Is the R3VOLUTION a "cult of personality"?

Isn't President the position we're aiming to vote for?
You know what makes me throw up? Anarchists and minarchists. They are all are under the delusion that somehow living under no government means living under no rule and they totally miss the point that the unscrupulous few will victimize the moral many without a rule of law. They don't see that the end result of anarchy is always collectivism.
Individual rights protected by a rule of law is the only way to ensure sovereignty in this world.

If you are against Ron Paul's policies then let us know what exactly you're against. If you are against us supporting the only Presidential candidate with proven morals then you are barking up the wrong tree. This site is for "Restoring the Constitutional Government of the United States" Look on the banner if you don't believe me.

to have a leader in whom I trust...please let me bask in his warmth and integrity for just a few more months. It may never happen again.

are you kidding me? The President of The United States is considered a leader. Elected officials are considered our leader. We put them in that position and count on them to "represent" on our behalf. Duh. To suggest that that makes us members of a cult or cult like in personality(understanding the difference) is juvenile and shallow thinking. This is traditionally a time we look to the leadership for guidance. It takes no measure of our own sense of self and of what needs to be accomplished in our own power away from us. The ravages of war that established our freedom set the precident for the understood need for strong leadership. A house divided against itself, etc.

Dr. Paul's words are in alot of people's mouths and for the first time many have come to understand the principle's of our Founding Fathers. With knowledge comes power and the entusiasm is contagious and should be shared without the fear someone may make useless comments such as yours.

I think many here have displayed the abililty to "think for themselves". Asking questions, gathering information and making informed comments.
We are not a cult, we are champions of the Constitution who understand the dire need for transparency and urgency in the actions of our "leaders". No problem with that. We are a reflection of the greatness of the "Information Age".

I will consider 'following, supporting, learning from' that person. Until then all the other choices out there have proven to be lacking... and call all go f*ck themselves.

This thread is meant to be divisive. It doesn't even make a point. It just wants to nit-pick apart someones resolve.

Don't fall for this BS. Ron Paul says what he means and means what he says. He is the only true choice. BECAUSE he follows the constitution.

If a ham sandwich would commit to the constitution absolutely, it'd have my vote over any of the other candidates.

Aku Soku Zan

And to say that we are a cult is just another example of believing the mainstream media propaganda.

A cult is a group of people who mindlessly follow a charismatic leader. I can hardly think of a group LESS cult-like than the so-called Ron Paul movement.
And I can hardly imagine a "leader" less charismatic or less controlling than Ron Paul. ( I defy anyone to give an example of Ron Paul exhibiting any of the characteristics typical of a cult leader that are not true for ANY politician, and usually to a much greater extent).

In fact, one of the great weaknesses of our movement is the fact that no one, including most notably Ron Paul, has given us direction or organized our efforts.

Anyone who has tried to get Ron Paul or his national campaign to exert some leadership can attest to that.

Fortune Favors the Bold

but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Like MLK or Gandhi, the name "Ron Paul" has become synomous with a larger movement, based on a set of ideas and principles.

Note that the term "cult of personality" does not have the same meaning as the term "cult"

As a german citizen, I`m a little bit surprised that you Americans seem to have the same ridiculous discussions.
In German "leader" is translated "Führer" and because Hitler called himself that way (and so did his followers), the term "leader" (in german) is considered somewhat politically-incorrect. Many People feel the need to say something else, whenever possible (they prefer to say it is not the "leader of movement or party xy", but "chairman" or something like that).

I`m really glad Hitler did not have kids. Just think about how the word "Dad" might sound to us today ;-)

Anyway...I thought only we Germans had such "problems".

To think that the sympathy for that great man Ron Paul could be such thing as a nefarious "personality cult" is somehow bizzare to me.
Some people might be very enthusiastic (after all, when did they have the chance to support a man like him in their lifetime?), but it does not seem "dangerous" to me.

--------------------------------------
europe4ronpaul.blogspot.com
Hasta la libertad, siempre ;-)

Even though I adore Ron Paul I don't agree with all his political views. But he is the best spokesperson on the scene today pushing for liberty. His wise old soft spoken grandfatherly ways inspire trust and confidence in our cause. Respecting him for his life of dedication to liberty doesn't mean we suspend our own judgment but since he has been so instrumental in the spread of the "Ron Paul Revolution" I believe there is nothing wrong with considering his views regarding strategy for the movement. As long as our principles are upheld there is nothing wrong with trying to present a unified opposition to power just as there is nothing wtong with each person fighting for freedom in the way that best suits them.

marlow

There are pre-existing libertarians who supported Paul and have been supporting other libertarians and libertarian-minded people before Paul's candidacy, and then there are people new to the whole thing and whose first real exposure to libertarian ideas is from Ron Paul.

These latter people are where I think most of the cultists are. They see him as some sort of prophet and leader, when in reality he's just saying stuff that other libertarians have been saying for a long time. It's great that he's exposing people to these ideas, but hopefully they can see that they didn't originate with him (as he's been trying to get across). He's just the messenger, and he's just giving his personal interpretation of liberty.

It's ok to disagree with Dr. Paul on particular issues. It's ok to think for yourself. In fact, if anyone agrees with Dr. Paul 100% on everything, I would suspect that there's something psychologically wrong with that person because they're just modeling themselves on him and denying their own individuality. What differentiates us as different people is that we don't have identical beliefs.

What I respect about Dr. Paul is that he is always trying to make it clear that he doesn't want to lead us. He expresses admiration that the Revolution is spontaneously organized. He says over and over that the Revolution is not about him. He often says things like "Thank you for inviting me to the Revolution." The Revolution existed before he came along. And that Revolution has no leader, because it's very foundation is the pursuit of the liberty of the individual to lead himself.