Skip to comments.Paul: Country is moving toward fascism
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. Were not moving toward Hitler-type fascism, but were moving toward a softer fascism, Paul said on NBCs 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 ...
I'll vote for Duncan Hunter in the primary...And if he doesn't win, I'll write in Pat Buchanan since I wasted my vote on Bush the last two times instead of voting for Buchanan...
That was a good one. Not to mention Paul total hyprocrisy when asked about Reagan and term limits. To paraphrase an old liberal saying,,,”If it wasn’t for DOUBLE STANDARDS...Paul wouldn’t have any”!
REP. PAUL: You got it completely wrong. I’ve never voted for an earmark in my life.
MR. RUSSERT: No, but you put them in the bill.
REP. PAUL: I put it in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back. But it doesn’t cut any spending to vote against an earmark. And the Congress has the responsibility to spend the money. Why leave the money in the executive branch and let them spend the money?
MR. RUSSERT: Well, that’s like, that’s like saying you voted for it before you voted against it.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask you about drugs and go back again to your ‘90—’88 campaign and see where you stand today. “All drugs should be decriminalized. Drugs should be distributed by any adult to other adults. There should be no controls on production, supply or purchase for adults.” Is that still your position?
REP. PAUL: Yeah. It’s sort of like alcohol. Alcohol’s a deadly drug, kills more people than anything else. And today the absurdity on this war on drugs, Tim, has just been horrible. We now, the federal government, takes over and rules—overrules state laws where state laws permit medicinal marijuana for people dying of cancer. The federal government goes in and arrests these people, put them in prison with mandatory, sometimes life sentences. This war on drugs is totally out of control.
“It’s a controversial statement, but it is also a true statement.”
The signal-to-noise ratio on this thread is quite low, but you are one of the few voices of reason.
Those screaming various insults are not actually debating the points made, with a few exceptions. This inability to rationally address points reflects poorly on the quality of people contributing to this forum, but it probably provides some insight into the mindset of the general GOP membership as well.
Of course the classic is simply attacking posters for saying anything remotely in agreement with Paul’s statement, without addressing the statement as well.
As usual, Ron Paul is about half right. Conservatives have long noted that the form of government favored by big-government liberals is similar to fascism in practice. It is the government in charge, though, and the idealogues. The big corporations go along, and become cheerleaders for the whole mess, which gives a superficial appearance that they are in control. Actually, they are gutless and amoral, and will go wherever government threats and the money lead them.
Von Mises called the economic situation under fascism or national-socialism “Zwangswirtschaft,” or forced economy. It was successful under Hitler by comparison with fully socialist systems because it did not involve dismantling all the means of production, or killing all the skilled people (as in the collectivizations under Stalin).
The fascist regimes in Europe varied by country, but strictly speaking Hitler’s was not a fascist regime. It was national-socialist, and there was a big difference. It was atheistic in tendency. Fascism in Spain was pro-clerical, and so was the movement of Codreanu in Romania, and of Englebert Dollfuss in Austria. The later was assassinated by the followers of Hitler, although he had been supported by Mussolini.
Mussolini was a former socialist, and was rather anti-clerical himself, but he did not persecute the Catholic church for political reasons, and came to terms with the Vatican. One could say, then, that fascism occupied a southern belt, with Nazis to the north. The racial theories were characteristically prominent in Nazi ideology to the north, and included the policy of Aufnordung (promotion of Nordics) which would have been inappropriate to the south of Austria.
All fascist and national-socialist regimes were anti-individualist, like modern American “liberalism.” At every turn, liberals are in favor of eroding rights for the greater good: abortion (which means no rights for the unborn), gun-control, high-taxation, restrictions on free speech (lest it cause “discomfort” within the masses), interfering with the market to “protect the environment” or to manage medical care or to control the weather, rigging of elections, &c. About the only feature which separates today’s American liberals from fascists is that the liberals are generally anti-religious, or at best are affiliated with liberalized sects like (for example) the UCC. Comparing the two, the fascists begin to look good, because at least they resisted communism, which the liberals generally did not (as, for example, in the Vietnam War). Except on defense, liberals should never complain too much about fascism, because it is quite similar to their own way.
