Even if Ron Paul wins the presidency...
96 2012-03-05 by no1113
Even if 1) Ron Paul somehow wins the presidency AND 2) he is actually honest in his interest and desire to end the Fed, I guarantee you, ladies and gentlemen, HE WILL ABSOLUTELY FAIL if we as individuals, as a people, a society, and as a citizenry actually depend upon only him to get anything done.
In other words, WE need to stand up and do something about what is happening in this country and in this world. Occupy Wall Street is a step in the right direction, but it is only that - just a step. EVERYONE has to stand up and move forward against what's happening. It is only WE the citizens that have the power to exact real change - not any president or official (elected or otherwise).
We are the ones that have to stand up and move.
Someone like RP can help, but if we simply look on idly before following blindly, then even if he IS honest, we as a country and as a people will still entirely and completely fail and still be ruled over as we are almost entirely ruled over already.
131 comments
27 [deleted] 2012-03-05
The president is not a dictator. I wish people quit acting like that role has that much power. Congress is the issue and congress will continue to be the issue until we flip the cancer which has been plaguing this REPUBLIC. Corruption and Lobbying, insider trading as well as, conflicting interests after public duty.
3 Politikr 2012-03-05
I have been saying this for a good bit. Nothing is more true than the fact that the role of the president is very nearly only valid when there is a perceived threat, therefore a constant state of conflict is preferential? Otherwise we usually depend on the legislative body for the everyday running of the country and writing of legislation. Executive orders are not desirable, and IMO should be used with great caution. But for real, everyone saying "well the President should stop the drug war, or close Gitmo" He cant, not unilaterally. Now, a troop withdraw...THAT he can do, NOW, today. Planes in the air. Ok im done. r/rant
2 no1113 2012-03-05
You're correct. However, given that the president is in charge of the military, and the U.S. military is the biggest, and the most influential (and most destructive) on the planet and has take such a disproportionate role on this planet, the U.S. president then does indeed wield a great deal of power.
If we the people simply stand up and deal with/move against just this, a great, great step toward dealing with the world's problems will be addressed. It's by not means the only answer, but it certainly seems to be one of the stronger problems on the forefront of global issues.
1 boneklinkz 2012-03-05
Exactly
2 no1113 2012-03-05
Well, you're still speaking about and dealing within the paradigm of politics and government in general - and that is really part of the problem. You're right. The president is not a dictator. However, even congress is entirely and completely impotent next to the will of the masses. The majority of the people don't realize that the president doesn't have as much power as they think he does. They also sure as heck don't realize that the congress has even more power still, and we the people are almost completely blind that WE are the ones that have the absolutely MOST power of anyone around.
Whether it's the president, or congress, or the politicians, or lobbying groups, or some secrets government, or the Illuminati, or whatever, it is WE the people as a united front that can address and deal with literally ANY issue on this planet.
We don't realize that, however, and continue allowing ourselves to be fooled and led.
1 tankjr 2012-03-05
What are you suggesting? Eliminate congress?
10 Ayn_Rand_Was_Right 2012-03-05
I have rope.
2 Etchii 2012-03-05
We elect people who aren't only out for themselves and we ask them to pass laws to this effect.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
I disagree with this, as it functions under the assumption that voting actually works - which it has absolutely proven NOT to. Whatever needs to get done will involve direct action - and voting isn't direct. It's more tangential than not.
The system of voting as it currently stands needs to be entirely changed and revolutionized. As it stands, it allows for way too much fabrication behind the scenes to be at all depended upon for any sort of change. History continues to prove this much.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
That's be a great start.
1 nope_nic_tesla 2012-03-05
Interestingly, all things Ron Paul has no problem with.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
All the more reason to realize that he is NOT some sort of savior of America - which many have confused themselves into believing.
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
light pole. hang them. burn it all to the ground
1 Dragas 2012-03-05
OWS is a step backwards, just like the tea party. Fuck that shit, as a libertarian i refuse to settle for a movement of socialist hipsters, or fox news morons.
13 SonsOfLiberty86 2012-03-05
Ron Paul is bigger than his campaign for presidency.
He is a teacher... he is teaching America about liberty.
The cause of liberty is much bigger than one man running for president.
Just remember that... he has awakened the desire for freedom in this country. That will linger as long as we keep it alive
3 no1113 2012-03-05
Unfortunately, what you just said seems to be something that could justifiably have been said about almost ANY previous presidential hopeful before they became president.
There have simply been so many occasions when one realizes how wrong they were about a president only AFTER he assumed office that I simply don't give much of any credence to how RP seems to be right now.
Either he's completely full of shit - which I think is highly likely since pretty much every president before him has been full of shit - or he ISN'T f.o.s., assumes power, and gets assassinated, or he ISN'T f.o.s., assumes power, and doesn't get assassinated, but gets buried in such a mess of political b.s. that he will effect little if any change in this country.
Again, Fuck Ron Paul. He seems to be the closest thing to an honest person in politics right now . . . but fuck Ron Paul.
The people need to simply NOT depend upon him as much to fix anything. The people need to depend on THEMSELVES.
Use the government to help - yes. But right now, the government isn't helping - and I'm not sure the government EVER helped or was even DESIGNED to help.
The people need to galvanize themselves and move forward.
Easier said than done - I know - but it still seems that this is what is needed.
