Has anyone had a non Ron Paul supporter read The Revolution--A Manifesto??

I think I read on the CFL site that it was upwards of 100,000.

Do you and your mother understand that even though he is personally against abortion, that he puts the Constitution before his own beliefs and sees the abortion issue as a states issue, just like so many other things that the federal government has gotten itself involved with.

he got an earful from someone at his reserve 2 weeks.

Tell him to spread the word with his Army people.

_________________________________

My liberty-minded home base of thought:

www.ponderthis.net

http://la.indymedia.org/n...

Print it off and discuss it with him.

It's from 2003, and it shows who owns what media companies. Our media is even more consolidated today. Only 5 companies own most of our media outlets today.

You'll notice that right-winger neocons like Murdoch, and companies like Westinghouse and GE own a large portion of our media. These people have a vested interest in MORE WAR and a continued build up of the military-industrial complex.

No conspiracy, per say. No reason to think of it that way. It's just evidence of a corporation looking out for it's best interest. That's what corporations do. That's why you can't just have a few of them owning all of the major media. The airwaves should belong to the public. RP is for capitalism, but he's expressed many times that he's NOT for monopoly capitalism... which is what we have in our media today.

Why would a media company owned by General Electric, one of the largest military contractors in the country, give a lot of airtime to the most anti-war candidate out there? Why do they give Britney Spears the same importance as real news? Ratings. It's in their best interest. A well-informed public is not. It's way down on the list.

Also give him this link to the words that Eisnehower said, from his farewell speech in 1961, about the dangers of the military-industrial complex...

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

No conspiracy. Just corporatism. Corporations control the government... not the people. If you don't think that's true, look at the video presentation on this site...

http://www.ourcaucus.com

Maybe someone should put together an effort to mail copies of The Revolution to the RNC delegates...?!?

read it...

thanks for that

if only this were true for my parents.....

and sister and brother and the entire family extended......

i'm in such anguish over this.

This is exactly people like your dad that we need to reach and wonderful that the exceptionally well written book can manage this. This just shows the influence of the media and how it can be combatted by Dr. Paul's book.
The book is timeless and should be promoted as much as possible.

Camerron...

In the 1860s, the Lincoln Administration began a system in this country that ushered in the mercantilist type of system that we still have today. It was a very close relationship between big business and government, that continued during the later part of the 1800s and continues today. By the 20s and 30s, this system had evolved to become what is known as Corporatism. Do you actually believe that the corporations in this country would want a free-market, they love government intervention, they thrive on it, even on regulations.

Your objection to capitalism, that is what you are objecting to as you herald the anti-capitalist positions of Obama, and is based upon a false presupposition that you can change the nature of man through government action; when the facts show that no system of either government or economic regulation, even the strictest, most forcefully applied can actually change the behavior of man, especially his innate need for self-preservation. No one has the right to compel another to live his life as they think he should, even if the choices that person makes might not be considered moral, or productive or socially accepted; and the government definitely doesn’t have that right or authority. Self-interests will always win out in the end, the problem is that, according to your view, men are selfish therefore they cannot also be altruistic at the same time. People are not trained to be selfish anymore than they are trained to be altruistic, these behaviors stem from something far deeper in nature of man, and both selfishness and altruism are part of the self-interest found in man.

Over the decades we have seen a gradual erosion of the principle of self-ownership, the government in particular has, through certain types of direct and indirect intervention, assumed that role and in doing so has denied the individual more and more liberty to live his life as he alone sees fit. A person’s freedom of action is directly related to his freedom of thought, when those freedoms are subverted or even diverted to the point that he must constantly be aware of the fact that his actions are being increasingly regulated then man is reduced to a type of slavery that we all recognize as inconsistent to our own self-interest or the interest of society as a whole. In order to man to live a productive life and from that productivity find certain happiness, with the opportunity to realize his full potential then he must be free from all coercion. Coercion never accomplishes its intended goal, even when it is government coercion used for the best intentions. The problem is that we have been taught and many firmly believe, as is evident in our society, that for men to act in their own self-interests automatically precludes the interests of society as a whole, nothing could be farther from the truth.

