top of page

Ron Paul: A statesman, not a politician; but still a violator of human rights.


Many in the liberty movement might consider this to be very picky and just asinine and of no help at all!


I say, if you're going to do the right thing, then do the right thing and do it all the way; not %50 or even %90, but %100.


I get the gist, the sentiment, of the article.  I understand that people are trying to make good on the noble idea of government.  But that idea is based on fear.


Government is protected by its indoctrinated subjects through the notion that people are capable of doing bad things to other people; therefore it is necessary to ensure that people have a way to protect themselves from those bad people. 


That sounds noble enough; but its wrong. 


I've said it before and I will say it again.  To create a government that upholds a rule of law where people may not object to its existence, but only to its operation, without having to relocate outside of that government's jurisdiction is not fair, moral, or even logically consistent.  It's dishonest, immoral, and filled with a massive contradiction.


It's dishonest in the terms of being crafted out of the fears of 'what if' and not 'what is'.  It's immoral that it violates the right of the individual to be governed at all.  And it contradicts itself on the grounds that it mugs its citizenry and kidnaps them for none compliance with the muggings in order to protect those same citizens from that very act at the hands of others.


Additionally, the fears that craft the logic to justify government replace trust and the benefit of the doubt.  It seeks to hold everyone equally in contempt for crimes they may never commit based on the actions of a relatively few individuals and empowers others to commit the same crimes that otherwise were not guaranteed to be committed.  It's a terrible shame and much to be regretted.


The very existence of government violates the rights of the individual to be governed at all.  The perpetuation of government via taxation further violates those rights by stealing from the individual who doesn't wish to be governed or forfeit his or her right to peacefully and honestly coexist with those who do with to be subjected to the government in question.  Furthermore the act of taxation retards the economic power of all by artificial inflating the value of the taxable currency of choice.  People choose to acquire that currency over others in order to pay those taxes to remain free; and generations later are dependent upon it because that is the way things are; the upholding of the greatest Broken Window Fallacy.


Where, what, and how would all of that wealth have been reinvested if not stolen and consumed in large part by a coercive entity designed to subsidize the inadequacies of a majority to control the fears in their own mind and seek out critical thinking skills to obtain the logic that can be used to combat their fears!?


Ron Paul, for all of his worth is a stand up guy so far as I know.  I don't know him personally, but his policies have been among the most noble and restricted considering his views of playing by the Founders' intentions of how the Constitution was to restrict the power and authority of the federal government of the United States.  Unfortunately, if he truly wanted to impress and affect a change that put his money where his mouth was…


He would have run for those offices and positions on the platform of not accepting a single cent for compensation, paid all of his expenses out of pocket, he would have made good on that all of the time, and he would have vetoed every single bill that did not expressly limit the power, authority, scope, and abilities of the federal government and vote for nothing more!


He still violated the rights of many to be governed at all.  He was a stand up guy for being abiding by the Constitution of the United States; but he still violated the rights of the people in general to be governed at all and accepted for compensation tax dollars.


Again, I know it’s seems to be nitpicking and simplistic fighting.  I'm not here to ruin anyone's parade.  Just as there remains a controversy concerning the vents of the War of Federal Aggression (1861-1865-a.k.a The American Civil War), its imperative that we call things what they are and think critically in the process.  Unfortunately that is the truth and until we stop justifying evil by empowering it with the acceptance of the rules it sets for us to play by, we will never make the large steps to achieving greater enlightenment; not that small steps are terrible, but the faster we recognize the truth about government the more lives we can save, maintain, and improve.


The more we can shift the status quo of power coming from coercive means that embolden rule of law via government to voluntary means through economic choice free of unwarranted regulations, taxation, and intervention the faster we overcome the fears that haphazardly justify the existence of government.





Download a free PDF  of Liberty Defined here!

No, this isn't Ron Paul's book.  It's mine, Jim Limber Davis'

bottom of page