2 Suck-a-cheetahs-dick 2012-03-05
So what do you propose? A revolution? I find that highly unlikely, even the small fraction of Americans who do have the balls to stand up to their government will be labelled terrorists and treated as such. It's frustrating to see this circus play out. As far as I'm concerned this is step one, let the voice be heard. It's bigger than sodomy or abortion, it's bigger than religion! You need all the help you can get right now and it's terrifying to think that this next election has the potential to steer the world back on course or let it sink to new depths. So sure RP may not be perfect, and yes his views are very unconventional, but peoples lives are at risk here, people from all over the world. I say cover all your bases. Four years of no war will always be something to be proud of. Godspeed America! Don't let us down.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
Hell yes. If that's what'll work - yes. It doesn't have to be a violent revolution. It can be a non violent one where the population simply doesn't cooperate with the status quo. Easier said than done, but yes. I wonder if anything less than a revolution would otherwise work.
As do I. I agree with this. This doesn't, however, stop it from being a fact that we are at such a point where nothing short of a revolution will likely work at reversing the hole we as a people are falling into very quickly.
I don't disagree with this either. However, with awakening comes further understanding of government subversion, and with further understanding comes a greater solidarity amongst the citizens against those the government might label as terrorists.
Indeed it is.
Ultimately, I agree with the sentiment you expressed here. I'm in accord with your thoughts, and agree with much of what you say.
2 thereisnosuchthing 2012-03-05
No, that will never work.
Revolution is starting from one point, lots of motion, more motion, "change", "progress", and then ending up right back where you started from, just like Earth has it's revolutions around the sun, staying along almost exactly the same line, starting at point A, and eventually returning.
The only thing that will work is evolution, not revolution. People say things like 'evolution of consciousness', and it's dismissed as new-age woo woo catchphrasing, but really that's what is necessary. Has to be change at the level of the individual, individual thinking, individual choice to be or not be involved in corrupt systems(although, as our entire system of education is run from the top down BY those 'corrupt systems', the mothers of the economy, it will never happen), and enough of them creates a critical mass which effects how our cultures and societies are shaped.
But, again, that will never happen either in the world that we live in. We were born too late in the game; the internet is an asset, but it's completely counteracted by television and the culture-creation industry. It's too late, the individual is already too controlled, and even those who break free end up stuck and unable to organize effectively to resist their own enslavement.
Sad message, but humanity has already lost, and we're just going through the motions. The only thing we have to look forward to is the fact that the sociopaths are eventually going to turn on each other - as all good sociopaths do - once cooperation is no longer necessary, and the first throne of the world comes into view. They will all begin fighting over which one of them, which family, gets to have their names etched into stone as the 'first ruler of the world' - but even that is just a metaphor, as the public faces given to the people in the form of chairmanships and presidencies are NEVER who is actually in charge, and that's been true since ancient Egypt and even earlier. Eventually, when they no longer have the fear that they constantly live in(which, really, is what the entire system of 'governance' is based on) of the masses, once they have us all psychologically broken or chipped to a point where we can no longer even consider offering resistance, they'll no longer need to collaborate, and the wars between them will begin.
12 [deleted] 2012-03-05
Your argument is correct, but I can sum up the problem with it in three words: bread and circus.
A populous with access to hundreds of cable TV channels and government subsidized corn is going to be a bit sluggish when it comes to changing status quo.
3 no1113 2012-03-05
Bread and Circus. This.
And you know what happens? When one begins to suggest change, a lot of time, people living fat off bread and circus get very aggravated at you for suggesting anything that might cause them to have to go against what they're used to.
That's already happened on this very thread.
Doesn't bode well for us as a people, unfortunately.
12 thecircusb0y 2012-03-05
Meaningless post.Preparethedownvotes.
Your whole post can be summed up in one simple quote; *"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". *
You're stating the obvious(At least to me to me it's the obvious.). I'm not just gonna start walking down the street to protest, especially since they're making it illegal. I've got a job and a family to take care of. I consider myself a slave to teh system as long as I have financial debt.
You know what I do?
Write my congressman monthly, with questions and comments.
Attend town hall meetings, it's the hipster form of reddit; it was the way we used to congregate and discuss things.
Make sure my representatives hear my voice. If everybody did this regularly, and hounded their congressmen, to make them earn that pay and pension, shit might change more, until they make it illegal to hound your congressmen.
Thanks for playing the game of mass hysteria, but I prefer a goal with a plan and direction over brute force dead reckoning(taking to the streets).
Vote Ron Paul 2012.
5 clearintent 2012-03-05
You're awake. The majority of this country is not. They're slumbering in their reality TV induced comas, voting for who the MSM tells them to vote for, and waiting for someone to save them.
I didn't take from the OP's post that he/she is advocating taking to the streets. I like the actions that you take and would recommend them to others as well.
2 thecircusb0y 2012-03-05
I like to think of it as I've opened my reality up to a larger world beyond the compromised manufactured consent I've grown up with. I honestly have the internet to thank for that, because I grew up communication/socializing with people of different race/religion/creeds and couldn't give two shits about the stereotypes and misinformation in mainstream media/politics. But America the war machine needs to have a strict specification of weight on topics and opinions to lubricate the cogs and gears in the execution of agendas.
On another note, here in NY, the sun is out, and it's fucking gorgeous today.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Very aware on your part. Fight the machine in whatever manner is best. Fighting in the streets is only one way - and not necessarily the best. Working within the system as it currently stands and functions, however, I also do not feel is the answer either.
I wouldn't go as far as to give thecircusb0y this much credit, however.
3 [deleted] 2012-03-05
I find your comment condescending. You could easily have made your points without coming off so smugly.
2 wessexstock 2012-03-05
IT'S TOO LATE FOR THAT
2 no1113 2012-03-05
I'm personally the first one to, at times, come off as such to people on here myself. My response to him may, in fact, be even more so than his to me. I don't know. All the same, I very much do agree with what you just said here.