For decades we have been told that capitalism and free-markets are evil and destructive, but who has been telling us this? We have been told this lie by the very ones who have profited the most from a contrived, manipulated, regulated market that stifles real competition, excluding a vast number of people from rising above their class and drains them through legal tender laws that forces them to use Fiat Money, which is intentionally debased to the point that people labor in vain to get ahead. Make no mistake about it; government regulations and controls benefit the government and its corporate backers more than anyone else. In a free-market, with minimum government oversight, the self-interests of the individual becomes the basis of the entire market process; such a system not only works, but it works well and can, if allowed, create more wealth and more opportunity than any government contrived program or policy. In a free-market where the producer produces in his own self-interests the consumer will also consume in his own best interest the interests of society will also benefit. It is a simple principle that is tried and true.

Government, religion or government as religion have not been successful in expunging the natural attributes from mankind for thousands of years therefore, the question becomes what will be the most beneficial for the most people. There is only one way for our society to raise the level of prosperity and that is to accede to the natural attributes of man to further his life by the process of his own rational self-interest. Now, none of this precludes the action of law, but the truth is that markets will naturally weed out the fraudulent, harmful and deceptive however, the law against such activities is to be expected and advocated. I have, in no wise, advocated the elimination of laws that protect individuals from such practices, but I do advocate that the government is not equipped to manipulate either social mores, social and financial statuses, economic movements or even monetary policy other than regulating an honest weight and measure for that money.

None have caused more harm, more devastation, more suffering, and more deaths than Priest, Politicians and Philosophers. It is a deceptive utopian dream to believe that government, or any government program, action or policy can morph the natural forces that shapes the lives of men and actually build societies such as ours without causing more disruptions, dislocations and disasters than it solves. Our government has proved that fact; in fact, just about every government has proved that fact. It seems easy for those who advocate massive government controls over society or the economy to forget that as long as men are human, as long as they are free to make choices in their lives, whether those choices are rational or irrational, wise or unwise, moral or immoral that such changes always serve other interests other than the ones that are touted by government or politicians.

That is one reason why government economic controls rarely do any good and usually cause more harm in the long run. The best that government can do, especially in economic terms, is to allow the natural attributes of man, including the spark of creativity within him, to flourish without heavy regulation, especially as has been stated, that such regulation favors the politically connected in just about every single case.

All the government regulations, controls, decrees, manipulations cannot change the way a man feels or how he thinks or the choices he makes and all those factors play a very direct role in economic cycles. The government has, through decades of interventions, sought to control that which is ultimately beyond its control. This of course only leaves government with one option and that option is coercion under the threat of penalty or imprisonment. The coercion of anyone, either by an individual or government, is always wrong and counterproductive even when that coercion is used for the common good. The role of government is to promote the common good not to coerce to achieve such a lofty goal.

As we have seen, when a system like our current one engages in regulatory actions, the manipulation of money within markets and oppressive redistribution of wealth, particularly from the middle classes, then it becomes heavily weighted in favor of those who are politically connected, as such, it is very unfavorable to those on the bottom rungs of society…this is not capitalism. Because of the system they have far fewer chances of rising above their status in life due to the unfavorable policies implemented by the government and its agents then they would in a genuine free-market. Capitalism is not the culprit, in fact, capitalism gives the most people the best opportunity to advance their lives and livelihood than any other system since it depends totally upon the market forces which reflect the needs, desires, aspirations, and even fears inherent in the nature of man. When you find some government politician who has a good idea about how to try to regulate the economy contrary to those inherent attributes found in man then you will see complex problems and economic prejudices form, just as we have witnessed.

The economy naturally experiences cycles, booms and busts, because it follows the same patterns as society and the circumstances that society finds itself in at any given time. War, unrest, fear, peace, security, etc., all play a part in the movements of the economy because they all play apart in the emotional movements in the population. To think that such things can be regulated by government when in most cases it is the government, which contributes to many of the circumstances that contribute to these emotional movements in the population, is beyond reason, yet people maintain that the economy can be regulated. Regulations only serve to disrupt the natural cycles found within the economy, which are influenced by the naturally occurring attributes in mankind, and usually such regulations and manipulations only extend the various cycles to the point that more people will suffer from the results of such interference. Perhaps one day more and more people will finally realize that the multitude of government actions is the actual cause of our social and economic ills. Instead of actually helping people rise above poverty, the poor may one day realize that the government has done precious little but bleed American and its economy to the point that they must settle for generational poverty despite all the promises, all the expansive programs they can only look from their monthly stipend from the government as their sole source of income.

