Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

This is probably the most bizarre Ron Paul plugging yet, but lets have fun with it.

The pace of information technology has been accelerating exponentially for over a century, and is just beginning to merge with biotechnology, which is also accelerating exponentially. If the historical exponential trend continues over the next 40 years, we'll essentially be able to re-engineer living humans at will.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/38

One consequence of this trend (as bizarre as it sounds) is that some of us posting here may live for 10,000 years or more, in some form we haven't yet imagined, depending on which exponential technology curve we choose to follow.

However, in the words of Ray Kurzweil, "It's the economic imperative of a competitive marketplace that is the primary force driving technology forward and fueling the law of accelerating returns."

I.E. socialist policy, however attractive it may seem to you at the moment, has the effect of damping the exponential trend -- it will of course still be exponential, but the constant defining which exponential curves we follow well be effected by what fraction of the profitablity of new technology government decides to appropriate for it's own super-noble causes.

So -- are you in your 20's or 30's? If so, you're right on the cusp. Integrating the effect of socialist taxation and various artificial boundaries on technology-driving companies over the crucial next 40 years may very well be the difference in arriving at sufficient people-enhancing technology before you kick off.

So, my shameless plug -- vote Ron Paul and live for 100,000,000 years at a level of consciousness beyond your wildest dreams, personally visiting other solar systems, etc. etc. etc. or vote Barak Obama and be buried at 70 -- but with free dental.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Ron Paul is a Christian politician who wants to forcefully remove hundreds of thousand of people from their homes and shift them over an imaginary boundary line using stolen money to do so.

Ron Paul is worse than just a statist, he knows and agrees that taxation is theft but still wants to use it for his own ends.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

And he refused to support gays in the military!!!!

And he would give the states the right to discriminate! >(

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ron Paul is a Christian politician who wants to forcefully remove hundreds of thousand of people from their homes and shift them over an imaginary boundary line using stolen money to do so.

Ron Paul is worse than just a statist, he knows and agrees that taxation is theft but still wants to use it for his own ends.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is [censored]. Ron Paul's believes that federal taxation of individuals is theft and he wants to repeal the income tax completely. He wouldn't be using "tax money" to remove illegal immigrants. All he wants to do is spend the money generated by some light tariffs on a few small federal programs including defense (real defense, not war) and border security. How you can think this is "worse than a typical statist" is just beyond me.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Nanobots, Tom... Nanobots.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]

This is [censored]. Ron Paul's believes that federal taxation of individuals is theft and he wants to repeal the income tax completely. He wouldn't be using "tax money" to remove illegal immigrants.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is he proposing using his own money? What right does he have to shift people about the world against their will anyway?

[ QUOTE ]
All he wants to do is spend the money enerated by some light tariffs

[/ QUOTE ]
lol
[ QUOTE ]

on a few small federal programs including defense (real defense, not war) and border security. How you can think this is "worse than a typical statist" is just beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because all we have as Acists is economics (which is difficult to understand and noone believes anyway) and the moral high ground. Ron Paul has surrendered the moral high ground in saying that taxation (a few light tariffs is still taking money by force) can be a good thing. I'd much rather have George Bush for four more years than surrender my principles and have Ron Paul. Surrendering principles is what got us into this mess in the first place. The income tax was originally like 1% right? To pay for national defense only. Once you've surrendered to main point that taxation is wrong it gets easier and easier to cave on more and more things until you get to where things are today.

Don't support Ron Paul. If you vote, you have no right to complain.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

But Tom you can get a really sweet rocket launcher arm robotic attachment thing, it will be awesome. And a hover skateboard, oh man that will be sweet.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Would living long enough to personally see the sun become a red giant be fair compensation for feeling a bit uneasy about stooping to vote for a Libertarian over a Socialist?

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Would living long enough to personally see the sun become a red giant be fair compensation for feeling a bit uneasy about stooping to vote for a Libertarian over a Socialist?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm saying is Ron Paul takes us further away from that. For once I'm with Nielso. Give me the raging mustachioed communist dictator, and give me true honest convicted freedom lovers who won't waver to preach taxation is evil! Violence is evil! The state is evil! Until it begins to sink in.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
And he refused to support gays in the military!!!!

