Moderation: The Importance of Avoiding "Tin Foil Land"

Salve Veritate

- 'Saving The Truth' -

It’s been suggested ...

... that grappling with government conspiracies, even if it involves analysis of unfounded claims of government, or further that reasoned attempts to get a handle on Truth, have no place on a conspicuous forum devoted to Liberty in general, and the teachings of Ron Paul’s Freedom Philosophy, in particular.

The proffered rational is that if we put a good face on our collective opinions our adversaries will not have ammunition to disparage our champion, Dr. Paul. Additionally, it is urged that we conduct ourselves in accord with a uniform code conforming to the least common denominator marking only well troddened pathways for strolling towards consensus with the hoi polloi and their imperial handlers so as not to embarrass the most tentative among us.

To those holding the short end sticks( stinking‘in the mud’) in the pending straw poll, who may rush to prop up this straw man with the thin stuffing in their hand, let me say – I grant you that we each should do better at soft sell, and other diplomatic techniques of persuasion such as courtesy, avoidance of fallacy, polished presentation and appearance. [ If it is control you want -- it is not beyond your own reach ... and you don't even need to violate freedom principles to achieve it.] I have no fundamental disagreement with you on the score of hygiene and comportment unless your dress and grooming code calls for the donning of uniformity. [ Sense, certainly(that’s what debate and reason is for); Sensitivity, absolutely (that’s what, discussion and discernment is for); Sensibility, not your call ( that’s a value judgement and moral issue that one ought not ever defer to others, that’s what freedom and personal responsibility is about) ].

My objection is to content based efforts to suppress substance, not stylistic recommendations as to form and manners in presentation. I object not just on policy grounds though I believe it will be counterproductive in growing our numbers, and it will prove ineffective to avoid stigmatization. [ You overlook the overt and covert designs that prove They will invent or otherwise contrive reasons to subvert wet dreams of media sanctioned popularity– recall the racist smear They concocted just before They blacked out our hero, the well funded, statistical frontrunner Republican Conservative].

Please understand I welcome your efforts and energies and input in this r’Evolution [as I see it], and I hope to enjoy your company as we each go forward, but I am very thankful you are only able to offer your view in dissent by way of minority report because I am convinced your view is fundamentally wrong as to method, direction, and priority in our fight to advance liberty. In fact, as I see it, if you succeeded in your goals of enforced constraints upon free inquiry and debate here, I would see you as not merely the loyal opposition, but as part of the opposition indeed, not just accidentally in it's service.

You see, I believe you are WRONG in principle... at the core of our effort ... not on the fringe. This isn’t about a peripheral sidetrack. It’s fundamental:

Obsta principiis

-‘ Resist the beginnings’ –

I believe you are wrong in principle. Michael is right -- We need to PRACTICE what we preach. Not just by way of example and philosophical honesty and consistency, but because we need the PRACTICE. This is our drill ! Yes, ‘... what we have here is, failure to communicate.’ ........................ We need to ‘... git our mind riiiigggghhhht’.

***

“It is also important for the State to inculcate in its subjects an aversion to any outcropping of what is now called 'a conspiracy theory of history.' For a search for 'conspiracies,' as misguided as the results often are, means a search for motives, and an attribution of individual responsibility for the historical misdeeds of ruling elites. If, however, any tyranny or venality, or aggressive war imposed by the State was brought about not by particular State rulers but by mysterious and arcane 'social forces,' or by the imperfect state of the world -- or if, in some way, everyone was guilty -- then there is no point in anyone's becoming indignant or rising up against such misdeeds. Furthermore, a discrediting of 'conspiracy theories' will make the subjects more likely to believe the 'general welfare' reasons that are invariably put forth by the modern State for engaging in aggressive actions.”

-- Murray N. Rothbard

***

Discouragement in the exercise of open minded critical thinking skills, or obstructing the search and dissemination of truth, is precisely the problem which should animate each of us.

In my opinion .... GETTING TO THE TRUTH .............. In the fullest sense and sensibility of this meaning IS the r’Evolution !!!

Let us each carry on our own mission, together, if possible, ............ but undaunted.

'cura te ipsum'

***

A tactic for the strategy of resisting the beginnings:

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/96072#comment-1056085

[ If this makes sense to you, more than sliding, clogging and disinformation -- debate or endorse in reply ... let's not track mud into Jack's parlor. ;-) ... It pisses him off. ............ Besides, Michael will be home soon, let's straighten the place up ... especially, those of us who don't want swat team babysitters next time he goes away on vacation.]

http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/audiobooks/block/Undefendabl...

This forum has assumed the culture of the typical corporate meeting: no consistent agenda that everyone can articulate to a guest ; no enforcement of topic boundaries; facts, opinions and unsupported ramblings given equal hearing; folks talking over each other to get their unrelated agendas advertised, smirking and disparaging comments thrown at will, sarcasm offered as proof of intelligence, and no plan of action or decision reached at the end. The only measurable outcome of such a meeting is the guarantee that the meeting will spawn even more fruitless meetings.

Folks, don't be surprised that your future invitations of others to the DP meeting are increasingly declined with a continual "out of office" response. Your meeting will become known throughout the “Freedom Company” as the "calendar-filler and become increasingly insignificant to the freedom movement.

True Freedom demands maturity, license requires only adolescence.

What an idiotic idea - suppress the freedom of speech to promote the freedom movement?

END the FED before it ENDS US

Don’t take my word for it – you can read between the lines; you can read the lines, you can observe the pattern, or the result, or you can track ( it’s not a complicated history to decipher the likes of Furlough, Danorino, jab2ur, kentmur, baubaublacksheep and other hit and runners).

But I do urge each of you ( Real DP'rs) to discern. But once you have, may I suggest you adopt a strategy that doesn’t play into Theirs.

Here’s a suggestion: If you must respond, tag them clearly; avoid escalating ( or devolving) tit for silly tat, one ‘gives it the gas’ when one wishes to defy gravity, not when is out to prove the theory. [Think about that slowly for more than a flash].

How ‘bout we try this:

Disable your standard tag so as not to unnecessarily extend the circumference of the circular jerk’n back and forth (which was Their tactical objective), then simply tag them with a short antagonizing phrase, for example:

 ‘ Your cover’s blown’ ( leave off the off color ba’dump, bump such a reference might evoke ... let’s just leave it implied for this experiment); or
 ‘We’re onto you’
 ‘U R B’ing 2 conspicuous’
 ‘This is going into your performance review’
 ‘May I speak with your supervisor’

... whatever short, pithy phrase occurs to you. Make it a minimalist exercise.

Don’t abuse. Self-discipline ?

Don’t lose sight of your objective.

And don’t become self-indulgent ... save the most fun for the battle you pick... on your terms.

My fault on that, I thought it was a woman. Thats not polite.