0 votes

Will Wilkinson Calls Ron Paul "an Embarrassment to the Creed" of Libertarianism




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

fuck reason

Does anyone even subscribe with them anymore? I know I don't..

Trash the ONE MAN who is actually standing up for LIBERTY.

Reason is not even worth the stress in complaining about them anymore and really don't hold much credit. One thing I do like though is the more they trash them the more the LINE IN THE SAND will be drawn.

People need to realize what they want from their government. It to take care of them OR it to be limited and THE PEOPLE take care of their own damn selves.

http://shelfsufficient.com - My site on getting my little family prepped for whatever might come our way.

http://growing-elite-marijuana.com - My site on growing marijuana

Try actually reading instead of just reacting.

Your opinion here represents the worst of the reactionary responses. Try again.

Who cares about Reason

Who cares about Reason anyways?

I thought the article was fine honestly...

Don't get what everyone is upset about. Read the whole article, the one at Reason just quotes some of the Will article and gives some comments. It isn't Reason saying the quote in this post.

You are correct.

It's far easier to try to make points with each other here than actually break a sweat by reading the article.

If you haven't individually bothered to read the article, stop.

Here's a clue... Reason did not slam Ron.

RP

RP is a class act libertarian all the way and moreover RP is definitely an asset to Republicanism.

He strives for excellence in virtue, this is no way an embarassment Mr. Wilkinson. Btw, what do you strive for Mr. Wilkinson aside from meaningless personal attacks?

donvino

Will HOOOOOOO?????

Will HOOOOOOO?????

What's up with the Reason cover?

"Ron Paul... the rise of an eclectic anti-statist movement??"

They don't vote anyway

These Reason and TNR libertarians are such purists that they won't vote for the candidate that they probably agree with 95% of the time about the most important issues!

But they also don't vote in presidential elections (i.e. Nick Gillespe)

I can't hate on them too much because the NeoCons feel the same way about us (to some extent similar). Don't you want the Evil Obama out of office??? Cry me a river.

-Peace

♫♫ You say you want a R[ƎVO˩]UTION ♫ Well you know ♫♫

disagree with wilkenson

the author matt welch gave RP props for shaping the issues towards the end , so I enjoyed that part of it. we are winning

I have

A video response to this article. That was how moved I was to respond to this article full of blatant lies especially about immigration and in the video you can tell that I am a brown kid.

May the LORD bless you and keep you
May the LORD make His face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you
May the LORD lift up His face unto you and give you peace
Follow me on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/Burning_Sirius

reedr3v's picture

You could post the link here; I'd be

interested.

sorry been really busy

with robots
http://www.dailypaul.com/177278/my-response-to-that-will-wil...

May the LORD bless you and keep you
May the LORD make His face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you
May the LORD lift up His face unto you and give you peace
Follow me on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/Burning_Sirius

Is Reason Mag. falling on a granade ...

to help Paul out?

Another example of the

intellectually vapid writings which have come to typify Reason Magazine.

In this episode, the writer cannot even discern the difference between a sovereign nation and some global libertarian utopia, which does not exist, and indeed will never exist. Yet calls are made for Paul to campaign for POTUS as if he was somehow campaigning for "president of the world".
This is a common disconnect among Libertarians, who are so ardent in their fantasies that they frequently confuse them with reality, and then proceed to deride Ron Paul for not adhering to their utopian notions.

i asked what some people felt about the idea of

us over here in the ron paul movement just stop calling ourselves libertarians. a user named heller over there who refers to paul supporters as paultards gave me a thumbs up. finding allies in all kinds of unexpected places. well maybe not so unexpected. why do we insist on intruding the houses of people who are more interested in maintaining (their) brand purity than making real changes? you make me feel like a burglar on this, velv. for moral reasons, we need to leave those libertarians alone. i feel like we're trampling on patients suffering from mental illness.

i wouldn't be supporting a separation if it weren't for the inherent agitator-personality types in that group for non-mutually exclusive ideas.. a state-oriented legislation would tolerate all of these differences. it's not as oxymoronic as calling oneself a 'socialist libertarian' where such agitation may be justified. some people are SOCIALLY, a very fundamental word that even transcends before politics, meant to left in solitude. i'm afraid unity is impossible.

The Reason Mag author

Matt Welch says this in the article:
"Disclosure: I am much more aligned with Will Wilkinson than Ron Paul when it comes to immigration and abortion and (probably?) interracial marriage,..."

I did read it. And while he's entitled to his opinions, so am I. And I find Reason Magazine repugnant, as well as I do the current(and past) positions of the Libertarian Party.

AND, I notice he didn't waste an opportunity to make that comment about "interracial marriage" as a sideways comment which attempts to allude to Reason's previous slanderous article about Jamie Kirchick and the alleged RP newsletters.
Snakes.

wow

to think i just posted this comment http://www.dailypaul.com/177139/what-is-meant-by-being-a-lib...

why do you old quasi libertarians gotta reinforce my point so soon? aren't you in a hurry to quicken the separation. i reiterate my call for a new term for this libertarian 2.0 movement to cleanly sever ourselves from the quasi libertarianism known as libertarianism 1.0. what's libertarianism 1.0? head to reason mag and have a check.

what i mean is we need a new term for this movement. again, glenn beck has called himself a libertarian. bill maher has called himself a libertarian. the chairs rocking over at reason mag and their subscribers call themselves libertarians. a lot of people who support federal reserve call themselves libertarian. we need a new label for this movement and not dish out the term libertarian at the forefront whenever called on, but perhaps only as last resort. why? need i explain?

Paleo-Conservatives ? Is that the word you are looking for?

Philosopher Roderick T. Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power [either "total or merely substantial"] from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives.[5] David Boaz, libertarian writer and vice president of the Cato Institute, writes that, "Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others" and that, "Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property—rights that people have naturally, before governments are created."[6]

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

This article....

reaffirmed the reason I quit reading Reason and un-subscribed from their YouTube channel.

Just saying.

♫♫ You say you want a R[ƎVO˩]UTION ♫ Well you know ♫♫

fuck u

im sick and tired of this bs

Your thoughts on the article

kidbquick?