-1 thecircusb0y 2012-03-05
You read my tone as smug, I wrote it as blunt honesty. The point is we can talk about actions all we like, but who is actually doing something? That's how people got in power, while everybody was talking, they were planning, executing, doing.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
It's not that obvious, since no one has ever done enough in this country to change the manipulation that's gone on. It's like a mother telling her kid "Clean your room." If the kid says "I know this, and you already stated the obvious." Then the mom should give that kid a slap upside his head and say "Well, you haven't DONE it yet. You haven't cleaned your room. So I'll simply keep TELLING you to clean your room until you actually DO IT."
Man, who cares what's made illegal or not in this respect. This mentality is 1) unfortunately indicative of many people in this country, and 2) the very reason why we will absolutely remain subjugated and become entirely enslaved.
Henry David Thoreau in his "Essay on Civil Disobedience" said:
"If injustice is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine."
But you're actually not taking care of that family when you continue to move along in a society where the appointed "leaders" of it function in such a manner that your family and the means you use to try to care for them are ultimately undermined and endangered. You don't see that? You're actually doing the opposite of taking care of your family by functioning in a manner that leads to their ultimate detriment - which not questioning and challenging the manipulation around you certainly leads to.
You're a slave to it so long as you continue buying into to the entire dynamic and manipulation that currently exists - debt or no debt.
Your congressman is impotent.
I would say that this certainly helps - as it at least begins to touch upon a person-to-person type of direct contact that is the beginning of galvanizing a people into awareness and action.
That's a very cheap (and "sheep") response on your part. It's a fallacy that ultimately falls on its own ignorance.
Yet another fallacy on your part, as 1) you imply that anyone who's not thinking like you doesn't have "a goal with a plan and direction", and is themselves even implying "brute force and dead reckoning". That is a total fail on your part. Also, 2) you make the mistake of thinking that your passive manner of going along with the system, paying your taxes, and occasionally writing your congressman makes an ultimate difference in that big picture that has led ultimately to a significant degradation of society and it's people. Your actions don't help anywhere near as much as you think they in this respect.
Sheep are only there to get used, slaughtered, and eaten by wolves.
Stop being one.
0 thecircusb0y 2012-03-05
My implication was towards you, and yes I assumed you had no plan or direction since you didn't just cut to the chase in the first place.
My passive manner is discussed openly on this forum because they are accepted currently by this system. Any of my active opposition will not be discussed on an open forum, or on unencrypted channels with strangers that could be government/corporate agents themselves just stirring up the melting pot looking to cause people to riot in the streets and cause massive chaos so the government can declare Marshall law and cancel the elections, there by removing the chances of getting Ron Paul into office.
Oh and if this makes /r/panichistory , What's up guys!
1 no1113 2012-03-05
You obviously assumed way wrong. Not the smartest approach on your part.
10 jkd42 2012-03-05
You're going to have to be a little more specific than that. "We need to stand up and move" isn't a profound epiphany for most people. I was at the WTO protests in seattle over a decade ago and thought for sure we must be on the verge of change. Nothing. Things got worse. I see Obama get elected. "This is clearly change." Nothing. Things got worse. OWS, a mass movement sweeps the nation... you get the idea. Anyone trying to do anything effective is quickly arrested. Any politician that's a threat is marginalized. Half the country thinks OWS is just lazy hippies making puppets. All my youthful optimism is gone. I think its time to read /r/collapse and just prepare for the end.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
Okay.
March with OWS, for example.
Write intelligent articles critical of the system and blog/publish them.
Make copies of some of those articles, go out on your busiest downtown corner, and hand them out to people.
Arm yourself with your camcorder and go out to political hot spots and police the police.
Neither is 1+1=2, but it still the Truth. I'm not here trying to present a "profound epiphany for most people" as much as I'm simply stating a fact as I see it. If people only speak when they think they have some sort of "profound genius" to impart, then 99% of the population will absolutely use that as an excuse to simply not say anything and keep their mouth shut.
This would be a very, very bad thing. A great majority of amazing things on this planet come not from amazing moments of genius epiphany, but from the common grounds of humble, unobtrusive and persistent work.
Therein lies the foundation of most works and acts of perceived "genius" - in the persistence and work it took behind the scenes to get things done in the first place.
Reading some of the things you just said, I understand the frustration that sets in when you don't see "change" happen.
What you have to understand is that things are so bad that nothing is going to happen immediately or over night. You have to just go, and go, and keep going. Someone that says "I went to such and such place, and had great hopes, but by the next week (month, season), things didn't get much better, so it's likely the movement is useless" is entirely missing the point.
You have to keep at it and not depend on others to galvanize you. You have to galvanize and motivate yourself.
So then replace it with the cranky, orneriness of an old fogy that simply refuses to say "Yes, master" to the system and keeps moving forward. You don't need "youthful optimism" to keep going. Youthful optimism is often easy to beat because it gets discouraged and quits if things don't go its way after a while. What's needed is the discipline of the aged and experienced warrior that goes into battle with a face that is serious and cold with the willingness to not stop fighting until its cause is heard and won.
Very well, then. So then prepare for the end. But do so WISELY. If you're going to prepare for the end, do so by getting your mind and your soul/spirit in order. Be responsible, be open and kind to people, move forward and protect those you see that are getting taken advantage of . . . do RIGHT.
The coming of the end is all the more reason for you to not stand by idly and allow for the kinds of repressions that you feel you would otherwise stand up to.