And he would give the states the right to discriminate! >(

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you actually listen to what he said? He specifically said that they can serve but they can't engage in disruptive behavior as determined by their commanding officers and the same applies to heterosexuals.

Also, where is this "states the right to discriminate" stuff coming from?

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

He would not directly say to get rid of the don't ask don't tell policy because he is afraid of losing votes.

Also, I get the impression he would allow the states to ban abortion and ban gay marriage. While I am somewhat pro-life, I feel the states must have to defer to the federal government about civil rights issues...

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would living long enough to personally see the sun become a red giant be fair compensation for feeling a bit uneasy about stooping to vote for a Libertarian over a Socialist?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm saying is Ron Paul takes us further away from that. For once I'm with Nielso. Give me the raging mustachioed communist dictator, and give me true honest convicted freedom lovers who won't waver to preach taxation is evil! Violence is evil! The state is evil! Until it begins to sink in.

[/ QUOTE ]

This just isn't going to happen. Nobody can handle the concept of no state.

I'd like a very small chance of a Ron Paul presidency over a virtually non-existent chance of no state at all.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
He would not directly say to get rid of the don't ask don't tell policy because he is afraid of losing votes.


[/ QUOTE ]
You can read minds now? Anyways, I don't think Ron Paul has too many votes to lose.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I get the impression he would allow the states to ban abortion and ban gay marriage.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, you can read minds?
[ QUOTE ]
While I am somewhat pro-life, I feel the states must have to defer to the federal government about civil rights issues...

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
He would not directly say to get rid of the don't ask don't tell policy because he is afraid of losing votes.

Also, I get the impression he would allow the states to ban abortion and ban gay marriage. While I am somewhat pro-life, I feel the states must have to defer to the federal government about civil rights issues...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree he probably didn't want to say it that way for fear of losing votes.

He would indeed allow states to ban abortion (I'm pretty sure gay marriage too).

It is a horrendous idea to have the federal government dictate these things to the states. If you let the states make these decisions then people can "vote with their feet" and go to a less oppressive state. When the federal government makes these decisions you have no recourse. By having a loose federation of states you get some degree of protection of the minorities, that is the genius of the American Constitutional Republic. Sadly the ridiculous growth of the Federal government and the ignoring of the constitution have ruined all that.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Because I do not think the states have the right to violate individual liberties, even if they vote for it.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would living long enough to personally see the sun become a red giant be fair compensation for feeling a bit uneasy about stooping to vote for a Libertarian over a Socialist?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm saying is Ron Paul takes us further away from that. For once I'm with Nielso. Give me the raging mustachioed communist dictator, and give me true honest convicted freedom lovers who won't waver to preach taxation is evil! Violence is evil! The state is evil! Until it begins to sink in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry but as a fellow ACist, I have to disagree. Sure, I don't agree with Ron Paul on every single issue, but frankly, at this point in time, I don't care. Just the fact that the overall liberty/free market message is getting out there, to a wider audience, is good enough for me. I probably won't vote but I don't see anything wrong with libertarians and ACists supporting Ron Paul.

AC is not going to happen overnight!

You and Nielso seem to think that it will. That one day everyone will just wake up and start reading Rothbard and watching youtube podcasts and suddenly be converted. Not gonna happen. In fact, I am quite sure nothing close to AC will happen in our lifetimes. But why not make things better rather than worse? Why not try and convert more moderate people into minarchist libertarians and then take it from there?

I know that for me, I had to become a minarchist before I became an ACist. I think that's probably the case for 9/10 ACists on this forum. Even though my philosophy is one of AC, I am still dealing with the confines of reality. And believe me, it's going to take baby steps at first and Ron Paul being all over CNN, FoxNews and the mainstream internet sites is a good enough start.

And when you say you'd rather have George W. Bush for another 4 years than Ron Paul, wow? WTF!? Give Ron Paul a break...he is dealing within the confines of the system in order to achieve a greater goal of spreading the word of liberty and free markets. Philosophically, he could very well be an anarchist, but if he came out saying that on TV, the networks would not give him the time of day.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Ok. But when you vote for Ron Paul, that X is your signature on the social contract that the statists keep going on about. You're saying that certain forms of taxation are ok, you're saying that governments can do better than the market in some areas, you're saying that voting for the lesser of two evils is a worthwhile choice and that democracy can work. You're conceding the whole game and giving up the only bargaining chip we have, the moral high ground, for a fools hope that Ron Paul can somehow cause a change in the US.

