Every time I start to feel despondent over the fate of the world, I listen to his speeches and I feel optimistic again. What a miracle that his speeches will be preserved for the foreseeable future. Now to encourage the youth to listen to it, and submit his arguments to his own reason.

@MatthewMayernik

3 жыл бұрын

2nd to last comment: 7 years ago. Last comment: 6 hours ago. Seems to me we all are getting a wave of libertarianism in this country recently.

I'm Latino and I legally immigrated with my family to the US when I was eight. I've wholly aligned myself with the ideas of the liberty movement since then. I have come to despise socialism and communism as well. I'd like to know what people like you think of me.

It was such an honor to meet Dr. Paul at this event. He instills optimism when he speaks, I'm glad so many people have finally opened their ears and their minds.

It never failed. The idea of free markets and personal liberty was, in fact, an overwhelming success, and is responsible for most of the economic and social progress over the past couple centuries.

30:30 I heard academentia, and no one will ever convince me I didn't. It is now my new favorite (and accurate) word for describing academia in modern times.

Ron Paul is the greatest politician of our day!

You never answered my question either... The fact that I am alive and without interference from others I would continue to exist. This is the natural right to life.

This is true. You can't win over everyone, best to spend your time to people who are looking for answers, which is most, rather than some who are simply here to troll.

Ron, you deserve lots of respect! thanks for the sharing of your ideas :-) From Belgium ;-)

Ron Paul is the most amazing person alive. He is my hero.

always a breathe of fresh air when listening to him recite.

Keep on the path friend. The rabbit hole doesn't stop there.

Just not the fraudulent income tax, and we also have the audacity to question why our tax dollars fund incarceration for non-violent drug crimes, war and killings in the middle east, and corporate bailouts.

... "if you where objective would you say that Americans are ruled by the constitution?" That is exactly what I would say. The fact that people disobey it - in good conscience or otherwise - is another issue.

You're absolutely right, we need to take down the military-industrial complex. I believe war should be avoided whenever possible. That's another reasons why I'm a Ron Paul supporter. He would have completely brought all our soldiers back from oversees. People would stop dying, America's image might have a chance of being redeemed, and we would have been that much closer to paying off the debt. :)

Improvements in communications technology makes us able to hear about more violence in more detail from farther away, while the media sensationalizes everything. Even if violence were flat, it would appear to be increasing because we're more aware of it. Empirical studies find that violence is decreasing in reality, even if we don't perceive it as such.

Great speech, please come to the Netherlands!!!!!!

Property is a scarce good that one has exclusive control over. Since scarce goods can only be utilized by one actor at a time, and we can predict that rivalry might exist over desires to use a scarce good, we need norms to determine who gets to own, and therefore use, the good, making it his property. Hence, we develop property rights, which are a legal concept used to differentiate who should have control of a scarce good.

I love Ron Paul! Such a great man-he gives me hope.

Who has the power or wisdom to set up these "simple instructions" that we all must follow?

Ireland for 1000 years was fully anarchic/libertarian, and it functioned just fine. Actually, it managed to produce probably the best literature of the era and was easily the most peaceful. Define "libertarian." If you think America is libertarian, you have a very different idea of liberty than I do. Liberty produces prosperity. This is an undeniable economic and historical fact. To say that liberty fails is just silly.

Your point? It doesn't change the fact that conservation is the most profitable situation. Most real world situations aren't a guy with fish, they're corporations with shareholders, who hold the corporation accountable and make sure that they achieve the most long-term profit.

I'm optimistic about the future of the liberty movement because of the Golden Rule. He who own's the gold makes the rules, and Libertarians own a lot of gold.

The free market stopped child labour. Increased productivity and thus higher wages made it possible for the parents to survive without the child having to work for money.

Sharing a scarce resource is called rationing. You ration it to where it is most effectively employed.

37:30 would not be a Ron Paul speech without ludicrous issue with the sound, but as always great to hear it anyway :)

what a statesman.

"Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind." -JFK Thank you for fighting for us, Ron Paul!

I do understand your point better after having read your other comments.

I'm feeling like the man of the house !!!! Man of the house. Kid.

By examining the data and determining where it is most effectively used. Data is data. Like fish for example... you would just eat the fish. I'd breed the fish and use the nutrients to grow crops and algae using the algae to feed the fish. The movement of the fish can also generate electricity. Every part of a fish can be used for more than just eating although that is a viable use for excess fish. The whole system can even clean air and water if done properly. Meanwhile you just snacked

The rich philanthropists in the US usually use their money on countries where people are starving not where they have an internet connection and a car.....

The problem is seeking utopia through a single dogmatic strategy. Sometimes capitalism is good. Sometimes socialism is good. Sometimes statism is good. Sometimes libertarianism is good. The trick is finding a balance that works to get more good than bad. No two humans exactly agree on what utopia means.

Being a Libertarian is to support the Constitution more than the Left or Right side of politics . Get your facts right ....

