As a matter of fact, he’s right

As a matter of fact, he’s right February 21, 2012

Ron Paul is quite right:

“We’ve slipped away from a true Republic,” Paul said. “Now we’re slipping into a fascist system where it’s a combination of government and big business and authoritarian rule and the suppression of the individual rights of each and every American citizen.”

That’s because it’s not left vs. right anymore.  It’s our ruling class vs. the rest of us.

"What makes it "denigrating" or a "non-response"? Jesus didn't write the gospels. There is an ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
""Disingenuous? No. Sarcastic, yes."No, disingenuous. In a discussion about what the Catholic Church actually believes ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"Disingenuous? No. Sarcastic, yes.I don't want to get into a discussion about the reliability of ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"That's a disingenuous response. If you want to argue the reliability of the Gospels in ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Mark S. (not for Shea)

    Ron Paul is absolutely right on that. He has diagnosed the disease perfectly. Unfortunately, his “cure” not only wouldn’t work, it would make things worse.

    You don’t cure a headache by decapitation.

    • Dave

      I wouldn’t call balancing the federal budget “decapitation”, but I can see how it would seem that way, since we’re overspending so ridiculously.

    • William

      Of course the cure is going to be painful.

  • Tominellay

    Of course he’s right, again, and his solutions will certainly work. He advocates stopping what we’ve been doing and changing our failing policies. He advocates returning to the principles that brought the U.S.A. great success in the first place.

  • Thomas R

    I’m glad I’m giving up the Internet for Lent.

    Anyway if you know anything about fascism, anything at all, you know that this is way off bordering on bonkers. I think people read the word “corporatism” in regard to Fascism and then think it’s all just about the military-industrial complex. I saw this on the Left a good deal during the Bush years.

    Here’s some links to reading material that I hope will help you not be quite so misguided.

    • Asclepius

      “Fascism” is a throwaway word, kind of like “communism.” Of course people are going to abuse them.

      Me personally, I’m not even sure who this “ruling class” supposedly is, because what we’re facing is not a “class” of people but a concerted effort to redefine what it means to be American, Constitution be damned. This comes not so much from a “class” of people, but by political movement encompassing classes all across the board.

      Last Point: Amen, Amen I say to you: nobody much cries about “Big Business” when the economy is strong, and those “Big Businesses” are doing what they’re supposed to be doing. Why is that? Ah, yes: it’s because people are living off the fruit of the vine.

      When we get to the point where people are complaining during an economic upswing, then bring your doom and gloom about Big Business my way, Mr. Paul. You’ll be laughed out of the public forum, but at least I’ll respect you for your consistency.

      • Thomas R

        Yes, but it’s a throwaway word that irritates me. Fascism and Communism were, or are in the case of Communism, both real things that hurt real people.

        There are some pretty scary civil liberties concerns right now, and the mandate is close to “nothing outside the state, nothing besides the state”, but Fascism was noted for a one party state that demanded devotion to the State and wasn’t particularly fond of capitalism. And it, and Nazism did change things gradually over a period of decades. The Nuremberg Laws look to have occurred just two years after Hitler became Chancellor. Blessed Pier Giorgio Frassati was attacked by Fascists within three years of the “March on Rome.” So even if it’s futile I do wish people realized words have meaning and affected real people.

        • Thomas R

          I meant to say they didn’t change things all that gradually. Six years after Hitler became Chancellor WWII began. (As it began in 1939)

  • They will work…that’s why the media has painted him as a keeeerazeee loon, aided and abetted by the elites in both the demz and gop.

  • Tom Connelly

    It’s not left vs. right anymore. It’s our ruling class vs. the rest of us.

    “The rest of us” vote for our ruling class election after election, so apparently they’re giving us what we want.

    The rest of us are the problem, not those who do our bidding.

    • Timbot2000

      SO when you vote John Jackson out and Jack Johnson in, what exactly will change?

      • Tom Connelly

        I have no idea, since you’ve told me nothing about Johnson and Jackson. However, I will say that I disagree with the planted axiom of your question.

        • Timbot2000

          As I disagree with yours.

  • I saw this quote from Ron Paul over the weekend also, which I loved:

    Education, Paul said, should be left up to state or local governments and communities. Parents need to take more responsibility.

    “What if those parents are dumb?” a journalist asked Paul during press interviews.