The government makes is so hard for anyone to advance in this country, anyone hoping to advance beyond their status or in the case of the poor, to even hope of getting out of the poverty trap they face so many regulations, fees, licenses, permissions from so many branches, agencies, departments of government from the federal down to the local. It is almost impossible for an individual to help himself when facing such hurdles placed in his way. Even if that person is able to make it through the labyrinth of requirements to start a business, even a meager enterprise, he must then face a whole host of requirements to keep his business open. These regulations, in one way or another, usually favor special interests and are very real restrictions on opportunities. The government makes it hard for Americans to increase their lot in life.

Unfortunately, our economy has suffered from a mixture of socialism and a very large portion of corporate fascism with little remaining of actual free enterprise. This country hasn’t seen a free-market capitalistic system since the 1860s, and even then there was heavy distortion in the system due to certain tariffs being imposed for political reasons. Is it little wonder the mass of people in this country struggle because the only economic system that would provide them with a good chance at prosperity has been effectively regulated out of the economy for decades. We don’t have a free-market, but one that is highly regulated for a very specific purpose. If you consider the hideous nature of the fiat monetary system and what it actually does to the ability of the people to gain wealth, it is no wonder that the socio-fascists within our corporate government implemented it, for it allowed for the creation of a massive peonage, productive for the sole benefit of the corporatists, the “uber-wealthy”, but who basically now work for pennies on the dollar per hour. Under the guise of economic expansion, a chicken in every pot, and stability our government has imposed one of the most oppressive instruments upon this people and our land: Fiat Money.

One of the most hideous attributes of Fiat Money is it allows the government to expand itself, and in particular, to wage war without raising taxes. Before the Fiat Monetary System, the government was restrained by taxation from taking unwise positions or waging unwarranted and offensive wars because the people would simply not stand by and let the government drain them through taxation to fund such endeavors. Any country that has allowed its government to institute a Fiat Monetary System has condemned itself to an eventual economic disaster and political unrest, perhaps to the point of the complete destruction of its society as a whole.

Through this unmerciful monetary system they have crafted a modern feudal state, filled with productive workers who slave while under the impression that they are making a living when in reality the money they work for grows more worthless as each year passes. In this most seductive form of corporatism, the government is leaving a nominal amount of real ownership in the hands of the people, and through the artful deception of debt prosperity the people have fallen for the ruse. Eventually, we will wake up, we will be forced awake in the rudest manner...its called reality.

"Since late Neolithic times, men in their political capacity have lived almost exclusively by myths."--Dr. James J. MartinThe "invisible hand" of self-regulating economies tends to punish the misdeeds of business rapidly, and likewise it rewards proper actions and decisions. Under a free-market, business have a true rate of interest in which to perform their businesses instead of a manipulated one where future rates cannot be relied upon due to the nature of the FED meddling. Since real interest rates are based upon time values, the businessman or businesswoman can accurately determine not only the time value of their inventories, but also real rates of return on their capital investments. At present, that is all but impossible.

The problems with government regulatory agencies and the Fed, is that they depend much more on statistics, massive statistics and statisticians who do little but read these statistics without realizing that there is no neutrality in reality like there are in those statistics. People, who make up the economy through their actions, are not neutral with respect to their economic environment. People, unlike statistics, actually base economic decisions based upon certain values that they prefer. People have goals, wants, desires, hopes, aspirations, and fears, etc. that drive their financial decisions, these make up the economy and are based upon a myriad of values. While the government is all about statistics, the reality is that economics is much more than mere statistics isolated outside of the real world, it is the science of human action, and that action rest in some very deep-seated and fundamental principles of human behavior. This government bases its economy and the regulations it attempts to impose upon it only on numerical quantities and ignores the larger, more influential qualitative functions of human action.