10 satorinirie 2012-03-05
Fuck the government. Fuck the state. Fuck capitalism. These systems funnel power, wealth, resources, and information away from the citizens to further the gap of power between the ruling elite and citizens. What we need, is community organizing and action. What we need, is to convince everyone the state doesn't give a fuck about them, the state is here to protect the state. When people see the puzzle of how they've been exploited from the beginning of colonialism, well I don't feel bad that they end up under a system of tyranny. However, if people realize these things, and decide to take responsibility for their lives and communities, then we'll have change. But, the system won't do it for us, for our interests are not theirs. We can't look to anyone but ourselves as a whole to create the change we must see. Occupy was a good start, but like it's been said, it's been hijacked and lost momentum. We need everyday citizens involved in their communities, not just anarchists and hippies. I plan to organize around growing food and sustainability, for everyone eats and needs the Earth to survive. But until we get past this fucking savior bull shit, we're doomed to be under the rule of the state as it furthers into an ever more oppressive system of control. We need all sorts of action and information to get people to wake up and want to act.
3 permanomad 2012-03-05
Fuck that was good to read. Could not agree more, lets hope theres enough time left to wake up the rest.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
This.
Absolutely agreed.
9 [deleted] 2012-03-05
The best way to defeat the tyranny is use your money. Stop buying from big name food companies and start buying local more healthy food. For your health as well. Shop at local business not big department stores. And use your money to buy real assets don't just put it in a globalist bank. If just a few more of the population did this it would devastate to controllers and their prison planet.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
While I'm not sure if it's the best way, I entirely and wholeheartedly agree with what you said. Absolutely.
-2 abadeop 2012-03-05
Bullshit, that's like saying you can solve the energy crisis by buying a few solar panels. 99% of people will keep shopping at Walmart and buying GMO food, you have good intentions but don't delude yourself into thinking you will change shit by how you spend your money.
4 [deleted] 2012-03-05
i said if more people do it. more people buy organic food everyday. the natural food industry is exploding
3 no1113 2012-03-05
But if 99% of the people still keep shopping at Walmart, then that's NOT what he's saying. He's saying things would change if EVERYONE did this.
And he/she is right.
5 hashmon 2012-03-05
@ jkd42- I was at Seattle '99, too. We did have incredible momentum, and what happened was 9/11 (inside job) that pulled the rug out from under it. Being naive and thinking Obama is going to be any different isn't going to help anything, and getting nihilistic and into "civilization collapse" crap is just pathetic. We need to get smarter and more historically aware. It's sure as hell not going to be an easy fight.
0 no1113 2012-03-05
This.
4 troller10 2012-03-05
Agreed
4 djThelema 2012-03-05
This nation is failing by design. nothing we can do will save it. We can in truth only save ourselves, our children, and maybe our friends.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
Absolutely. Correct. I agree. All you can do is save yourself. However, often the best way to save yourself is to band together with like-minded people. The more like-minded people you can band with, the better your chances are often-time at saving yourself.
It would be a good thing if all of the 99% banded together and dropped whatever differences they had in order to become sufficiently "like-minded" and stand up powerfully and overthrow the 1%. Then, as you said, they (we) can take care of their children and friends.
4 Ghostfacee77 2012-03-05
3) He will probley get shot.
4 cajunman4life 2012-03-05
I've long worried that should Ron Paul win, he would go the way of JFK. And it would be relatively quick into his presidency.
0 thrasher6143 2012-03-05
Pretty surprised it didn't happen to Obama
5 SatOnMyNutsAgain 2012-03-05
Ya because he's so anti-corruption / anti-bankster / anti-war.
4 permanomad 2012-03-05
Hmmm, I wonder why he's still alive then...
2 no1113 2012-03-05
See what I typed above.
http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/qibbf/even_if_ron_paul_wins_the_presidency/c3y1idz
2 clearintent 2012-03-05
Obama had lots of promises in his campaign, but when he got in to office, he did everything to please the elite. He fell right into their plan of subjugating and instilling fear (of terrorism) in the people. Look how many more of our freedoms are taken away now. The whole uproar over him by the Republicans is just a dog and pony show to distract from real issues like the NDAA.
2 thrasher6143 2012-03-05
I absolutely agree. Our freedoms are being taken one by one. They distract with something big and pass something so vague and general that we have no idea how much trouble we are really in!
2 clearintent 2012-03-05
Obama had lots of promises in his campaign, but when he got in to office, he did everything to please the elite. He fell right into their plan of subjugating and instilling fear (of terrorism) in the people. Look how many more of our freedoms are taken away now. The whole uproar over him by the Republicans is just a dog and pony show to distract from real issues like the NDAA.
1 Politikr 2012-03-05
I wonder, very hypothetical. I have pondered it for awhile. I wonder if they let them spout off, and promise and promise and have great intentions. They get elected, first speech, yada yada. After a bit, they get the first of what must be many, briefings, meetings, councils convened. That sort of thing. The cold hard facts are bluntly thrown down for everyone to see, and all the supposed idealism, is swept away? At that moment, the president, just-inaugurated, has the opportunity to say, NO. None have. Just a thought.
1 clearintent 2012-03-05
I think you're spot on in your hypothesis.
2 [deleted] 2012-03-05
Really? I don't think it's the elite's policy to shoot one of their own. They are more likely to smear Obama with a sex scandal, a la Dominique Strauss-Kahn, than kill him if he gets out of line. Judging by his actions that won't be soon... Although a part of me thinks they've got the tapes all cued up and ready to go when he slips. Breitbart probably found them. Unfortunately for him, he found them too soon.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
I was surprised too, until I got a better, clearer view that what he is is Bush Jr. 2.0. Of course he's not going to get shot if what he's doing is forwarding the NWO agenda even faster than ever before.
