Full link here.
Posted on 12/23/2007 6:44:53 PM PST by AmericanMade1776
White House hopeful Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Sunday that the U.S. is moving toward fascism, stating that corporations are increasingly “running the show” and citizens are being deprived of their liberties.
Paul clarified that he did not refer to the type of fascism that Adolf Hitler practiced in Germany. “We’re not moving toward Hitler-type fascism, but we’re moving toward a softer fascism,” Paul said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “Loss of civil liberties, corporations running the show, big government in bed with big business.”
The lawmaker said the U.S. is moving toward “corporatism.” He also lashed out at a system in which those are criticized as unpatriotic who do not support the war in Iraq or the Patriot Act.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
*snicker*
I think that many candidates have tried to wrap themselves in the (nationalist) flag to get elected, but they are really globalists, too.
To my mind, the political spectrum is really "a circle", not "a flat line".
In this circular model, at one point in the circle is complete "Totalitarianism" and 180% away is complete "Libertarianism". If you were to put "Totalitarian" at the very top of the circle and "Libertarian" at the very bottom, you could say that Democrats occupy the 180% of the Left and Republicans occupy the 180% of the Right.
Our Founding Fathers were closer to the complete Libertarian model when this was a smaller country, but a country the size the US is now cannot have the complete Libertarian standard, so some accommodations need to be made -- the question is how much and what kind of compromise is necessary -- and this is the essence of every political question and argument.
Both the Democrats and many of the Republicans over the years have moved --from either side-- too close to the Totalitarian top of the circle so that many of them are closer to each other than they are to other members of their Party. Neither Party is completely at Totalitarian, but both have become more Authoritarian than many Americans are comfortable with. Some Americans are dissatisfied with the Authoritarianism (in whatever form) at home and some are dissatisfied with the Authoritarianism in our militarism abroad. Authoritarianism is de facto "Globalism", because the business interests that benefit from both forms of Authoritarianism are globalists. Some recognize that you can't have Authoritarianism in one place of any kind (here or abroad) without the other, and don't care how they get back to a more Libertarian model as long as we get there.
Ron Paul wants to move the Republican Party back toward the Libertarian bottom of the circle, where it traditionally came from. This is why Ron Paul's message has become so attractive to so many Americans, but it is also why he appears to be so out of step with his own Party -- because Ron Paul is not an Authoritarian and many Republicans today and virtually all Democrats today are.
This Authoritarianism is what Ron Paul was talking about when he said that "America is moving toward fascism". "Fear of losing our jobs, homes and healthcare" has driven Americans toward the Democrats' Authoritarian Socialism and "fear of terrorists" has driven the Authoritarian militarist ideal. It still means that both sides are trying to move our government toward more Authoritarianism.
In short, based on the propaganda we are being fed, we are allowing ourselves to be ruled by fear of everything and everyone inside and outside our country, and this is no way to live -- we all know it, we just disagree as to how to get out of this mess we've created.
I think that a move back toward Republican libertarianism is the only answer, and the only one with that agenda is Ron Paul. Ron Paul is not the perfect candidate, I wish that there were more candidates out there with his message, but there aren't. Frankly, I am proud that this message came out of a Republican and despite the detractors, there are many with whom Ron Paul's message resonates.
“I haven’t finished reading the rest of the thread, but I had to stop here to say thank you for your posts! I was beginning to wonder if I was on FR or a government cheerleading site. I honestly am amazed at the reaction here, when conservatives typically (unlike lefties) have some skepticism of government, and understand how important it is to be vigilant in regard to our freedom and individual rights. To me this thread is sad, very very sad.”
Same here. Seeing these incendiary threads the last few weeks, reading the comments, and looking up the actual entire quote myself, I’ve come to take a 2nd look at Paul and what he actually says, vs what others have sometimes misrepresented him as saying.
He made a good point - I work in the IT industry and I worry about the power that things like credit records, other databases, etc have over people. With personal privacy goes individual liberty. Personal financial information about you is owned by a company. They make money by reporting information about you that you might contest to another entity that pays them for it.
Digital communications like cell phones provide location information base on tower triangulation. Etc etc. How can conservatives not question the impact these technologies have on our liberty?
Ronald Reagan in his famous "Free to Choose" speech in support of Goldwater in '64, said there was no left and right, only down and up. Down toward the darkness of tyranny or up toward the light of liberty. That's the scale I'd use. How much is the candidate for the use of coercion and how much against.
Hillary is closing the circle with the religious right, she now supports going after the manufacturers of violent video games. Hmmm, what's she going to do with Risk, where the goal is to conquer the world.
Actually, this is one strong reason, why I support medical savings accounts, patients should be making these cost/benefit/risk tradeoffs for themselves, not third parties. Well, that's off the topic, but it's a pet peeve.
Right about the fascism, wrong about the corporations.
unlike his MOVEON.org allies...huh?
You say Neo-Con , like it is something bad, it is something to be proud of. Besides... Ron Paul doesn't even like the first republican Abraham Lincoln.. and all the other republicans inbetween. You are backing a LOSER.
Don’t mind me. I’m just sitting here enjoying your meltdown.
Well, I’m not supporting him...but he’s basically right. We are losing civil liberties at an alarming pace. It’s mostly Democrats pushing the laws that are infringing on individual rights, but the Republicans are often along for the ride, especially lately.
LOL!
No small wonder the author choses to no longer be associated with this place.
L
Hmm, I don't like Lincoln either. He invaded the South and increased the power of the federal government immensely. Lincoln established dangerous precedents.
I'm not backing a loser, I'm backing my convictions. Fred Thompson (whom I like, but don't support) also will not win -- soooooooooo, are you backing that LOSER?
Tell me why the border is still open if it isnt because the shrub is in bed with corporate America.
Both parties have their reasons for keeping the borders open:
R - for big business
D - for potential voters
Ron Paul, hasn’t a Snowballs chance in Hell of becoming President, he is a spoiler and a loser, and you support the loser spoiler. As for me, I support Fred Thompson over Ron Paul anyday, at least Fred Thompson is not a NUT, supported by looney tunes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.