If you give it up for any boy who comes along and whispers the right words in your ear you're going to become the school [censored].

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would living long enough to personally see the sun become a red giant be fair compensation for feeling a bit uneasy about stooping to vote for a Libertarian over a Socialist?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm saying is Ron Paul takes us further away from that. For once I'm with Nielso. Give me the raging mustachioed communist dictator, and give me true honest convicted freedom lovers who won't waver to preach taxation is evil! Violence is evil! The state is evil! Until it begins to sink in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry but as a fellow ACist, I have to disagree. Sure, I don't agree with Ron Paul on every single issue, but frankly, at this point in time, I don't care. Just the fact that the overall liberty/free market message is getting out there, to a wider audience, is good enough for me. I probably won't vote but I don't see anything wrong with libertarians and ACists supporting Ron Paul.

AC is not going to happen overnight!

You and Nielso seem to think that it will. That one day everyone will just wake up and start reading Rothbard and watching youtube podcasts and suddenly be converted. Not gonna happen. In fact, I am quite sure nothing close to AC will happen in our lifetimes. But why not make things better rather than worse? Why not try and convert more moderate people into minarchist libertarians and then take it from there?

I know that for me, I had to become a minarchist before I became an ACist. I think that's probably the case for 9/10 ACists on this forum. Even though my philosophy is one of AC, I am still dealing with the confines of reality. And believe me, it's going to take baby steps at first and Ron Paul being all over CNN, FoxNews and the mainstream internet sites is a good enough start.

And when you say you'd rather have George W. Bush for another 4 years than Ron Paul, wow? WTF!? Give Ron Paul a break...he is dealing within the confines of the system in order to achieve a greater goal of spreading the word of liberty and free markets. Philosophically, he could very well be an anarchist, but if he came out saying that on TV, the networks would not give him the time of day.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously, the US has strong minarchist roots with the founding fathers, constitution, etc. People can understand these things. From there, they can start to realize that the state probably shouldn't exist period.

Look at this forum, people move to AC through minarchism. It's usually a gradual process, not a huge snap into ACism.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok. But when you vote for Ron Paul, that X is your signature on the social contract that the statists keep going on about. You're saying that certain forms of taxation are ok, you're saying that governments can do better than the market in some areas, you're saying that voting for the lesser of two evils is a worthwhile choice and that democracy can work. You're conceding the whole game and giving up the only bargaining chip we have, the moral high ground, for a fools hope that Ron Paul can somehow cause a change in the US.

If you give it up for any boy who comes along and whispers the right words in your ear you're going to become the school [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, the statists don't require that you vote in order to agree to their "social contract", mere existence is sufficient according to them.

I believe a vote for Ron Paul is a (very significant) step in the right direction. Another George Bush is a step in the wrong direction.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok. But when you vote for Ron Paul, that X is your signature on the social contract that the statists keep going on about. You're saying that certain forms of taxation are ok, you're saying that governments can do better than the market in some areas, you're saying that voting for the lesser of two evils is a worthwhile choice and that democracy can work. You're conceding the whole game and giving up the only bargaining chip we have, the moral high ground, for a fools hope that Ron Paul can somehow cause a change in the US.

If you give it up for any boy who comes along and whispers the right words in your ear you're going to become the school [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Well like I said, I probably won't be voting. But I wouldn't crucify fellow libertarians who do. A vote for Ron Paul isn't necessarily an endorsement of government, it's an endorsement of Ron Paul and a cry for drastic change. Like I said, hearing much of the stuff he's had to say, I would not be surprised if he's pretty damn close to being an anarchist, philosophically. He is the candidate who is in favor of maximum freedom, minimum govt' intrusion by far. A vote for him is a vote for a more free market economy and more individual liberty.