The point behind his being elected was to satiate the people and get them/us to stay still and quiet for a moment thinking "Ahhh . . . We really ARE moving forward. We ARE changing. We as a people ARE in good hands! See? This country IS good! We even elected someone that's half African to the presidency! Boy, I'm proud to be an American! For at least I know I'm FREE!!" lol
And bam. When the American people went back to sleep again, the NWO used Obama to move forward even faster.
Woke the people up w/Bush Jr. and the bullshit 911 false flag. Put'em back to sleep w/Obama.
If they would have assassinated Obama, then the people would have known even FASTER what a lot of us already know - that this government has been taken over for a long, long time by, among other things, corporate and money interests that are NOT interested in helping the people.
Obama's just there to confuse everyone. He's a HUGE smokescreen.
3 LegioIXHispana 2012-03-05
Indeed. Honestly though, I highly doubt that RP will ever get elected; how many times has he tried now despite a seemingly overwhelming amount of support? Either he doesn't truly have enough support or he is being cheated out of the election. Either way, I agree with your message, OP.
4 morasso 2012-03-05
It ultimately comes down to delegates though, and although the media loves mask this (as all their projected delegate counts are wrong) Ron Paul is second place right now with delegates.
There is a chance he can win, but he's totally reliant on the supporters.
It's not over until it's over.
1 enjoiturbulence 2012-03-05
Paul is 4th in delegate count. 23 to Romney's 180, Santorum's 90, and Gingrich's 29.
4 morasso 2012-03-05
None of the delegates are set in stone right now. Also, using the WSJ and NYTs as a source? Comon now...
1 enjoiturbulence 2012-03-05
That was from NYT. WSJ has him at 4th with 25.
1 clearintent 2012-03-05
If by some means RP ever did get elected, he would refuse to bow to the pressures placed on the office by the corporatocracy and would probably be dealt with like JFK was.
2 [deleted] 2012-03-05
Ron Paul is the only one who can maybe fix our broken system. Unfortunately, because he wants to end the fed and other government agencies, he won't win.
2 abadeop 2012-03-05
Hey I could fix it, just gimmie a shot.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
No he's not. Absolutely not. And that's part of the problem. Too many people are relying on "another" to help them "fix the broken system".
The only "one" who can fix the broken system is The People. It doesn't matter if there is any "one" person or individual that has the ability to lead if the people are too stupid, indolent, ignorant, and lazy to follow.
Even here, however, what's needed is not someone to lead people, but a manner in which each and every individual can be a leader in themselves and have the personal responsibility to do the right thing withOUT needing some sort of parental government to tell them what to do and what not to do.
1 Nobody_special 2012-03-05
Exactly. They can't let him win.
2 sacrimony 2012-03-05
Ron Paul is lucky to be alive. If he wasn't a dennis Kuschinich type looks-wise, he'd be more of a threat.
2 hashmon 2012-03-05
What we also need is more progressive, honest people running for office. Why not you?
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Because it is the "OFFICE" itself that is just as - if not more - corrupt than the people in it. Regardless of whether one enters into office with good intentions or not (and I would say that most are entirely spoiled and putrid long before they even get in office), the underhanded rigors of political influences find a way to entirely destroy whatever decency almost anyone has coming into it.
What we need is not more progressive, honest people running for office. What we need is a revolutionizing of the system of politics in general in this country and a galvanizing of the people enough for us to realize that it is WE that have the power, and not any supposed representative that, in reality, rarely if ever represents the people.
2 [deleted] 2012-03-05
A politician is a politician is a politician.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
I would absolutely - and unfortunately - agree with this entirely. This, again, is the very reason why we need to make sure and move of our OWN volition, and not depend upon any politician, or the white house, or politics in general to dictate to us what should and needs to happen.
2 EyesfurtherUp 2012-03-05
If you think just voting for pres will change things, I got a bridge to sell you. We have to support our choice with effort. Otherwise he becomes a sacrificial lamb instead of a leader.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
I have no idea whatsoever where you could have even possibly gotten the idea that I thought or even implied that voting as it stands in this country could ever make any sort of difference. I couldn't agree more with this statement - so much so, as a matter of fact, that I'm, again, wondering how you could have ever possibly thought that I said anything of the sort.
Absolutely. This is part of my whole point, sir.
Again, I couldn't agree more, and wonder where you thought I said otherwise.
2 EyesfurtherUp 2012-03-05
I apologize I wasn't trying to be argumentative. I was just making a statement.
Ps I could totally see why you thought I was being argumentative . Again my apologies.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
No worries. Textual communication often leaves much to be desired in the way of effective idea transmission. :)
Best,
1 g00dis0n 2012-03-05
You're just a commy/hippy/insert-other-name-here.
Its getting rid of those old attitudes which needs to happen first; for the people to realise we're all being enslaved.
2 ordinary-people 2012-03-05
fucking labels, I hate them so much...
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Explain what about this post comes across to you as "commy/hippy/etc". I don't see what you're referring to.
Getting rid of old attitudes is indeed recommended. I fail to see how the OP fails to go against this idea.
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
[deleted]
2 no1113 2012-03-05
Neither Ron Paul nor Obama, nor any president is going to make a difference in this country one way or the other if we the people don't stand up and RUN things together on our own.
Think about that.
1 yesterdayman 2012-03-05
Even if pigs could fly, they would be silenced in the interests of the meat industry
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Not if six billion people stood up and marched as one against the lies and those that impose them.
1 yesterdayman 2012-03-05
Meaningless rhetoric
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Absolutely. If one as a person and an individual continue to sit idly and do nothing, then yes. You are right. It is indeed nothing but meaningless rhetoric.