Reply 2: The phrase "ruled by" comes from (obviously) "rule" which can take many forms. We have playground rules, rules of games and sports, a ruler to guide us to draw lines on paper. Some rules are "hard" and some "soft", some with consequences and some without, some written on paper some unwritten. Rules can't force us to do anything and only work if people consent to them (and to the rulers who enforce them). The Bible is itself written on paper but has power over those who live by it. ...

That's factually correct; but remember, the government was only given such power on the premise that it would not overstep it's authority. The government is only here to protect our rights: "...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..."

Why does only one person benefit if he owns something? Under capitalism, the best way to become rich is to be a servant to your fellow man. Profit comes from pleasing the consumer. The man would seek to satisfy the needs of the community, as that's what earns him the most long-term profit. He would most certainly NOT deplete all the fish at once, as that would not maximize his profit.

If taxation isn't theft then what is it? Because it's hardly voluntary, you get a gun pointed at you and thrown into jail for the rest of your life if you do not pay taxes and pay towards someone elses life choices.

And what if market regulations restrict what it is allowed to get away with? Libertarianism is not the absence of law, nor even the absence of government, only the absence of the State. If a firm causes damages, I would expect them to pay for it. That's not incompatible with libertarianism. Tell me why non-aggression doesn't work. That's all that libertarianism really is.

dudes that print the money own the gold.

You can't share a scarce good. That's why it's scarce. Only one actor can use it at a time. You could, I suppose, transfer the property title between actors, but then no productive work can be done with that good. Having one person own the good actually DOES get the maximum usage out of it. Basic economics really. I'm, in favor of having an arbiter, but that's a separate issue

I like the quote from Victor Hugo

I think they'd all eventually fail even if they did represent honesty and integrity, which many of them try to do in theory from the start.

Where did I say abolish private property? I'm not against capitalism, I am against unregulated pure capitalism coupled with human greed ;3 I'm also against the cult of libertarianism.

Every country established by the libertarian group The Phoenix Foundation.

I agree. However, he is leaps and bounds more acceptable than non-Libertarian leaning politicians. Even his son (who claims to be a Libertarian) is more of a business-as-usual politician.

Like I said earlier, you don't pay attention to the real world. A greedy human seeks the most profit with the least expenditure. The rarer the fish become the more value they possess as a rare commodity. It is in a greedy humans best interest to deplete the fish and then market to those that can afford luxury items. Understand?

Ron Paul should win Because thanks those media and those RNC and GOP new rules. You see RNC and GOP new rules was a joke, alright.

What exactly is property and why do you have a right to it?

What about the Republic of Minerva. How long did that last again?

We want to make it so that people don't LIVE on welfare. The country is spending almost a trillion dollars a year on "entitlement" programs. We just can't afford it anymore! Welfare is meant to be a temporary measure to get people back on their feet. My family took food stamps for a year or so. Now my parent is a professional nurse and is paying all of it and more back in taxes, but cases like that are far too few.

Shame about the mic cutting out at the end....it was a bit hard to hear

The Constitution won't help much as long as it allows the government to impose unlimited taxation, a draft, and other property taking and violence.

How would you determine where it is most effectively used?

btw i'm talking about actual anarchy (meaning little or no government). Not "lets go smash private property and act a fool" anarchy. Shout out to Murray Rothbard, woop woop

Voluntarism vs Force is the paradigm here, not action vs inaction, maybe I should have been clearer.

Keeping a private stock of rare fish is in the best interest of the greedy human. If fish were everywhere then there value would be depleted. If nobody wanted to eat fish then their value would be depleted. Manufacturing a false demand for a rare commodity and then selling it for what the market will hold while spending as little overhead as possible makes the most profit. Humans only live about 80 years or so. You don't plan centuries in advance, you plan by years or decades.

We have another weapon: a clear conscience

Even if it was declining that does not invalidate my statement. Simple ecology.

Great speech!

Thank you. misesmedia :)

The only "The Phoenix Foundation" I found was an indie rock group. You'll actually need to provide me an example, not a google search.

No country has ever really approached Marx's vision of Communism, the socialist stage always kills the "progress". Marx conceived a utopian human condition that more closely resembles a secular religion than a political ideal.

It is a consensus. The founders of the country decided on a loose codification of regulations and set up a system to ensure they would be taken seriously. Checks and balances were put in place to keep each branch of the government from taking too much power. People have been trying to break it ever since... but you are still a democratic republic. Do you think the creators of america were thrilled with being governed?

i take the term paulbot as a badge of honor personally!

People need to understand, that not everyone will be open to these ideas. People need to stop convincing everyone, when it's a lost cause. Move on to other people, there are a lot more in the pool of ignorance.

Jesus indeed taught that He is the true source of freedom, however, he didn't oppose capitalism. Jesus is "...the same yesterday, today, and forever..." Hebrews 13:8. The old testament reveals God's direction on business matters in Leviticus & elsewhere; in the new testament Jesus uses business principles that endure today in capitalism to illustrate how the kingdom of God operates. However, He did teach to work hard, yet share everything & be willing to give up everything for God and others.