I don't completely disagree with you I just don't think guys like you and Nielso should be so quick to judge the methods of fellow libertarians who'd rather vote for Ron Paul than sit around with a holier than thou attitude while Big Brother continues to grow and is always looking over their shoulder.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Another George Bush is a step in the wrong direction.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I have a feeling that despite what Tom said, he would run to the polls in support of Ron Paul if he learned he could cast the deciding vote between Ron Paul and George Bush.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would living long enough to personally see the sun become a red giant be fair compensation for feeling a bit uneasy about stooping to vote for a Libertarian over a Socialist?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm saying is Ron Paul takes us further away from that. For once I'm with Nielso. Give me the raging mustachioed communist dictator, and give me true honest convicted freedom lovers who won't waver to preach taxation is evil! Violence is evil! The state is evil! Until it begins to sink in.

[/ QUOTE ]
40 years, Tom. That's the timeframe we're dealing with, with regards to leading up to the singularity. How long is it going to be before the US and other key technological players agree that the state is evil and simply give it up? Give me dates, here. 5 or 10 years from now? If you think so, maybe your strategy is best.

Maximizing technological innovation over the next 40 years is the game we're playing, if you want a decent shot at living far beyond your standard human lifespan. And the way to do that is not to sit on your hands and discourage Libertarians from voting, while Socialists make their standard grab for power and smother progress.

We're not talking about centuries down the line -- we're talking about now. The next 40 years. The runup to the Singularity. You're not going to get that time back. Maybe the company that would have made a key breakthrough in neurochip integration just went under yesterday because capital gains tax etc. restricted the amount of investment capital out there, and made investing in them just not quite profitable enough.

I'll save my hard-line non-participatory stance until slightly AFTER we have a technological fountain of youth.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok. But when you vote for Ron Paul, that X is your signature on the social contract that the statists keep going on about. You're saying that certain forms of taxation are ok, you're saying that governments can do better than the market in some areas, you're saying that voting for the lesser of two evils is a worthwhile choice and that democracy can work. You're conceding the whole game and giving up the only bargaining chip we have, the moral high ground, for a fools hope that Ron Paul can somehow cause a change in the US.

If you give it up for any boy who comes along and whispers the right words in your ear you're going to become the school [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Well like I said, I probably won't be voting. But I wouldn't crucify fellow libertarians who do. A vote for Ron Paul isn't necessarily an endorsement of government, it's an endorsement of Ron Paul and a cry for drastic change. Like I said, hearing much of the stuff he's had to say, I would not be surprised if he's pretty damn close to being an anarchist, philosophically. He is the candidate who is in favor of maximum freedom, minimum govt' intrusion by far. A vote for him is a vote for a more free market economy and more individual liberty.

I don't completely disagree with you I just don't think guys like you and Nielso should be so quick to judge the methods of fellow libertarians who'd rather vote for Ron Paul than sit around with a holier than thou attitude while Big Brother continues to grow and is always looking over their shoulder.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the holier than thou attitude or at least convincing people that anyone who endorses the state is not holy and rather evil is the only chance we have of ridding ourselves of Big Brother. I'd love to vote for Ron Paul, wouldn't life be so much easier if democracy did what it said it did and the state could be used for good it'd be amazing. If voting for Ron Paul would do anything positive there may be a case for it but it undermines the AC position. If Ron Paul didn't exist he'd have to be invented. Supporting him is the perfect way to pacify libertarians and ACists in to thinking they're making progress when nothing of the sort is happening.

A vote for Ron Paul is an endorsement of government. This comes down to the things you say vs the things you do stuff that I've been trying to get across. Ron Paul doesn't know that you're an anarchist. All he knows is that you voted (a statist act) for a guy who has stated that there are good (as in morally good) ways to spend tax money.

To vote for Ron Paul then go back to saying participation in the system is wrong, the lesser of two evils isn't a choice and so on smacks of hypocrisy and completely undermines your argument (and whats worse mine too).

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Heh, the statists don't require that you vote in order to agree to their "social contract", mere existence is sufficient according to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea this is a good point. Anyone who buys into the social contract theory says I have to abide by it, whether I vote or not.