EDIT: It seems that I made a mistake in thinking you were responding to my OP and saying that what I wrote was "meaningless rhetoric" and not yesterdayman's comment. I apologize, as I originally read your comment in isolation and didn't realize that it didn't refer to me.
1 yesterdayman 2012-03-05
But if you plan on marching upon lies it is a battle plan. What would you propose six billion people do to throw off the lies and oppression
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Firstly, did you read my "Edit"? It might help clear up my original statement.
Secondly, and to respond to your question, let me begin by asking what exactly you meant with your first statement:
Marching against lies is a good thing, whether it constitutes a battle plan or not.
Ha. Well, just that. Throw off the lies and oppression. Realize that this is a world of lies and chicanery, and religion (and even science) has been put in place to divide and separate us, not to unite us in commonality - which would be a position of much greater overall strength, vitality, and prosperity for the species in general.
1 UpInNope 2012-03-05
A citizen is a subject of the federal government. WE the PEOPLE are its master.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
If the citizen is a subject of the Fed, then that means that the FED is the one who is the master, not the people. Perhaps you misspoke or were a little confused about what you intended to mean.
If we the people are the master (which I happen to agree with), then we the people need to ACT like the master and stop acting like the slaves we have certainly allowed ourselves to become.
1 UpInNope 2012-03-05
The citizen is the subject (the slave). The people are the sovereign.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Perhaps it is a semantic confusion or miscommunication that is going on here. I was/am equating the citizenry and the people.
As I make this distinction, however, I'm actually failing to see what the actual difference is between the people and the citizen - besides, of course, the fact that "the citizen" is the singular of the plural "people".
As such, the people AND the citizen are both slave and sovereign depending upon the circumstance. I'm making the point that both should be the latter (i.e. sovereign - at least of their being, their property, and their attempts at earning an honorable living).
1 UpInNope 2012-03-05
"the citizen" is not the singular of the people, you are mistaken. Once again a citizen is subject. By definition a citizen can not be sovereign. This is how they get us.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
I get it. You're working within the law and the definitions of the establishment. What I'm, again, saying is plain and simple. FUCK the strawman. Fuck the citizen. Fuck the subject. Fuck the distinctions.
I know what I am. You know (or should know) what you are.
You're an individual. Whether you want to call that an individual or not - or go by the government's stipulation of what that is or not in order to legally bind you, etc - doesn't matter. The point is that the individual people need to stand up and work against what's going on.
The citizen even would not and could not be a slave or a subject if each and every one of those citizens/people stood up and moved against the powers that be.
Simple as that.
And that's the point.
1 UpInNope 2012-03-05
I got the point in the first place. Im just saying you don't do it as the citizen you do it as the people.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
And I say that you can't do it as a people if you don't do it as an individual. I called that individual a citizen. As "a citizen", I mean one who "legally" calls themselves "an American", etc. If I was mistaken in that based upon some legal minutia, then so be it. I'll still say that that's totally beside and beyond the point.
Stand up as an INDIVIDUAL (citizen or non citizen - whatever one wants to call it). Stand up as a PEOPLE.
Just STAND UP and move against what's happening.
That is all.
1 icat 2012-03-05
To have a healthy democracy, there is need for an opposition. What is the opposite against corporatism?.
2 no1113 2012-03-05
To have a healthy world you need to cut opposition - especially the kind that exits on this planet - to a minimum.
It would seem Collectivism. "Cooperatism"
1 goofproofacorn 2012-03-05
they will kill him just like JFK
1 SilentNick3 2012-03-05
Most of the United States doesn't give a shit about Ron Paul. Polling at 3% in GA, for example.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Ron Paul is beside the point of this post, however. I mentioned him only as an example of the one individual in politics who seems most willing to actually change the horrible and horrendous status quo that we've been in, and how it is US as a citizenry that have the real responsibility of getting up and changing things - not any politician regardless of how apt he might seem to want to be to change things (like RP).
-3 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
OWS is most certainly not a step in the right direction. It has been hijacked by sick fucks like Van Jones and media matters and other scumbag organizations just like them.
We do need to force a change in how this system works because its not working for us right now.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
That's the VERY reason to force a change. If the system isn't working for us, then that's the very reason to make sure and effect a change. I'm not understanding the logic here at all actually.
The system doesn't work "right now" and has almost NEVER at any time actually worked.
Yes. It is indeed time for a change - and that change will not come at the hands of the present system as it stands.
1 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
Point is, people think OWS is working for them and its not. Its been hijacked and is serving select groups.
We need real change, not whiney raise the minimum wage change. Its bigger than that.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Big deal. Don't get yourself stuck on OWS. Don't make the mistake of putting too much energy on OWS. It may not be working optimally, but it is certainly working better than any other movement that's come out in response to the 1% b.s. I'm all for something else happening that's different, better, and more effective than OWS.
Voting and working within the system is certainly not the answer.
However, SOMETHING has to get done.
First of all, to equate OWS with "whiney raise the m.w. change" is entirely and completely ignorant on your or anyone's part. This is completely and entirely blind to many of the other issues being raised. Ultimately, however, that's beside the point, because I - again - very much do agree with you. We DO need real change. The issues ARE indeed bigger than that. MUCH bigger.
However, you must understand that right now there is NO ONE ELSE that has had the balls to step up to the plate other than OWS. No other Americans have had the courage to stand up en mass and say "This is wrong".
I'm all for another movement that is better and stronger - like I said earlier. Or, heck, I'm all for INDIVIDUALS standing up and simply making statements on their own and by themselves independent of ANYONE. Ultimately that's the BEST way.