MR. RUSSERT: I was intrigued by your comments about Abe Lincoln. “According to Paul, Abe Lincoln should never have gone to war; there were better ways of getting rid of slavery.”
REP. PAUL: Absolutely. Six hundred thousand Americans died in a senseless civil war. No, he shouldn’t have gone, gone to war. He did this just to enhance and get rid of the original intent of the republic. I mean, it was the—that iron, iron fist..
>> MR. RUSSERT: When I looked at your record, you talked about big government and how opposed you are to it, but you seem to have a different attitude about your own congressional district.
That would be one more good reason to retire ElRon from the Congress!
(I think that his goose is already cooked as a candidate for POTUS.)
What are your thoughts on the political philosophies of James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, George Washington, to name a few? How do they compare with Ron Paul’s views, or with George Bush’s?
It’s not that the Fed doesn’t maintain influence, it’s that the amount of credit/debt in the system outside of US M3 and UK M4 is now appreciably more than any adjustment the Federal Reserve Banks can deal with using the tools at their disposal. So at the edges, where the action is, the Fed Banks no longer have any real influence.
US$7.4 trillion in the M2, banks have off balance sheet losses approaching 1.5% of the M2, SO FAR. The vehicles for the losses were partially off balance sheet, not reported to the Fed Reserve, the total value of the vehicles were also off balance sheet. Yet the banks were injecting credit into the market with the offbalance sheet values.
I never studied this enough, I suggest checking out shadowstats for more info regarding this.
MR. RUSSERT: George Herbert Walker Bush, this is according to Ron Paul: “`Bush is a bum,’ Paul wrote in” “November” 15th, “1992 issue of his newsletter, the `Ron Paul Political Report.’” And asked about the current President Bush, whether he voted for him in 2004: “Paul says no: `He misled us in 2000.’” Asked if he voted for Bush in 2000. No, “`I didn’t vote for him then, either. I wasn’t convinced he was a conservative.’” And actually, in 1987, you submitted a letter of resignation to the Republican Party: “I therefore resign my membership in the Republican Party and enclose my membership card.” If Reagan’s a failure, Bush 41 is a bum, and you didn’t vote for Bush 41—41’s a bum and 43 you didn’t vote for, and you resigned from the Republican Party, why you running as a Republican candidate for president?
Before you go, Mike Huckabee, Republican candidate for president, ran this commercial for Christmas and many thought that the shelf in the back looked like a cross. You were asked about it on CNN and this is what you said.
REP. PAUL: It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once says. He said when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.
That Picture is photo shopped!!! /s
So, what did I state that was loony? I posted the truth.
Telling the truth about the Republican Party is not bashing it...unless you're one of those super-sensitive types, ya know, like the Muslims who cry racism because there are no footbaths for them.
Sure, the Republican Party doesn't need libertarian minded people -- as it continues to suffer attrition as it pursues the neo-con agenda and will continue to lose elections. Good luck with that game plan!
if you disagree with Paul, why not push for repeal of the 21st amendment as well?
Who is that? ( I recognize the guy on the left, he was in Wings back in the 70s)
If you and your man, Ron Paul do not like the Republican Party, then why don’t you get out of it?
So he liked Reagan once, hated him in the 80’s and now like him????
The only candidate supported by Marxists and Nazis.
I was hoping Ron Paul could find a party...
The “Stark Raving Loony” Party?
***Monty Python Reference***
Ron Paul also supported by White Supremacist.
Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.
Whos the Facsist ?
Works for me.
“nd yet, this: Pauls current district, which includes Galveston and reaches into the Brazoria County, draws a substantial amount of federal flood insurance payments.”
Presumably this means people had paid for flood insurance if they were getting payments. You do understand Flood Insurance is a BINDING CONTRACT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE HOMEOWNER which the government is now paying, as legally obligated to?
One characteristic of fascism is that ownership of property is allowed, but its use is heavily restricted and regulated by the government.
We’ve been drifting toward fascism for years now. That doesn’t mean Paul isn’t a nutball, though.
Sometimes this is called projection.
No... the Jury is in, and Ron Paul is a NUT.
Sorry, that’s a glib thought, not an accurate one.
School choice - freedom from failing schools
Lower Taxes - freedom to make own economic decisions
Foreign policy - freed Eastern Europe from Communism - freed Afghans from oppressive islamo-fascim - freed Iraqis from murderous thug government.