    Paul quipped back, “What if you get dumb government, and then you dumb down a whole society?”

  • Ron Paul is right and wrong. We are lacking both the SA and SS to make resistance futile. Ultimately what makes fascism somewhat stable is the beatings and killings. These are still rare enough that the process can be reversed. Reversing it is simple in concept, you identify laws that should be repealed and deliberately, you mobilize to get them repealed. Start with your local municipal code, if you have one. Move on to your county, if you have one of those, then clean out your state, and by the time you’ve gotten to the biggest job, the federal code, you’ve already done several important things
    1. Cleaned out a large chunk of the problem
    2. Worked out a method for doing this quickly and efficiently
    3. trained a cadre of political types who are attuned to the problem and willing to trade their vote on repeal for your votes, volunteer hours, and money for campaigns.

    The method is also simple, if tedious to execute
    1. identify your target government
    2. enumerate (list) all their laws, rules, regulations, and taxes
    3. go through the list one at a time and figure out if this one needs repeal and if so,
    4. repeal the offending item
    5. repeat the process (3-4) for each item on the list

    Coalitions will shift, be gracious about it and understand that you will not win every battle. Move on and circle back when previous battles create a better society so you can use that as evidence that this one also needs repeal.

    • Joseph

      Yeah, it’s that simple. Thanks! I’m glad that you’ve given us the secret that has only just been revealed after all of these years. Let’s get started now!

      I’m sorry to rain on your intellectual parade and I hate to be a pessimist, but I believe the US is like a cancer patient whose cancer has spread to every vital organ and even up the spine. Only a miracle can save this patient. And it’s obvious that the current treatment hasn’t been working. The steady applications of radiation have only given this patient internal and external burns, but hasn’t killed the cancer. The system is broken.

      We don’t “vote” for anyone. We get a choice between candidates that have been propped up by their respective parties (who are propped up by those who have the finances to back those respective parties). It’s a choice between gruel with gravel or gruel with glass… every time; all politicians leading us down the same hole.

      You think you have a cure, I think you’re an idealist. That said, I do what I can to help in the same way I’d stay by the side of my dying mother whose cancer has ravaged her body. But, other than prayer and the hope of a miracle, I’ve come to grips with the fact that it may be too late.

      • Joseph – If it gets you off the barcalounger and showing up at the zoning board to speak in favor of allowing a local business to expand and hire people, you go ahead and be pessimistic all you want. Chambers thought when he left communism that he was joining the losing side. His book Witness was still a powerful story.

    • Joseph

      You’re also counting on a majority to help “cleanse” the system as it currently works. The majority of Americans either have a twisted “personal Jesus” understanding of who God is or they don’t believe in the Christian God at all. When the True God is reduced to one’s personal whims or is forcefully purged from it, then it’s not possible for true “good” or proper cleansing to take place. Any such cleansing would be nothing more than superficial, if there is any at all. Much like the “Tea Party” fiasco. They pretended to represent the fed up citizens of the country. Once the Tea Partiers won their respective seats, it became evident that the movement was only a new, improved, shiny box that was hollow inside.

      This is the system. It is totally broken. You can’t expect Americans who are fascinated with new sitcoms on CBS to ever get engaged in the effort to properly cleanse it. Most people aren’t even aware of what’s going on right now.

      • “You can’t expect Americans who are fascinated with new sitcoms on CBS….” and get their news from Jon Stewart and Colbert…

        • Joseph

          Right… my reference to CBS sitcoms isn’t to be taken literal, it’s a metaphor for television (the “boob” tube), movies, etc.: all forms of mainstream entertainment media (which includes the “news”).

          • Adolfo

            It’s not meant to be taken literally, dear. He means an manufacturer of dairy products.

      • Actually, part of the work can be done during commercial breaks. For instance, there is currently no list of all taxing authorities in the USA. Some states, like my own Indiana, keep such a list. Others, such as Alabama, do not. It’s tough to iterate through all the government to scrape out the rot when you can’t even get a list of all the governments.

        Most of this stuff is not heroic. A lot of it can be done in small chunks of time. Some of it is stuff you can assign to your computer to do while you sleep. The work is currently not getting done. I’d like to change that.