However - and although I agree that the issues are a lot bigger than OWS alone - they are at least attempting a type of statement that apparently no one else in the U.S. is standing up to make. For that reason alone I support it.
0 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
Id say its pretty clear that Im not stuck on OWS. Just replied to a topic about it lol.
Unfortunately its really not. This was towards the top of their very sketchy list of things they want after contemplating it for almost a year lol.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
So these are the only two things in the entire list of things I mentioned that you decided to respond to?
Yeah, man. You're definitely stuck on OWS. Again, big deal, man. The issues are much bigger than that. Get over it. Move on and try to be constructive with whatever change you try to make for the better - if any.
Best,
0 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
Get over yourself. I responded to the 2 things you challenged me on for the lack of a better term.
Everything else you said was run of the mill declarative statements. Not much I can do there but pat you on the back.
There is no list anywhere in all that.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
If the only points you thought were made were two measly things that I said directly to you and you entirely missed all the other even more relevant things that I mentioned, calling them "run of the mill", then you obviously weren't paying attention.
This, of course, is convenient to you, as you only responded to the most inconsequential things I said and entirely missed the bigger, real issues mentioned.
Anyway, you're ultimately only doing yourself a disservice by having such blinders on.
Oh well. Meh.
1 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
You must be joking.
Here then:
Ok. This is agreeable.
Obviously not.
We have covered this.
Right , we covered this as well.
Agreeable statement and goes without saying really.
Same thing as the previous sentence with different words. I can agree again if you'd like.
As are most of us. Again, this goes without saying.
Those are great views on the topic of how to spark a change. Really nothing for me to do here either.
You just said this.
You just said this too. What do you want from me?
Ok, excellent. Want me to debate you for an hour? .
.
.
Nearly everything you said was inconsequential. You are giving yourself far too much credit here.
The only disservice here is you convincing yourself that there was some sort of plethora of information for me to digest.
Cmon now.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
In the final analysis, the point is and should be the the government and the 1% are nefarious and taking advantage of the people. Attempting to effect any change in the government by working through the system of government and politics as it currently stands is an exercise in absolute futility.
Making any statement pro or con about OWS - as you initially came on here to do - is also ultimately pointless since it is YOU as an individual that has to get up and act accordingly against what's happening in this country independent of any movement.
1 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
Look, my comment was aimed at 1 specific thing that the OP said. It should be understood that I agree with the general theme of his comment just that his views on OWS are misguided.
It was your choice to focus on my simple comment and blow it out of proportion. You made it much more than just a simple comment.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
One, the OWS views don't seem in the least misguided. Two, it's also been my choice to no longer bring it up, and yet you continue on with it.
1 cgeezy22 2012-03-05
One: Your last 2 comments:
Previous post:
Thus my continued response to it.
Two: A lot of their demands are fine. Some of them are quite shady.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
Regardless, the overall point is that as far as a mass movement demonstrating against the repression and manipulation of the government, the OWS is the absolute best that has happened up to this point. That it has as many failings as it does speaks more toward the failings of the general populace to form anything better than it does of OWS. Either way, lets please simply stop discussing OWS.
That, again, is not the point of the OP, and should not necessarily be the point in this dialogue here as well.
The point is simply that the citizens need to work against the power structures that exists on this planet and the manner in which they (the 1%) subjugate, limit, and enslave us.
-13 J973 2012-03-05
Why in the Hell would anyone want to end the Federal Reserve Bank? Did any of you little morons actually live with someone who lived through the Great Depression? I was raised in the home with my Great Grandmother who raised 10 children during the Depression. We don't want a repeat of that. There IS A REASON for the Federal Reserve and frankly every Social Program. The reason is to keep the masses from becoming so desperate that they finally rise up against the Government and the rich. We would have had something like the French Revolution long ago if people's children were starving to death. Instead we give them $200 a month in food stamps a month.
Let the downvotes begin. I am not a fan of old Ron Paul. I think he is a fucking fruitcake nut-bag and Reddit is a bunch of fucking idealistic retards.
7 sparkle_and_shine 2012-03-05
Obviously you're uninformed, let me explain: the Federal Reserve is a private, centralized bank that does not work for the US gov't, it loans the gov't money - money which is backed by absolutely nothing - at interest. This is where our perpetual, neverending debt comes from. Even if every dollar in the US was given back to the Federal Reserve BANK, how are we supposed to pay back the interest for the loan? The system was designed to fail and the bankers knew that. It was a way to keep us in their pockets. Judging by your colorful language, Im going to go out on a limb and say you didn't grow up in the Depression either (which was mostly caused by war, manipulation by bankers led people to believe that without a centralized bank their money wasn't secure, after perpetrated collapsing of other banks by the exact same people) They removed the gold standard by threat of imprisonment and gave people paper money which isn't backed by anything at all, it's legal tender for public/private DEBTS! The fed manipulated a depressed nation into believing they needed the Fed to survive, even though a central bank, interest rates and taxation on money is ultimately what led to the American revolution. The Founding Fathers, although are by no means saints, warned people of banking institutions and the dangers that would come attached if we ever allowed private banks to control our monetary system.
I would suggest that instead of ignorantly relying on word of mouth that you read a goddamn book and educate yourself instead of trying to make a condescending point on a subject you are obviously uneducated in... because nothing is more annoying than an uninformed FUCKING RETARD who pretends to know what he's talking about because someone he knows told him so without having any first hand knowledge himself, or any way to logically prove his argument that the FEDERAL RESERVE did ANYTHING besides put us in debt, thanks to people who did live in the depression and LET international banking crooks take over our monetary system their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren are left with nothing but a debt we can never repay.