Bottom line; I think you can vote for Ron Paul without losing the moral high ground. Personally, I doubt I will vote, for various reasons, but I have no problem with any libertarians/ACists who just want to take a step in the right direction.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok. But when you vote for Ron Paul, that X is your signature on the social contract that the statists keep going on about. You're saying that certain forms of taxation are ok, you're saying that governments can do better than the market in some areas, you're saying that voting for the lesser of two evils is a worthwhile choice and that democracy can work. You're conceding the whole game and giving up the only bargaining chip we have, the moral high ground, for a fools hope that Ron Paul can somehow cause a change in the US.

If you give it up for any boy who comes along and whispers the right words in your ear you're going to become the school [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Well like I said, I probably won't be voting. But I wouldn't crucify fellow libertarians who do. A vote for Ron Paul isn't necessarily an endorsement of government, it's an endorsement of Ron Paul and a cry for drastic change. Like I said, hearing much of the stuff he's had to say, I would not be surprised if he's pretty damn close to being an anarchist, philosophically. He is the candidate who is in favor of maximum freedom, minimum govt' intrusion by far. A vote for him is a vote for a more free market economy and more individual liberty.

I don't completely disagree with you I just don't think guys like you and Nielso should be so quick to judge the methods of fellow libertarians who'd rather vote for Ron Paul than sit around with a holier than thou attitude while Big Brother continues to grow and is always looking over their shoulder.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the holier than thou attitude or at least convincing people that anyone who endorses the state is not holy and rather evil is the only chance we have of ridding ourselves of Big Brother. I'd love to vote for Ron Paul, wouldn't life be so much easier if democracy did what it said it did and the state could be used for good it'd be amazing. If voting for Ron Paul would do anything positive there may be a case for it but it undermines the AC position. If Ron Paul didn't exist he'd have to be invented. Supporting him is the perfect way to pacify libertarians and ACists in to thinking they're making progress when nothing of the sort is happening.

A vote for Ron Paul is an endorsement of government. This comes down to the things you say vs the things you do stuff that I've been trying to get across. Ron Paul doesn't know that you're an anarchist. All he knows is that you voted (a statist act) for a guy who has stated that there are good (as in morally good) ways to spend tax money.

To vote for Ron Paul then go back to saying participation in the system is wrong, the lesser of two evils isn't a choice and so on smacks of hypocrisy and completely undermines your argument (and whats worse mine too).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I hear some of what your saying, but I honestly don't think you give Ron Paul enough credit for being a pretty staunch libertarian. I don't consider him the "lesser of two evils" because, quite frankly, he isn't part of any "two". Generally speaking, he is a fringe candidate with ideas for some very drastic changes to our country and the role of government.

Let's put it this way. Ron Paul has absolutely no shot in the world of being sworn in to office in January of 2009. But I like to see the MESSAGE is getting out there. The message of freedom, liberty and free markets is what's important here. And the more support people like Ron Paul get, the less fringe their ideas will be, and the more support for libertarianism will spawn, overall. If someone wants to go out and pull a lever one November morning so that they feel like they are helping to progress the ideas of freedom and liberty, I have no problem.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

I disagree with that idea, but I'm willing to change my mind if you can provide me with good enough reason. People are born into large areas of land called states, and it is not the simplest of things under the current system to move a large distance from one state to another. Housing prices vary, transportation cost, etc etc... I do not see how it is fair to allow the states to essentially do whatever they want. If the state wants to have something to do with recognizing marriage, it is not in their authority to discriminate against individuals... That goes for abortion and other things as well.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

Wow, so libertarians and ACists are constantly warning us against the dangers of falling victim to outlandish campaign promises and pie-in-the-sky rhetoric that 'mainstream' Democrats and Republicans in America throw at us.

Good thing you guys haven't fallen victim to that:

[ QUOTE ]
vote Ron Paul and live for 100,000,000 years at a level of consciousness beyond your wildest dreams, personally visiting other solar systems, etc. etc. etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ron Paul: A vote for immortality and interplanetary tourism!

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]

Well I hear some of what your saying, but I honestly don't think you give Ron Paul enough credit for being a pretty staunch libertarian. I don't consider him the "lesser of two evils" because, quite frankly, he isn't part of any "two".

[/ QUOTE ]
He believes that taxation is a good way of achieving some goals.

[ QUOTE ]

Let's put it this way. Ron Paul has absolutely no shot in the world of being sworn in to office in January of 2009.

