Respectful rebuttal to Mr. Nystrom in the Freedom of speech/censorship/facist debate

Dear Mr. Nystrom,

I have been an almost-daily visitor to your Bull!Not Bull website and it's previous encarnation for over four years. The wide-ranging and insightful articles you post have greatly expanded my worldview and educated me on an immense range of topics over that time. Your website and kindred others first introduced me to Ron Paul and his thinking several months ago. I sincerely want to thank you for that - it has forever changed my life for the better.

My wife and I are libertarian-souled, 30-something, college educated, former non-voting (jaded)Democrats. For months now, DailyPaul has allowed us to follow the grassroots growth of a revolution that has a chance at being remembered forever in american history. Our apathy has been cured, we have changed parties and are actively spreading the Ron Paul message to all who will listen. Again, I want to thank you for your tireless passion and creative work here on Daily Paul.

Unfortunately, this morning I unintentionally became the "seed" of discontent and dischord in a few Forums/topics that has spread to the current arguements raging regarding the DailyPaul structure/freedom of speech/censorship/hints of facism/negativity police. Upon recently coming back to the site today I have read these new posts with great concern. If you would allow me to briefly revisit the facts of what happened this morning, I feel a CRUCIAL distinction between these areas of disagreement and what I feel is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING Ron Paul stands for can be illuminated for all of us to reflect upon.

To recap: in the wee hours of the morning here in Arizona, I stopped by the site and read several posts regarding the campaign email requesting money earlier and more consistently than "money bombs" and before the Tea Party of 12/16/07. I posted a new Forum topic called "New Hampshire not worth a 100 Tea Parties" that I felt was a reasoned, if somewhat critical view on the debate. These comments are still to be read under the same heading in the "Paul needs $ NOW" blog post for anyone who wishes to.

I was trying to bring up important campaign strategy that I sincerely felt would ultimately achieve the dual goals of a HISTORIC Tea Party sucess AND a WIN in New Hampshire, Iowa, etc. I fully expected disagreement and debate, in fact was eagerly looking forward to hearing other valued points of view.

The first response was from "bigjohn12" who accused me of being either "a traitor or and idiot". I was subsequently accused of being not a "Real Ron Paul supporter". Fine by me, hardly hurting words. Replies went out. Soon enough, more reasoned responses and thoughts began to trickle in. The debate was engaged! I read a couple of other Forums and posted another response similar in vein. Upon returning to the main page I found that the ENTIRE Forum had been deleted! I certainly did not "flag" it, even though I guess I would be the only one offended. I was a bit frustrated, because I was sure that something constructive and uniting could come from discussing an important topic. I could not believe that the "baby" had been thrown out with the "bathwater". I quickly found that my other response had been removed from the other Forum. I began to think I was being selectively deleted from the discussions due to my somewhat negative and critical view on the official campaign funds useage. I used courtesy and NO PROFANITY - simply brought up some uncomfortable ideas.

So why was I censored? It was clearly done by Mr. Nystrom, someone hosting for him, or the site operating system in place. Someone else posted a Forum "Flagged as Offensive?", and a couple of us (ironically including both myself and bigjohn12) began a discussion of the flagging occuring recently on this site of all things negative or critical. Someone else posted a comment that was intended as a response to my forum but was deleted that suggested in very thoughtful language that censorship of negativity is a tool of a facist/totalitarian organization. I left the site with my enthusiasm somewhat dampened, not by what was said in response to my post, but to the "unseen hand" deciding WHAT was to be discussed.

To return later today and find "bigjohn12" "banned" by Mr. Nystrom and to read the reasoning he and several others came up with in comments has me deeply concerned. The train of thought followed by Mr. Nystrom under "Redcoats - AKA Neo-Rons" forum is disturbing. If we are all not very careful we are destined to become those we wish to replace in this revolution. Please let me explain.

To censor a discussion between people by removing from the table any uncomfortable or "negative" topics limits the range of ideas and conclusions available to all present. Knowledge and wisdom are almost always gained through a complex and often violent dance between opposing forces/facts/opinions.

To actively censor/restrict/eliminate someones opinions from a discussion because of their mannerisms or because the MAJORITY PRESENT DOES NOT AGREE also limits possible wisdom and knowledge to be gained by all. This includes "keeping the negative comments in another section of the site" and "flagging" a post as offensive. Is it not this EXACT censorship almost all of us believe mainstream media practice with Dr. Paul, or for that matter mainstream AMERICA? Paid-for polls, two party systems, etc. His message is deeply offensive to established bureacracies, institutions and people currently in power and they are ACTIVELY seeking to restrict his voice at every opportunity. Must we do the same to our fellow revolutionaries? Or worse, to POTENTIAL allies?

The analogy of DailyPaul as the private "living room" of Mr. Nystrom is simply wrong, and limits the potential of all we can do. This is NOT a small gathering of close personal friends and relatives personally invited by Mr. Nystrom. This site has been advertised, promoted and hyped hugely, without discression, in hopes of attracting NEW RON PAUL supporters. That is a GOOD thing, but a more accurate image for this site is of renting out a convention center and welcoming in all who walk by. To then mill around from conversation to conversation and "referee" based not on common courtesy, but CONTENT and STYLE is overstepping the "promoters" rights.....if they wish to hold themselves as different than the established system and an example of the MOST IMPORTANT THING RON PAUL COULD STAND FOR - A DIFFERENT WAY FORWARD FOR THIS COUNTRY! Something dreamed about by the founding fathers and hinted at in our history books. Is this not what we ALL want? What we ALL know our country NEEDS?

To practice on a local level what is at the very heart of our national "disease"....we shall reap what we sow.

This is NOT a First Ammendment arguement, for freedom of speech is at it's essence simply "proper procedure" in the national conversation. The fundamental distinction is this: Can we, as a people, at any level of organization or size of gathering, AFFORD TO practice censorship by limiting the TOPICS, TONE, or OPINOINS in a discussion, provided it is being undertaken without threat of violence or hate? To repeat: this is NOT "freedom of speech"...it is FREEDOM OF POSSIBLE KNOWLEDGE, WISDOM, CHOICES, CONCLUSIONS, and SUCESSES we wish for ourselves to have access to. THAT is the FREEDOM of Ron Paul.

SO....Mr. Nystrom, I very sincerely and respectfully ask you ...as I and every Ron Paul supporter here at DailyPaul should ASK OURSELVES....

What do WE WANT DailyPaul to be? Is it indeed simply a "house party" for those in the agreed-upon majority already; for those "positive" enough to let everyone sleep well at night; for those unquestioning in their beliefs; for those whom wish to "cheer" for their home team while being poite enough to not ruffle feathers?........Or do we want it to be an INTERNATIONAL focus point for "ALL things Ron Paul"....the BIGGEST tent in the land, welcoming conflict, discussion and growth in our individual conversations as we would welcome the same process in our countries' leadership and direction.

So, let me/us/ourselves know. The goal is still the same - get Ron Paul and WHAT HE REPRESENTS elected as President. I like our chances better as a ragtag buch of misfit heroes united not behind a figure, slogan or flag, but bound together by common beliefs, goals, agreements and understandings that have EVOLved from previous skirmishes and quarrels WITHIN our ranks.....BATTLE TESTED. Convincing a stranger to support Ron Paul will be infinitely easier if we have all answered each others questions and resolved our disagreements BEFORE hand.

"To really taste the sweet, one must KNOW the bitter".

Sincerely,

Bradley and Amber Moore