THANKS A FUCKING LOT, GRANDMA!!!
5 morasso 2012-03-05
Recommend you do some more research into what the Federal Reserve is, and what it does.
The FDIC and the Federal Reserve aren't the same thing.
2 9000sins 2012-03-05
you obviously don't get the federal reserve, and feel great about attacking those who do understand it.
1 J973 2012-03-05
Or maybe it's you that doesn't understand it, and that is why you like Ron Paul. That sweet old doctor that doesn't think the Government should be helping Tornado victims. What an evil bastard. Reddit needs to cool it's hard on for him.
1 9000sins 2012-03-05
You just think he's evil because you do not understand. I see where you are coming from, and it's perfectly reasonable to think this is wrong when you don't fully understand his position. The media lies about paul by omission.
2 ordinary-people 2012-03-05
The French Revolution may be the best thing that ever happened to Europe and the World, you guys should give it a try :P
1 J973 2012-03-05
Off with their heads? :)
0 [deleted] 2012-03-05
Welfare is the most retarded concept ever created in the history of mankind.
1 9000sins 2012-03-05
welfare was originally supposed to be a temporary thing, but somehow it ended up sticking around forever. it's not a bad thing when done correctly, but it is not being used like that.
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
especially when 1 third of the population is on disability thats just ridiculous. how about getting healthy and finding a job. people should learn that you have to take care of yourself. it doesn't help when people are so sick because of their lifestyles and diets. thats a big part of the issue.
1 9000sins 2012-03-05
Getting healthy? How does someone do that without medical care?
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
oh you didn't know health had to do with more than a visit to the doctor? your diet and lifestyle have more to do with that than anything. most people are unhealthy because of the food they eat and the way they live that needs to change
1 ordinary-people 2012-03-05
Say that again once you are 70. What progressive First World Country just lets their elderly suffer and die? I'm not saying the way it is now is good or perfect, but not having welfare is just crazy.
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
Its called taking care of yourself. some people need it but if the economy was better it wouldnt matter but since theres no jobs people often have to go on welfare or disability.
0 thrasher6143 2012-03-05
Pretty surprised it didn't happen to Obama
5 morasso 2012-03-05
Recommend you do some more research into what the Federal Reserve is, and what it does.
The FDIC and the Federal Reserve aren't the same thing.
0 [deleted] 2012-03-05
Welfare is the most retarded concept ever created in the history of mankind.
7 sparkle_and_shine 2012-03-05
Obviously you're uninformed, let me explain: the Federal Reserve is a private, centralized bank that does not work for the US gov't, it loans the gov't money - money which is backed by absolutely nothing - at interest. This is where our perpetual, neverending debt comes from. Even if every dollar in the US was given back to the Federal Reserve BANK, how are we supposed to pay back the interest for the loan? The system was designed to fail and the bankers knew that. It was a way to keep us in their pockets. Judging by your colorful language, Im going to go out on a limb and say you didn't grow up in the Depression either (which was mostly caused by war, manipulation by bankers led people to believe that without a centralized bank their money wasn't secure, after perpetrated collapsing of other banks by the exact same people) They removed the gold standard by threat of imprisonment and gave people paper money which isn't backed by anything at all, it's legal tender for public/private DEBTS! The fed manipulated a depressed nation into believing they needed the Fed to survive, even though a central bank, interest rates and taxation on money is ultimately what led to the American revolution. The Founding Fathers, although are by no means saints, warned people of banking institutions and the dangers that would come attached if we ever allowed private banks to control our monetary system.
I would suggest that instead of ignorantly relying on word of mouth that you read a goddamn book and educate yourself instead of trying to make a condescending point on a subject you are obviously uneducated in... because nothing is more annoying than an uninformed FUCKING RETARD who pretends to know what he's talking about because someone he knows told him so without having any first hand knowledge himself, or any way to logically prove his argument that the FEDERAL RESERVE did ANYTHING besides put us in debt, thanks to people who did live in the depression and LET international banking crooks take over our monetary system their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren are left with nothing but a debt we can never repay.
THANKS A FUCKING LOT, GRANDMA!!!
2 wessexstock 2012-03-05
IT'S TOO LATE FOR THAT
-1 thecircusb0y 2012-03-05
You read my tone as smug, I wrote it as blunt honesty. The point is we can talk about actions all we like, but who is actually doing something? That's how people got in power, while everybody was talking, they were planning, executing, doing.
2 9000sins 2012-03-05
you obviously don't get the federal reserve, and feel great about attacking those who do understand it.
2 ordinary-people 2012-03-05
The French Revolution may be the best thing that ever happened to Europe and the World, you guys should give it a try :P
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
especially when 1 third of the population is on disability thats just ridiculous. how about getting healthy and finding a job. people should learn that you have to take care of yourself. it doesn't help when people are so sick because of their lifestyles and diets. thats a big part of the issue.
1 [deleted] 2012-03-05
oh you didn't know health had to do with more than a visit to the doctor? your diet and lifestyle have more to do with that than anything. most people are unhealthy because of the food they eat and the way they live that needs to change
2 no1113 2012-03-05
I'm personally the first one to, at times, come off as such to people on here myself. My response to him may, in fact, be even more so than his to me. I don't know. All the same, I very much do agree with what you just said here.
1 J973 2012-03-05
Off with their heads? :)
1 9000sins 2012-03-05
You just think he's evil because you do not understand. I see where you are coming from, and it's perfectly reasonable to think this is wrong when you don't fully understand his position. The media lies about paul by omission.
1 no1113 2012-03-05
You obviously assumed way wrong. Not the smartest approach on your part.