Comment: I agree

(See in situ)


I agree

I've made several comments here about being discerning. I don't think I'll make any more comments, because the bottom line for me is, does he or does he not believe, live, and educate others on the non-aggression principle? No, he does not, and he never has.

Instead of wasting precious time trying to find "leaders" who seem to sound like Ron Paul in some ways, or who seem to support the liberty movement, why not spend time reading Rothbard, Bastiat, and other similar authors and then educate others, even if it is only one at a time. The best way to spot a counterfeit is to study the real thing.

The problem with politics is that everyone is looking for "leaders" of a movement. That is what got us into this mess in the first place - the people clamoring for a king and the mass following of that king.

The problem with most charismatic leaders that draw large crowds is that they quickly become infiltrated, and/or, they want to draw larger crowds so they water-down or twist the message for broad appeal.

Another problem with a charismatic leader and mass movements is the use of emotions above logic and education to get people to support them.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned or out of touch, but imo, educating people one at a time (using logic and reason) on the non-aggression principle is the best way to spread liberty, not look for people who can mesmerize a crowd. Ron Paul does draw large crowds, but it is not because he is charismatic, it's the MESSAGE. And he not only speaks it, but he lives it and does not waver.

“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”
― Albert Camus