  • Ron Paul seems to be the only candidate without a major flaw. It isn’t about left and right anymore. The left and the right need to take a breath and listen to the Church. I would appreciate any comments on my effort to make some sense out of this arena that you can find here:

    • Joseph

      He has a major flaw. He follows the Ayn Rand philosophy. That’s about as major as you can get.

      • dcs

        Paul is not an objectivist.

        • Not the other Will

          Or an Objectivist.

      • Maiki

        The one time I’ve seen him actually mention Ayn Rand in print, he says: “I consider Ayn Rand’s works worth reading, in spite of my strong disagreements with her on important matters”. That is not “following Ayn Rand’s Philosophy”. Both share some strains of Libertarianism, but so do many other Catholic and Christian thinkers.

        • Joseph

          Ah, interesting. I was under the impression that he was Atlas Shrugged incarnate. I’m glad you mentioned this. Can you link to the source? I’d be interested in reading it.

          • Maiki

            This is from the bibliography/additional reading section of Ron Paul’s Book “The Revolution: A Manifesto” — it was a book written circa the 2008 elections/economic collapse, so it has that bent to it, but it gives an overview of RPs positions/priorities.


          • Not the other Will

            Also, the commentariat who keep equating libertarians with Objectivists ignore the fact that Rand denounced those awful libertarians as “concept stealers”, because they had the effrontery to espouse anti-statist positions without espousing HER philosophy.

            • Joseph

              Well, I’ve never equated libertarians to objectivists. I was speaking only of Ron Paul himself. He obviously likes Ayn Rand so much that he named his son after her. I’m having a hard time believing that he is not an objectivist. When I read Ayn Rand, the first thought that comes to mind are the words of the serpent, “you can be like a god”. So, I could never be a fan of her philosophy and I certainly would never name my son after her.

              • C’mon Joseph…you’re just being lazy here. Rand is NOT named after Ayn Rand. His first name is actually Randal. He was known as Randy growing up. His wife shortened it to Rand, and it seems to be just a nickname.

                • Joseph

                  Ha, actually I was being lazy. Thanks for correcting me. So, Ron Paul is not an objectivist? Are you sure?

                  • Ron Paul is pro-life. Objectivists generally are not.

    • Thomas R

      “Ron Paul seems to be the only candidate without a major flaw.”

      If you mean in his personal life maybe. If you mean in any other way, hardly. His idea of federalism would allow states to practically be dictatorships if they wanted. His reverence for the Founding Fathers verges on idolatry. His expressions of dropping-out of all global organizations, and ending foreign aid, is at best delusional. At worst it represents a real callousness to the global poor. His view of the US before Medicare/Medicaid is almost laughably revisionist.

      If all you’re interested in is that the federal government not do bad things than he’s good, I suppose, but “good” to me is a bit more than just doing nothing.

      • You might want to read some Machiavelli. No, not the Prince, but his Discourses which is his manual on how to properly run a republic. A good piece of advice from the Discourses is that you should go back to your foundation when your society goes astray. We desperately need that sort of reset today in America.

  • Mark S (not for Shea)

    Libertarianism doesn’t work beyond the local level. Not unless you’re super rich.

    Paul is right that we are well on the way to true fascism. But he’s wrong that Libertarianism will save us. His policies would reign in Big Government while allowing Big Business free reign. That’s just trading one oppressive yoke for another.

    • You fail to realise that Big Government and Big Business are hand in glove. Paul does not espouse Big Business in favour of Big Government. I believe he is in favour of market based solutions, but that would mainly depend on small business and the market place more so than BB…and BG has to get smaller in order for that to happen.

      • Mark S (not for Shea)

        “You fail to realise that Big Government and Big Business are hand in glove.”

        Not at all. I’m very much aware of the fact. Our problem isn’t that Business or Government are too Big. Our problem is that they are the same thing now.

        But Paul’s Libertarianism would cripple government while allowing business free reign. It’s like getting rid of the rats in your house by burning your house down.

        • Joseph

          Exactly right. And, for kicks, let’s assume that Paul did win the election and somehow had enough power to reduce the size of Big Government. Big Business has already benefitted so much from our cannonball into the deep end of Big Government that it will not suddenly lighten the burden the duo has placed on the little people who have been crushed beneath it. Big Government has given Big Business free reign already… they’ve just managed to make sure any potential competitors haven’t had the same luxury.

