 31, 2007 at 7:15:48 AM
Don't waste your breath, with a comment like this. First of by Richard Mynick on Monday, Dec 31, 2007 at 12:44:11 PM
Nothing you said diminished Stalin's atrocities? by Ingrid on Monday, Dec 31, 2007 at 5:23:29 PM
A fair assessment of RP's pluses & minuses. Beyond the by Richard Mynick on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 3:47:36 PM
Be careful what you wish for... by Wildboar on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 3:48:54 PM
What???? by mike ma on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 4:42:49 PM
Sitting this one out is not an option by usxp on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 4:46:12 PM
Way over the top by Amy Fried, Ph.D. on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 5:55:14 PM
Capitalism Yes. Deregulation No. by csnet on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 7:48:00 PM
Now if could just spell words by csnet on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 7:55:09 PM
Deregulation in balance? by Ingrid on Monday, Dec 31, 2007 at 7:54:07 AM
Yes, I'll add Onerous Regulation No. by csnet on Monday, Dec 31, 2007 at 11:59:11 AM
Here's what you NEED to be worried about by Louis Nardozi on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 8:23:31 PM
You should actually read disaster capitalism by jacob klein on Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at 8:45:12 PM