The government is quick to provide a regulatory agency with “police powers”, but as experience proves, such powers do not mean that there is a solution at the end of the government’s induced rainbow of regulatory bliss. Take monopolistic corporations, such corporations could not enjoy monopoly characteristics without government privileges of some type. Normally, that is to say, in a free-market, corporations would be thrown to the consumer wolves and their fate would be determined by the actual competitive edge in service, price, and quality delivered to the consumer. Yes, in free-markets there is no government bailout, businesses must depend on good practices, not only to stay competitive, but also to be successful, otherwise they fail. Oh the horror, to imagine that companies would be allowed to fail, especially large corporations, but in a free-market it is not only possible but necessary if there is a level state of commerce that actually benefits both the economy and the people of the country through commercial practices that result from voluntary choices of both buyer and sellers, all in open competition.

For decades, this government has been in the “wealth” redistribution business, which, they assumed, would bring about a more “equitable” society, but the only thing that can accomplish that is actual wealth creation and the government cannot accomplish that feat, only free-market enterprise with full property rights can accomplish that. At one time, our money was considered our property, a person worked and was compensated for that labor with money that was a unit of value that could consistently be counted and relied on more times than not. The illusion is that money is wealth when it is not, even the government promotes this illusion to a large degree. While it is true that the government can transfer the wealth of one group of people to another, this accomplishes nothing but momentary satisfaction and relief, but it does little to raise the actual living standards of the people who need it the most. Living standards depend on creating wealth through enterprise, through manufacturing, through trade and creativity.

Redistributing money does nothing but increase the availability of goods and services those trapped in poverty. It simply transfers buying power from one person to another. This is a sensitive point, so bear with me, when the government takes taxes from one person and then redistributes that money to another person with the idea of equalizing wealth, they are really just taking more productive long-term goods and services from one group to give to another which must meet immediate needs with the funds the government provides. Of course, the government, and socialists don’t see it that way, they don’t realize that by taxing the fruits of working laborers actually discourages thrift, work and future productivity which increases the possibility of job creation, while subsidizing idleness only increases it.

The key is not found in either the Republican or the Democratic Parties, they are pretty much in the same boat, but using different paddles to get to the same place. The most efficient resource in this country is private ownership of productive resources that can be used to create job opportunities and a far more abundant living standard for those trapped in the government induced cycle of poverty. There have been so many people who have been dispossessed, in some cases driven, in the name of slum clearance and urban development, from their modest homes which they could afford into public housing projects. On top of that they must then pay much higher grocery bills because our Congress passed and funded a massive $300 Billion Dollar Farm bill, with borrowed inflationary money, that subsidizes farmers, some of whom are wealthy. I know that for a fact, a neighbor of mine owns about 13,000 acres, and is a multi-millionaire, yet he gets a hefty little check, well over 6 figures, from the government each and every year to subsidize his little farm. Politicians, whether Democrats like Obama, or Republicans like McCain seek the most power for The STATE as possible and are willing to do whatever it takes to assure that power.

The poor are prime targets for the war-mongers too, they are hit by the recruiters with fairy tales of excitement and adventure, including money for college. The lower one third and the middle class are asked to pay for government protection of corporations and industry in the form of tariffs, quotas, embargoes and other price-hiking policies created by some bureaucrat who is connected or influenced by some corporate special interest lobbyist. The poor in this country have been reduced to slaves of handouts and subsidies with guaranteed subsistence complete with its own shackles. The poor are completely stripped of their self-respect, their concept of self-responsibility has been torn from them to the point that they may no longer respect their lives or the lives and property of others. The politicians have promised the poor of our country so much and delivered little more than maintained poverty. It sickens me!

The only thing that can raise the level of poverty in this country is good ole fashioned free-market enterprise, but that depends on a sound monetary system with a very restricted efficient government where power is decentralized and held in check, where corruption is actually eradicated and the politicians once again realize that they serve at the people’s pleasure and with their consent.