          • Mark S (not for Shea)

            Well, it’s a moot point. Paul will not be the GOP nomineee.

            He may well run as a Third Party candidate, which means Obama will win by a landslide rather than squeak a victory past Romnorum.

        • Big Business uses Big Government to kneecap its competitors who are potential threats to incumbent members of the BB club. Without that capability, the free market system would eat most of these guys alive.

          • Joseph

            Precisely, IBM comes to mind.

          • Joseph

            Precisely, IBM comes to mind.

    • Actually, the reason big business is so powerful now is because of the role of the federal government. Don’t confuse crony capitalism (which we have now, and which has expanded radically under Bush and Obama) with market capitalism.

      Most big businesses use the feds to create regulation that favors the big guys (that can afford to comply with a convoluted list of costly regulations), to squeeze out the little guy. For example is recent FDA guidance about supplements that will essentially put small companies out of business just to comply with basic testing of safe compounds. There is no issue with supplement safety, but in the interest of big pharma, these rules were made. Also, the recent farm bill strongly favored big ag and created rules that hurt small farmers (to Monsanto’s delight, of course).

      • Thomas R

        So in the “Gilded Age” Big Business had less power? I know some like to claim things like that, but at best they had a little less power then but still a great deal.

    • Will

      I agree. It would be back to America in the late 1800s.

    • Maiki

      See, I would say the opposite — libertarianism is best suited for the most remote branches of government, and that at a local level, it is ok for government to be more involved in society.

      Big Business prospers (ordinarily) when one of two things happen: they deliver a good product (which I don’t begrudge them) or they get undue incentives from the government (which would stop under a Libertarian Government).

  • Will

    I tend to move on to something else when I see people using words such as fascist, communist, and socialist. They seem to be cuss words for some who cannot find better words to use.

    • Chris

      I think B 16 had it right when he referred to a “dictatorship of relativism”.

    • Joseph

      It’s probably because American’s don’t like to hear those terms when they think about their own government. It seems to equate us to some of the more evil governments of the 20th century. That’s the problem with learning how to define words in context, something most Americans are guilty of (they don’t open dictionaries). It also happens when television becomes the major source of information and learning. One instantly attaches images to words like they are switching channels.

  • Mark R

    When hasn’t it been the ruling class vs. the rest of us? The ruling class get their comeuppance in the form of over-reaching themselves and spendthrift children, the rest of us – if we are able – take advantage of them at the expense of their foolishness.

  • “I will use my constitutional authority as President to stop the enforcement of all regulations relating to ObamaCare, including the new HHS regulations forcing all employers, even religious or church-affiliated ones, to provide coverage for contraceptives and RU-486 as part of their health insurance plans,” said Paul.


    Need we more?

    • Joseph

      Well, we need to find out why he’s not winning the presidential popularity contest right now, and if people think he’s right, they need to rectify the situation.

      • Mark S. (not for Shea)

        Because Party politics isn’t about popular opinion. GOP leadership has decided Romney is their man, and they’re more than a little baffled that the hoi polloi aren’t tipping their hats to their betters and doing as they’re told.

        Paul has never been a team player in the GOP. Party leadership will never nominate him.

  • Joannie

    It seems highly possible to me that even if Ron Paul were not to get the nomination as President, he could still end up on the GOP as the VP to Mitt Romney, should he get it. So I would not count him out by any means. The reason is that both Newt and Rick even though they get a lot of media attention they personally are not very well liked and respected. I had heard this a couple of weeks ago from a political insider who correctly predicted that both Rick Perry and Herman Cain would quit the race. Also keep in mind that it would be foolhardy for Romney not to have him on the ticket if the GOP really wants to defeat Obama this November on Election Day.

    • Joseph

      Please don’t say that. I don’t want Romney on the ticket at all… or as someone said in an earlier thread, “Obamney”.

    • Mark S. (not for Shea)

      Romney will take a vow of poverty before he ever chooses Paul as a VP.

      And honestly, even if Romney did do it, I think Paul has too much class to accept. I certainly think Paul is more than a little loony in some of his views, but I’ve always admired him for sticking to his convictions.

  • Chriskaba

    “Robama” – that’s awesome…. I don’t think I can top that one….




    Nope, cant. Confederate Papist, my hat’s off to you….