not implicitly, not without caution.
I know that there is no such thing as a perfect human being, and Ron Paul is certainly no exception, but the idea of classifying him as a fraud (in another discussion) seems a little extreme.
Though I know it is important not to trust without reservation, there has to be a little bit of hope, doesn't there, that now and again someone actually means what he/she says. Where do you draw the line?
Why even try to restore government or *whatever will work to make the world a better place* (I am almost afraid I'll use the wrong words by *your* definition and be accused of being an anarchist, again)--
if you can't even try to trust someone a little?
I guess that I am afraid ("concerned" would be a better word) that this could lead to a free-for-all like the French Revolution where "Kill the aristocrats" includes anyone that those doing the killing believe is an aristocrat or an evil person, whether they are or not.
Where does it end? "We lose, you lose" on another discussion called anarchists a 'cancer'--
and that cancer needs to be removed--
well, how? With the guillotine? Are you willing to go the way McCarthy did? He did lose his credibility, even if he might have been right about some communists. And yet, there were those who spent a lot of time in fear, because they weren't communists, but were suspected. Or they were just naive people or open-minded people who knew some communists and didn't join the 'witch hunt'. There's nothing good about witch hunts. Generally, those who are real witches are never found anyway (symbolically speaking)--
Good becomes bad, and bad becomes good when *we* call for destruction of anyone for their beliefs.
That frightens me. Witch hunts are serious business and not a good thing to find on Daily Paul.
Rand Paul is filibustering right now. Do you think he's an anarchist? He's talking about unlawful hunts for terrorists (among regular Americans); is it wrong that he's concerned about drones? Did his 'anarchist' father teach him that?
Could it be that all of *us* make mistakes, and that sometimes we say or do things that don't please other people, but that doesn't make *us* (Ron Paul and me) anarchists?
Well, I've found this discussion interesting, and I think I'll go back to trying to get people to not collectivize. I can get yelled at for that, too--
even to those who want to hunt down the anarchists and destroy them. (or anyone else for that matter)
it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--