And the other party? What do they do that enhances liberty? When was the last time you even heard a Democrat talk about Freedom? Half of them worship freedom’s enemies - the Castros, the Chavez’s, Putin KGB-thug-of-the-year.
A jury of one is probably something the founding fathers did not have in mind.
You make a lot of loud comments and insults, but don’t seem to actually debate in intelligent terms any of the points made on this thread. Can you?
Describe the technical definition of fascism. Has the US moved in this direction or away from in in the last 20 or 10 years? If the US more resembles this model now than 20 years ago, is this a good thing or a bad thing?
Corporatism - do you feel the FDA has become more or less friendly to major pharmaceutical companies over the last 10 years? Take into consideration the number of drugs fast-tracked, and the number of products made over-the-counter.
That’s what I said.
I forgot to ask you about the elephant in the living room of corporatism - our trade policy with china, supported by both parties (both presumably awash in chinese money, given republican apparent refusal to pursue the matter in the Cox Report or even now with the Hsu event).
Technically, fascism is a form of government in which the means of production are regulated and directed by government agencies. In essence, fascism is the modern successor to mercantilism, wherein kings granted special monopolies to the enterprises of their friends and supporters. Some American colonials were especially angered by such arrangements and after victory sought to prevent the development of a strong central government which would have power to grant boons and banes. These were the anti-federalists. Federalists, like Hamilton, wanted a strong central government and a central bank to favor and protect their business interests.
Today, both major parties are composed largely of those who would use the government to support their financial interests. Thus, the friendly revolving door between lobbying firms and congressional offices. We have developed permanent public-private partnerships or in the older term, industrial-state committees.
That we don't have an especially heavy-handed police state makes for a certain "softness".
"Softer fascism" illustrated.
But he has gotten donations from neo-nazis.
Isn’t there a corollary of Godwin’s Law that applies here?
I suspect that Paul’s philosophy is that people can believe whatever they want as long as they don’t break the law, and anyone can contribute to him who is legally eligible to.
To a great degree I agree with him here. The internationalist globalist network of corporate interests has goals antithetical to the best interests of America.
But on foreign military policy he is too isolationist.
He really seems to believe that if America just withdraws from the Middle East, the Islamic nut-jobs will leave us alone. That displays a naivete and ignorance of history which is difficult to understand in a man of his stature.
“But on foreign military policy he is too isolationist.”
In an imaginary world where Paul is elected, obviously there would be no overnight withdrawal from the world stage, there is simply too much inertia, legal restrictions, congressional votes, etc. But to play with the idea...
The US is at this moment a tremendous world power and creating a power vacumn would not be a good thing, short or long-term. China and Russia would be happy to fill some of it, and numerous despotic regimes that are very friendly to us might end up being toppled (Egypt, for one), which would certainly hurt US interests as well.
Iran could end up with much more influence in Iraq than they are going to get anyway, which would further alter the equation. Our presence in Asia being removed from Japan, ROK, and other locations would be a sea-change event as well.
...into consideration the number of drugs fast-tracked......
So the FDA is in the tank for the pharma companies? Of course the counter-argument is that for decades the FDA has caused needless death through an over cautious bureaucratic approach to drug approval. http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg18n2c.html
It also makes development of drugs more expensive that it would have to be.
........number of products made over-the-counter......
And if I as a consumer, don’t have the governement forcing me to engage the service of a physician to get a drug that cannot harm me, isnt that expanding my freedom?
And others can draw the conclusion from this nexus of neo-nazis and truthers that a candidate presents a danger to the centrist, freeom-loving, body politic.
“So the FDA is in the tank for the pharma companies? Of course the counter-argument is that for decades the FDA has caused needless death through an over cautious bureaucratic approach to drug approval.”
Agreed, but my question was to compare the FDA of 20 years ago to the FDA today? Are they more responsive to market needs of Pharmaceutical companies?
The number of OTC drugs has certainly been convenient. Has it helped the pharma companies as well?
Please don’t get the impression I am partial to either the FDA or the related multinational corporations. The original question dealt with corporatism, and I was addressing that aspect.
BTW, thanks for answering my posts to americanmade1776, who doesn’t seem to respond in any rational way.
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.