17 votes

Something's missing from the Liberty movement

Does it seem to anyone else that in recent months, the Liberty movement, at least as reflected in these forums, has taken on a bit of a sour note?

I used to sense a spirit of joy, of hope, of genuine friendliness, even when the chips were down at certain junctures in the primary season; but it seems like there are a lot of angry, bitter people here these days, ready to rip your head off if they so much as think you might be looking at them cross-eyed.

Where is the love in the r3VOLution?

Where is the demeanor of Dr. Paul in all this?

People are so quick to assume the worst possible motives in each others' posts, and don't on average seem to stop and see how maybe a kind word or a note of encouragement might go a long way, even when you disagree. I'm sure I'm not faultless in this regard, myself, as I've probably come across a bit aggressive in a few posts, when I'm just passionate. But it seems like the downright nastiness and negativity is on the rise.

Or maybe I'm just imagining things...

Comment viewing options

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

From the comments here, it seems that the

"Johnsonites" are the problem. I'm not so sure that is the problem. It seems to me that there are plants who pose as Johnson supporters that constantly nip at Patriots' heels.

No, I do not support GJ and will not be voting for him in November. I think many people feel the same way about his candidacy as I do. The problem seems to come in when an aggitator posts something and we respond to it, instead of ignoring it.

Don't feed the trolls, no matter had bad you feel you need to lash out. That would go a long way to restoring this site to intelligent exchanges of ideas, without the nastiness of the past fseveral months.


Thanks for this post. We need to offer the average American a positive alternative to what we have now. Maybe we can move on from the past injustices and jerks who we don't trust. Not forget the lessons they taught us but move on and build


It's the Johnson spammers

There's a DIRECT correlation to what you're describing to tiresome spam by the johnsonites.

Even when Dr.Paul was still in the race, the beltway boys began spamming this forum. The natural sequence of things would have permitted me to consider GJ AFTER the convention BUT NO, they began fracturing this forum even before the RNC. Quite frankly, and perhaps because of the negative bias towards GJ that they inevitably inspired in me, GJ doesn't cut it for me and IMO he has no real clue of what he's talking about. I watched the third party debate two days ago and the way he brought up the money creation process and the Federal Reserve was clumsy and erroneous; he should had just shut up and not go into the details which he obviously doesn't understand. That's just one example out of many many others.

He's a fake, a classic beltway libertarian: it shouldn't be surprising the LP loves him...

Anyway, I won't write in Paul as it is utterly useless also, I'll just abstain and hope Rand doesn't screw up his voting record from now until 2016.

BTW, In the very remote possibility the LP gets 5%, it would actually damage and fracture the liberty movement as it would fracture the vote for Rand. We don't even have a "2 party system", we have a ONE party system and need a viable second party. The LP is not a viable alternative and never will be IMO, a reformed GOP is the best bet.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an


Well said.

Blessings )o(

I am frustrated

by people who claim to be libertarians but then espouse the views which are fundamentally anti-freedom. Take "right to die" for example. You can't be a REAL libertarian and oppose ANY rights - which includes this one. It baffles me that any libertarian would even see the need to have any man-made law which protects this right.

Rights are self-evident. If you believe you can do whatever you want without physically/financially hurting someone else... which I believe is the foundational concept of liberty - you can't be opposed to "right to die" or any other right for that matter.

You also can't be opposed to someone allowing themselves to be talked into doing something you think is completely stupid - and still be a REAL libertarian - although you have a right to call yourself that... doesn't mean it's a fact.

Daily Paulers frequently b**ch and moan about "RINOs" while at the same time being "LINOs."

Right to die - when someone else is asserting that right... is NONE OF MY BUSINESS. Why is anyone even DEBATING that RIGHT? So when speaking of this right I am only expressing my frustration that ONCE AGAIN there is someone else trying to TELL ME WHAT TO DO - even though I'm harming NOBODY ELSE.

Morality is a slippery slope. If you give the power junkies an inch they will take a mile - there can be NO GREY AREA because they will STEAL every shade of grey until they control the entire spectrum.

But no one wrote it on a piece of paper - it can't be a right!

Its not in The Constitution, and the Constitution gives me my rights - right?
WRONG as wrong can be. THANKS rpvgs - excellent comment.
At best, the Constitution defines the rights we were BORN with - in this country and all over the world. They are our human rights, our sovereign rights, and they are ours whenever we reach out and claim them. Until we claim them, we are children, wards of the state and slaves.
It is MY life, MY body, MY choice to make "risking" God's wrath with my choices.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:

The nastiness can be traced back to...

(surprise, surprise) the Johnsonites.

They were the ones trying to push the Americans Elect scam on us when we were electing GOP delegates and trying to get the nomination. They were the ones pushing GJ on us starting months before the RNCheat. And they're the ones who call Ron a "fraud" and systematically downvote and bully people who won't vote for Gary.

I don't play, I commission the league.

scawarren's picture

No you're not imagining I

No you're not imagining I feel it too. There's a lot of just downright hateful attitudes on here.

To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting.
e.e. cummings

I just don't like individuals

being so collectivist, especially in regards to pushing for people to vote for Robombi, writing in RP, or casting a vote for 3rd party there has been a lot of collectivism in each of those agendas, not every thread, but certainly every option.

People are going to do what they want to do, so be it, why call people names or stereotype them for not voting the way you want (not the OP but who ever tries to convince someone to vote a certain way?)

No need to fret, just as long as more folks educate those who need it, and live up to the standard of Ron himself I could care less who votes for who, after all this election has already been decided and the only loser is the American People.

+1 Something is missing.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James


Even though there are dangers in relying too much on one person to be a uniter, I'm kind of hoping we can draft someone now for 2016, who will instantly be a rallying point to help focus our efforts and heal some of the fractures. That's why I was thinking maybe we should draft Judge Nap, since people from most (all?) quarters have a high respect for him, whereas they have doubts about Rand, Gary, etc., etc. A fresh face like that as a focal point might give us a big rebound in morale, so we can go forward with a spring in our step in the next cycle, instead of being depressed about competing factions.

Doesn't have to be Judge Nap -- but somebody to give us a boost?

it starts with us

It will start with us. One thing that impressed me about Ron Paul meet-ups was that strippers and social conservative, white, brown and yellow could work on the same phone-bank. Yes there was disagreement and even tension but people could actually have conversations and not resort to stereotypes. Consider the guy from reason who could have conversations with Judge Nap about what a pre-Vatican II Catholic is.