There is a tendency to believe that businesses, big business in particular, favor free-markets however, the evidence it just the opposite. They are, for the most part, politically connected and as such they seek certain regulatory interventions by the government. What we are seeing in this country is little more than an extension of late 19th Century Mercantilism or a word that became fashionable, even in this country during the early 20th Century in this country: fascism or a mixture of government and corporate control over he economy. During the Nixon Administration, William Simon, then Treasury Secretary said that he was amazed as: “I watched with incredulity as businessmen ran to the government in every crisis, whining for handouts or protection from the very competition that has made this system so productive. I saw Texas ranchers, hit by drought, demanding government-guaranteed loans; giant milk cooperatives lobbying for higher price supports; major airlines fighting deregulation to preserve their monopoly status; giant companies like Lockheed seeking federal assistance to rescue them from sheer inefficiency; bankers, like David Rockefeller, demanding government bailouts to protect them from their ill-conceived investments; network executives, like William Paley of CBS, fighting to preserve regulatory restrictions and to block the emergence of competitive cable and pay TV.”

It is interesting that even in the later part of the 19th Century those who called for more government intervention and regulatory oversight was big business. Big business love government and Federal Reserve inflationist intervention into the economy, it provides them with an edge that they might not otherwise enjoy in a free market.

The truth of the matter is that “Monopolists” and their “Political Pigs” tremble at the thought of a free-market because it would inhibit them from creating a false economy where they are the first at the trough. Eventually, people will begin to notice that the monetary policy of the FED is, to a very large extent, the cause of the very problems it is supposed to solve. Sooner or later, we will wise up.

We are the most giving, compassionate country the world has ever seen. Unfortunately, the giving ends up being squandered by tyrants the world-over.

We could feed the world with all the money we spend on the military-industrial complex. Your man Obama is more worried about making sure Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon... AT ALL COSTS. Yeah, he cares.

You need to look at Milton Friedman some...

This explains why we can't let the government spend so much of our money. The 4 ways to spend money:

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

Milton and Phil Donahue debate capitalism and greed:

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

When people in Sumatra got hit by the tsunami, we, the people of the United States of America gave hundreds of millions of dollars, both through the government and through the private sector.

The government is doing such a good job of stopping poverty and oppression now, aren't they? You cannot expect the government to be able to help people and do it efficiently. People have to help people.

No politician who, given the financial state of affairs of the United States, proposes ANY increases in spending...no matter what the cause...CARES about poor people. If you think so...you need lessons on monetary policy and inflation of fiat currency.

Try this: http://www.dailypaul.com/...

The problems that you elude to are much more a sign of government, once again, not working properly...specifically the judicial branch. When government is in the hands of the corporations, it acts to guard its benefactors from paying the price for bad behavior. Were the money we waste on entitlements to go to a well oiled court system...we wouldn't have the corporate bad behavior, from pollution to usury, that we now see. If the Courts stood for individual rights, above the desires of the collectivists, most of the ills you cited would not have been in evidence. Instead the money trust, which your boy Obama is a bitch for, had the tiller and mainsheet in their grubby hands and set their bow on a course that is now what we call "history".

It was never said that corporations were to be responsible for charity/welfare in an un-mandated world. That was the roll of the responsible citizen. And it did work until the "extra" income that might be targeted for charitable use was usurped via rising inflation due to the glad-handed printing of fiat currency and then the under-handed winding in of credit. Couple this with power mongering between politicians and their corporate benefactors...the likes of which are obfuscated...behind seemingly "do good" trusts and entitlement legislation and you have the recipe for where we are today. Further, it could be said that the explosion of population and the resultant growth in entitlements is exacerbated by such programs where people are less responsible in their decisions whether or not to have children...a decision that should be based on one's ability, financial and otherwise to raise a child. I think you can easily see that the opposite result has been in evidence.

Nanny's are continuously relied upon, a state of affairs that persists until the nanny is discharged.

You seem to have no understanding of corporate power nor of that from which it is derived. Nor do you seem to have a grasp on the societal ills associated with fiat currency in the hands of those in first position for it's benefits and with the "power" to turn the presses on at will. Understand that all of the "value" printed comes from the back pockets of a citizenry that can't "just say no".

You can have OBAMA where the sun don't shine...and while you're at it...stick Comrade McCain in there with him..

**“The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them.” ~ Mark Twain **

Communists don’t care about poor people. They only say they do, all while championing policies directly aimed at keeping the poor downtrodden and dependent on a benevolent, ‘liberal’, caring class. Just like Obama. And the rest of the riffraff he surrounds himself with.