Pink's frame of mind does not accept the idea of rational selfishness, because this person seeks emotions for moral guidance. It feels good, hence it is good. Furthermore, the person seems to be relying on connotations like greed when interpreting words like selfishness. This is the kind of person who require us to put restraints on the power of government, because when they get in a position of power they make policies built on emotions, which seldom leads to good results.

All laws are paper/documents so that statement means nothing. You are ruled by law until such time as you amend or revoke it. If you want to revoke or amend parts of the US Constitution, good luck, but you will have to do it through the lines of people who oppose you. Most people have not given up on it yet.

I don't use violence, no. I wasn't raised with the language of violence in my home. Few animals are as violent as humans? By what measure?

Taxation is the price of doing business. It pays for the upkeep and maintenance of a country. If you don't pay agreed upon taxes then you are stealing from everyone who does pay those taxes. You are enjoying the benefits of citizenship without contributing anything. The only way to not pay taxes and avoid thieving from a country is to move into international waters and become self sufficient outside a country. Even countries with only small part-time governments have taxes.

Libertarians don't particularly want to replace or overthrow the system, we would just like it to function as intended. I think that you have anarchists and libertarians mixed up.. :)

Well if a community owns the fish then the whole community benefits from the fish instead of just one person benefiting. A greedy human would hoard the fish for its own benefit or sell the fish until they are gone for personal profit. Without regulations these sold fish could have high mercury or various rot and diseases. As long as people buy it a greedy person will sell. So the resource is depleted and the damage is done and the only one really happy is the seller.

Why is his son a neocon when he himself is so logical.

Your point? How would you allocate resources with "sharing?" There exists the Calculation Problem that you haven't solved.

Did you see where I said "Selfishly Altruistic" and how rare such a thing actually is in humans? Rand's entrepreneurs are not realistic. The real world is not Rand's fantasy. Put Rand's characters in a real world scenario and see how that works out.

You can't say "Agreed" and then disagree with me...

That isn't what you asked. You asked what gives me the right. What gives you the right to exist?

Dat bass.

Why not? He is the only one I've seen who *doesn't* let his personal preferences keep him from following the Constitution. Not to mention Mitt Romney is Mormon(not that I care).

Don't look to other people, either positively or negatively, and shape your philosophy around their action. Philosophy should be based around what is rational, not whether or not you trust a person, as the latter is the sheep mentality.

What right do you have to instruct me?

You haven't scratched hard enough. I talk to that kind of libertarian all the time... mostly Ron supporters. Like the fallacy that taxation is theft.

Is the slave stealing if he takes and eats the master's food, even if he didn't work? Of course not. You're argument is the same thing, and it's just silly. I cry about theft and violence, which is what the State is described by. "An expropriating property protector is a contradiction in terms." -Hans Herman Hoppe. The State, by definition, can't protect property, and is by no means the only way to secure property. It's perfectly possible to do so without the State.

can people make more noise with their utensils?!

And what would you propose replacing the current system with? Not that libertarians ever could revolt without being violent ^_^ or defend themselves after seizing power ;3

I pay attention to statistics. We live in probably the least violent time in human history. That's just a fact. Also, you've yet to tell me how violence invalidates libertarianism

Since when is government regulation in ANYTHING a step froward?

Who said anything about unregulated? Market regulations exist you know. Not all regulations are statist in nature. Pray tell, what is this "Cult of Libertarianism?"

I have. You've yet to provide a justification for the abolition of private property

It isn't force the way you are saying. A community agrees upon a set of structures designed to facilitate cooperation. Society doesn't work without rules. Imagine a game of basketball where nobody knew the rules. It would be chaos. Or worse baseball. You'd have people beating each other with bats and pegging each other with balls and nobody keeping score.

Theft? Who steals? Libertarianism is based on property rights, which don't allow theft. That's completely illogical.

I've lost respect for Ron Paul because of various things, particularly recent events involving the ronpaul. com debacle. I still respect what he's accomplished in spreading the message, and history will surely look back and see that, but several things I've seen show the compromises he is willing to make, especially for the political career of Rand who I will never support. Also no, I take Lysander Spooner's stance on the constitution. I'm a voluntaryist.

come to Poland pls :)

Being rationally selfish has absolutely nothing to do with greed. In Rand's novel the entrepreneurs are not the greedy ones, quite the contrary. Read the book, and you will see! I don't find any reason to debate you now, as your definitions of those two words are far from how I understand them. We would be talking about two entirely different things.

States rights gives more freedom to the people do they not? Why should one state have to live under oppressive laws and rules another state imposes using the Federal Government?

different strategies.

The point of reading it would be to understand it. Go in with no preconceived notions, and try to understand the meaning and definitions of what she is saying.

You are expressing exactly why libertarianism cannot work. If a human cannot follow simple instruction in order to be part of a cohesive whole then how can humans be trusted to behave at all?

Libertarianism is the political philosophy that holds liberty as the highest ideal. To say that libertarianism fails is to say that servitude is preferable to freedom, that bondage preferable to free reign. To assert such a thing is madness. Libertarianism and liberty *are* the same thing. They are inseperable. Ireland didn't have tribes or clans in any statist sense. And you've yet to say *how* libertarianism has failed.