"The reason to have a leader like Ron Paul, or someone else, is as a focal point for the philosophy."
In the last link I listed:
Teaching starlings how to flock: http://i.imgur.com/JDe0z.jpg
The author introduced the concept of a programmer, and that to program a flock of starlings you "dont try to choreograph the whole ballet" but what you do instead is devote all your time and resources to programming the individual starling. Teaching it the basic rules of how to fly, how to react, how to respond and interact locally with your fellow starlings. That's kind of what Ron did with us. He was the programmer, the focal point for the philosophy, the program if you will. He never tried to run the movement or tell us what to do and where to be, what to say, what to think, what to feel. He just woke us up, taught us the principles of liberty and planted the seed in our minds. After he did that for one, or several, or even large groups he gave them the charge, once you have been enlightened its your responsibility to do something about it. In that way he began to clone, or better said, began to spread the message and grow the movement. He provided the leadership and the philosophical focal point as you suggest, but he did not lead it. We did.
So perhaps because we are our own leaders we do not need a leader per say, but a philosophical focal point or someone that champions it so we can continue to share and spread the message. For many that is Ron Paul's message, or interpretation of liberty. His set of programming rules if you will. I agree with parts of others programs, but none as completely as Ron Paul's. Does that mean "no one but Paul", "Paul til I die"? Ha, no, not necessarily. In that same link about the starlings
it suggests near the end that if your flock behavior isn't quite right, keep iterating and reprogramming the individual starling until the flocking of the thousands of birds become satisfyingly true to your mission. So is Ron Paul's programming perfect? No. Is it pretty close. I would say yes. Can it be improved upon? Yes, and I'm pretty sure Ron Paul himself was hoping someone or many someones would take up the banner and run with it and improve on and expand what he started. If that means tinkering with the philosophical focal point than so be it. I would be wary to adjust it myself as I feel its pretty darn good, but if there are others so inspired and can with intelligence and integrity improve upon it by all means do so.
The first video talks about the rivaling functions, organs, and particles within the body that, fight, collaborate, conspire, cooperate, and bump heads and synergize. The video says that if this did not happen we would fall over dead. These processes and internal battles are what keep up alive and healthy. I believe the differences in opinion and actions that play out and clash with each other on the pages of the daily paul and within the movement are healthy for us and makes us all stronger and wiser for the trouble (as long as the debate remains civil of course). In this way I believe the best ideas and best courses of actions will rise to the top. Poor and ill advised ideas will be dissected and their flaws revealed. As different parts of the same movement towards liberty I believe that though our actions and functions may seem to clash or contradict at times I believe it will all work out in the end towards the goal.
I agree, I believe there is a need for someone to set the philosophical focal point but not necessarily lead it. Just someone to program it and let it run. Perhaps others to fine tune it to iron out any bugs.