With communist being as loosely defined as it is, I guess you can argue Obama is not one, but his policy objectives sure has a lot in common with theirs. Like

Transferring control of more of the nation’s wealth from individuals to government. Emphasis on ‘control’. While his proposals may well leave assets nominally in private hands, the private owners are forced to follow government dictates as regards how to use their ‘private’ property. At the same time, owners who purr nicely and aren’t too uppity, gets to be consulted when it comes time to enact regulation to keep their potential competitors at bay. That way, monetary rewards are bestowed not on those best and cheapest serving the needs on their customers, but on those most useful to Obama and the rest of our political overlords.

Ensuring as many people as possible get as large a chunk of their direct livelihood from various politically dependent schemes as possible, instead of making it as easy as possible for individuals to become self sufficient. If a comfortable majority of voters either get their salary and pensions directly from the state, or is employed by companies totally dependent on state contracts, you have pretty much created a voting bloc with some serious self interest in keeping Obama and friends alive, growing and in power for all posterity. If you can, at the same time, ensure inflation is eating away these people’s assets quickly enough to prevent them from ever becoming financially independent, you pretty much have them roped in for life.

Controlling what people hear, see and are taught. By promoting government controlled education, and taxing people and regulating alternatives to the point where it becomes financially impossible for the masses to take advantage of them, Obama and co. can ensure the coming generations are only minimally exposed to ‘subversive’ ideas. Like self sufficiency and financial independence. As well as the, for Obama and various communists and facists at least, lethal notion that by far the vast majority of people are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, with no need to be ‘cared’ for by a bunch of self important middlebrows with little more to show for themselves than sharp elbows , lack of morals and a dad rich enough to send them to a private university. Get out of people’s way, as in pretty much completely, and they will find a way to get themselves and their families by. In style, even, now that they no longer have to drag Obama and his entourage of government scabs and lackeys along with them.

By any definition, Obummer is a socialist. I suggest you read some history instead of the mantra you are repeating- your assertions are tragically comic.

You are confused on the following:

• Free market capitalism vs. Feudal Capitalism/ Fascism. Hint: our system ain't capitalism. It's far closer to socialism , you know.. "that cares about people"... ;-0

• Government can be trusted? Really?...

• The government facilitation of big corporations interests. Government creates monopolies in most cases, and then legislates their protection. All the while folks like you think that the government is the shining knight coming to the rescue. Most of the time corporations get their undue power because of government not in spite of it. See current events: the housing bubble and bail-out. Yes, the government really cares about people.... sure.

• The difference between a Democracy and a Republic. In spite of it's tattered condition- thankfully, we are the latter.

• The truly corrupt and oppressive nature of government wealth re-distribution. It's not what it seems.

• The true cause of the Great Depressions cause and the reason for it's lengthy of it's duration.

This list is just the very tip of the iceberg...

Let's see... Obama- "change you can believe in"... hmmm....

He has changed his position on the FISA laws....

He is change-ing his position on support for the war....

...What other "change" does Obama believe in ?

over our benevolent government- and probably Obama too. I'm sure someone else could address the great depression better than me. I know in my family nobody starved and nobody was on welfare.

I do understand what your saying. Corporations don't care about anything except profit. But if you feel that people can't be trusted why in the world do you think that power-hungry ego maniac politician people can? I'm pretty sure I saw a headline about a GOVERNMENT nuke sub LEAKING in Japan. (They've also left these at the bottom of the ocean- 'cause the government is sure they'll be secure for ever). So much for protecting the enviornment. The government may give us minimum wage, but also takes about half our GDP in the form of taxes and steals from us through inflation because it has bankrupted us. The government is also not so great on human rights. Secret prisons and gitmo come to mind, but I know there are many other examples. What I do feel is more trustworthy and accountable is my neighborhood, my family, my church. My government does not care about anything except more power and more government. Take care, Kathleen

You can not have laissez-faire with a government central bank.

Re: wage slavery, I agree with Francois Tremblay:
Anyone who is so stupid as to associate real slavery with freely-chosen work does not deserve anyone's support.