-8 votes

If America Was An Anarchist Society, Ron Paul Would Not Exist

Congress wouldn't exist. Elections wouldn't exist.

The United States Constitution would not exist.

The Bill of Rights? You know, those pesky first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution America invented...would not exist.

The 10 Commandments and the Bill of Rights have a lot in common.

The first thing they have in common?


As above from heaven, America's Founding Fathers tried to create below on earth.

We have tried and won, and have failed many times as well, but we still try.

Nobody would know who Ron Paul is today if he was not elected by his constituents. He has lost many times in his career, and has won too... but he still tries.

How can people be fans of anarchy and Ron Paul too?

I write because I care. I have seen a lot of talk about anarchy lately, and quite frankly I think it makes the movement Ron Paul started look bad.

Ron Paul did not want to throw Baby America out with the bathwater, he wanted a more limited, smaller government that is restricted by the people in power instead of the millionaire politicians controlling us from the District of Criminals in Washington - not the State.

Ron did it the right way. He followed the laws of the land, and at the same time has lived a life true to the laws of God that were handed down to Moses on Mt. Sanai.

His opponents often broke the law, and what did Ron Paul do?

He turned his political cheek and kept following it...which turned out to be the most powerful political strategy ever created over 2000 years ago.

The results of what Ron Paul started back in 2007 has manifested in to the biggest political change America has seen since when?

For how many years have people settled their differences with a simple vote?

Voting and anarchy don't mix well, kind of like eating your cereal with orange juice if the milk's gone...just doesn't taste right.

People voted Ron Paul into Congress how many times?

How can one be a fan of football and politics, but also be a fan of the complete elimination of all sports at the same time?

Ron Paul is a great politician, and a great baseball player too.

He played the game the right way, for the love of God's game called Life.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

As I post this...

Ron Paul is on the front page of the Daily Paul with an extensive interview on something called C-SPAN 2. Somewhere about 20 minutes into that interview he answers an email question in which he says that "individual government" is always the goal. He goes on to say that he "doesn't call himself an anarchist, but...in the current political climate that won't go over" (or something to that effect). He also talks about the shortcomings of the Constitution, which you seem to embrace without question and falsely attribute to Dr. Paul.

Just listen to the man himself.

You have a small point in that the vast majority of people will respond negatively to the idea of not being able to plunder and enslave others. That is what they have been taught to love. That is simply a question of marketing and perceptions.

Your personally embracing the same error, which Ron Paul certainly does not do, is a mistake.


Even better quotes at about 2 hours and 35 minutes:

"Anarchy...uhhhh...is not harmful to me."

---Ron Paul

"If somebody's an anarchist, and they totally believe in no government...to be an anarchist and assume responsibility for yourself: I think this is a great idea."

---Ron Paul

Hopefully, this will lay to rest zooamerica's periodic posts which misrepresent Dr. Paul's position.


Just because he wouldnt exists

has no nearing on whether its good or not. If there was no aparthied in africa, Mendala wouldnt have existed, if there was no occupations of Inida, ghandi wouldnt have existed, if America did have to fight the revolutionary war so many of our founders would not have existed. Those who fight for good, do not justify the bad.

If we had an anarchist society, ron paul would still exist...

He would just be a chemical engineer or something. Or maybe a career historian, paid for in full by the free market. Or maybe a back to earth farmer.

You are right though, we wouldn't have Ron Paul the career politician.


I fell in

love with Dr. Paul's character, principles and ideals. Like so many others, Ron Paul cured my apathy, and set me on a journey of learning like nothing or no one ever has. I gladly sacrificed much time and money to his campaign, and followed his campaign like a hawk.

But when I saw what they did to him and the R3vol throughout the election process, and at the convention, something in me changed. Could it be.....Anarchy? Buhwahahaha!

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

I feel the same way. First

I feel the same way. First time in my life I went to a caucus to support RP and they just tossed out my vote. I'm done. No more politics, no more voting. Instead of wasting my time trying to convince people to pay attention/vote for the right candidate. I'm now only about preparing and educating. When people ask me which politicians I like. I can OFFICIALLY say NONE now (especially now that Ron Paul is out of it). I keep telling them to forget the whole D vs R shame and to get ready for when the SHTF. Because it's gonna.

Listening to Benn Swann explain anarchy is what made me realize what I am.

If Ron Paul had not existed,

If Ron Paul had not existed, I likely would not have become an anarchist.

In my early libertarian days one might have referred to me as an issues oriented libertarian, in that I had certain things that I felt strongly about that led me to becoming a libertarian. For instance, his stance on foreign policy, or the drug war, or various interventions into our personal lives. When you learn of the non-agression principle, and the philosophical background of the diffrent organisations Ron Paul was influenced by, you start to be able to anticipate whatever Ron Pauls position might be about many diffrent topics simply because his ideas are founded apon philosophical principles. You might note that Rand Paul is more inconsistent in this regard than his father. There is a spectrum in this regard, and I have alot more respect for Ron Paul than I do for Rand. The more I studied libertarianism, the more I came to the conclusion that we cannot make philosophical exeptions, even for the state.

I believe that the fundimental exception we grant government to take on a monopoly of force in contradiction to the fundimental morality of not initating force against others whome have not initiated force against us is the degree in which our "civil" society is schizophrenically fractured. Its not a basis for civility at all, its a basis for exceptions to what actions are allowable. Under all the claims of "law and order" at the core of government is an "effective anarchy" that maintains and enforces a variety of complete moral contradictions as the standard. Im not saying that we need to have all the same morality, just that the basis of our society shouldn't be coming from an institution that so immediately contradicts itself.

I encourage you to learn more about anarcho-capitalism as they relate to libertarianism. Alot of the figureheads that were critical to Ron Pauls development are the very people who created this substrain of libertarianism, Almost everyone I know that was a big fan of Ron Paul is now an Ancap, and I myself remember being upset, even mad, when I first encountered it. You'll have to put the reading in and mull it over, but going by your state derived preprogramming isn't going to lead you to an honest conclusion of the merits of accepting the possiblity of a truely free society.

Aside, its silly to say he would not exist, he might not exist to you in regards to what he has done that has called your attention to him, but he would most certainly still exist. I have every reason to believe that encouraging people to maintain a free society is just as important as making the first steps tword it. I would have trouble beleiving that such a great man would not also be a great man in a diffrent context.

Ron Paul seems to be without a ruler, but many friends.

Strictly speaking, anarchy simply means without a ruler.

There will be no political solution without an intellectual revolution, first.

An indebted State doesn't govern it loots and taxes. The Bill of Rights where to protect the people from such infamy.

We have lived with an State debt for 222 years. It's hard to imagine anything else.

Free includes debt-free!

Hmmm... Let's ask Ron Paul what he thinks

Perhaps his "hope that someday we mature enough to have that argument" the Constitution is "unfit to exist" has indeed arrived. Be happy! ;)


If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.

Without tyranny, Ron Paul would not exist...

Let's all give a hand to tyranny! [Clap clap clap...]

I think you meant to say, politicians would not exist...

Give me a moment while I weep.

Congressman Ron Paul would

Congressman Ron Paul would not have existed as there would have been no statist jackals for him to stand against, but Dr. Ron Paul would have kept delivering babies and helping folks regardless.

How would anyone know that

How would anyone know that Ron Paul delivered babies without a, "statist," birth certificate?

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.

privately issued birth certificates

any other questions?

"It may be a hundred years before a computer beats humans at Go - maybe even longer. If a reasonably intelligent person learned to play Go, in a few months he could beat all existing computer programs." - Piet Hut