The Brilliant Tom Woods

[billydkid]

I know there is a widely held contempt for libertarians in here. I know that there is a fringe element - the birthers, the 9/11'ers, "Obama is Hitler" types and the rest -within the liberty movement that has developed around Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential campaign, informal though it is. I know there have been some fairly well known marginal types who have latched onto the movement. (of course, none of this can be said of the liberal left and the conservative right, right?)

I also know that that these realities have served as a convenient excuse to dismiss the movement entirely as a bunch of racist, whacko, militia types and simply disregard any of the legitimate arguments and concerns about government power and central planning and a planned economy and loss of civil liberties and crony capitalism. It must also be said that there is a significant element of agent provocateur type of activity intended to discredit the movement, some of which is exposed on occasion. I would caution you not to believe everything you are told.

I would argue that if one is willing to seriously consider and try to actually understand what some of the more articulate and representative spokesmen in the movement have to say, it may be that you will find that some of your comfortable conceits and contempt is ill founded. It may be that the people you perceive as your enemies are not and the people you consider to be your friends are not your friends. It may be that some of those you have contempt for do not deserve your contempt and some of those you admire truly do.

Most you in here are far smarter than I am. I have never felt otherwise, but, in all honesty, in terms of politics and society, I have seen a significant amount of unwillingness to question dearly held and comforting prejudices. I certainly don't have a monopoly on the truth of things, but I have dared in my life to question my own beliefs about things, even things that I have invested myself in, so the things I have come to believe, I did not come to believe because they comforted me or because they are what I wanted to believe. None of which is to say that I do not have my own prejudices. I certainly do, but I didn't arrive at my political/social views without seriously considering other views and considering that I may be wrong. I would ask of you the same thing.

I think Tom Woods has important things to say and I think some of the truths he expresses are unavoidable if one considers the facts of economic history honestly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI26Pn37pzc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uo4sKbFuaI&feature=related

[boloboffin]

Fringe element? Please demonstrate how the majority of Ron Paul supporters reject birtherism, 9/11 truth, Federal Reserve and gold standard nonsense, etc. Come on.

[Alt+F4]

More paranoid teacher bashing in the first minute. Libertarianism is a philosophy that can NEVER work in reality.

[boloboffin]

Ah, Tom Wood is himself going about silly monetary policy CT.

"Paper money is the problem! It's not worth anything because it's not backed by anything! It's not inherently valuable! Go back to the gold standard!"

"Um, how is gold inherently valuable?"

"..."

"Because it's a pretty color and highly malleable and thus is much to be desired in making other things pretty -- and that's about it, right?"

"..."

"So really it's fiat money all the way down, right?"

"..."

[mazyloron]

Ah, Tom Wood is himself going about silly monetary policy CT.

Anything more than a barter economy relies, at least in some way, on fiat money. Unless I trade you food or clothing or shelter in exchange for the same, there's some level of assumed - but not actual - value. And we cannot live in a barter economy, you cannot have modern civilization with just a barter economy. So arguing to go from fiat money to money based on a physical substance which has arbitrarily been assigned value seems silly.

Which is why the "fiat money isn't real" argument sounds a bit dull to me. Though, I haven't watched this video, I'll admit. But I'm at work, I can't right now.

That being said, there's definitely a Libertarian side to me. There's also a Socialist side. So that's fun to reconcile.

My general opinion of Libertarianism is that theirs is a voice that needs to be heard. Not the crazy birther/teabagger/truther/etc. types who can't do anything but scream and wave guns...but the rational personal liberty advocates. Sadly, the former have made such a ruckus lately that it's hard to even remember any of the latter, other than Ron Paul. (Who is a proponent of going back to the gold standard, doesn't believe evolution happened, and may be a YEC...but he's not militant, just a little out there on some topics.)

However, though I think they have valid points to make about personal liberties, I also think that, in general, Libertarianism is a utopian dream. It can't exist in reality unless we can, at the very least, alter human nature.

[Donal]

Ron Paul himself did a lot to discredit the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential campaign. One of the main planks of his platform is the gold standard silliness. His references to the NAU. His wink and nod acknowledgment of the Twoofers.

And don't act like the fringe elements and crazies of the two main parties don't get called out around here.

[shadron]

I know there is a widely held contempt for libertarians in here. I know that there is a fringe element - the birthers, the 9/11'ers, "Obama is Hitler" types and the rest -within the liberty movement that has developed around Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential campaign, informal though it is. I know there have been some fairly well known marginal types who have latched onto the movement. (of course, none of this can be said of the liberal left and the conservative right, right?)

Not that I would have brought this up if you hadn't tried a bit of self-justification here, Billy, but did you include police-bashers in that list?

[dudalb]

BTW Rand Paul, Ron's son and candidate for the GOP Nomination for the US Senate Seat in Kentucky, is having a "Money Bomb" today. His political views are a exact carbon copy of his Father's. Interesting to see how this goes.

[dudalb]

Ron Paul himself did a lot to discredit the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential campaign. One of the main planks of his platform is the gold standard silliness. His references to the NAU. His wink and nod acknowledgment of the Twoofers.

And don't act like the fringe elements and crazies of the two main parties don't get called out around here.


Not to mention Paul's refusal to renounce the support of Stormfront and other White Supremist groups..a true example of ignoring a poltical no brainer.