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed

[ QUOTE ]
But I like to see the MESSAGE is getting out there. The message of freedom, liberty and free markets is what's important here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[ QUOTE ]
If someone wants to go out and pull a lever one November morning so that they feel like they are helping to progress the ideas of freedom and liberty, I have no problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

What you're essentially saying is that you're not interested in moving towards AC'ism.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
What you're essentially saying is that you're not interested in moving towards AC'ism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it? That's weird because that doesn't seem like something I would say. I'm pretty sure I'm saying that voting for Ron Paul isn't a move towards ACism but is in fact tilting at windmills at best and (more likely) a huge step backward for ACism at worst

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am fairly confident that anyone who has already endlessly debated the finer points of politics and philosophy to have reached ACism in the first place, has no problem doing this the way we do it on this forum and perhaps in discussions with our friends and family. Voting for Ron Paul is in addition to all that, not in place of it.

Finally, you and I probably don't like it, but the fact is that there is a HUGE portion of the population in this country that doesn't care enough to discuss politics and philosophy at the dinner table or around the water cooler. All these people do is watch CNN, read the local metro paper and then go vote. If you ever want free markets and liberty to gain serious steam, you have to reach these people any way that you can. Getting a guy like Ron Paul a lot of publicity helps this.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am fairly confident that anyone who has already endlessly debated the finer points of politics and philosophy to have reached ACism in the first place, has no problem doing this the way we do it on this forum and perhaps in discussions with our friends and family. Voting for Ron Paul is in addition to all that, not in place of it.

Finally, you and I probably don't like it, but the fact is that there is a HUGE portion of the population in this country that doesn't care enough to discuss politics and philosophy at the dinner table or around the water cooler. All these people do is watch CNN, read the local metro paper and then go vote. If you ever want free markets and liberty to gain serious steam, you have to reach these people any way that you can. Getting a guy like Ron Paul a lot of publicity helps this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoah, come on now. I used to do political polling and over 50% of the people don't even know the politicans names. Over like 5 months I encountered maybe 4 people who sounded leigimately interested or knoweldgeable enough to have an opinion.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am fairly confident that anyone who has already endlessly debated the finer points of politics and philosophy to have reached ACism in the first place, has no problem doing this the way we do it on this forum and perhaps in discussions with our friends and family. Voting for Ron Paul is in addition to all that, not in place of it.

Finally, you and I probably don't like it, but the fact is that there is a HUGE portion of the population in this country that doesn't care enough to discuss politics and philosophy at the dinner table or around the water cooler. All these people do is watch CNN, read the local metro paper and then go vote. If you ever want free markets and liberty to gain serious steam, you have to reach these people any way that you can. Getting a guy like Ron Paul a lot of publicity helps this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really honestly don't think it does. Now find a way to get ACism or more importantly principle of non-violence or the idea that taxation is theft and theft is wrong in all circumstances onto CNN or in the Metro and I'll not only vote for it I'll fund it out of my own pocket. Ron Paul doesn't do that. He says that fundamentally some level of governmental aggression is ok. In fact he goes further to say that some level is morally good.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
Whoah, come on now. I used to do political polling and over 50% of the people don't even know the politicans names. Over like 5 months I encountered maybe 4 people who sounded leigimately interested or knoweldgeable enough to have an opinion.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes...I believe that was my point. Unless you think I gave them too much credit for reading the paper and watching CNN? I'm talking about getting to the people who do those things but still don't REALLY ever care to discuss politics/philosophy in a very in-depth manner.

You're talking about people who know absolutely NOTHING. Either way, it only helps to further strengthen my point. These people will not wake up one day and decide to be anarchocapitalists. Small progress is necessary at first.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

I'm with tomd here -- there seems to be an *apparent* tension between consequentialism and deontology in the ACist camp; if ACists are to whole-heartedly embrace Ron Paul (and it sure seems like that's happening on this forum), then it would seem to imply that the normative moral and ethical claims ACists are fond of making are at least somewhat meaningless, given how readily they abandon them if it means "a step in the right direction" or some face time on CNN or whatever other justification is used for supporting Paul.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
I really honestly don't think it does. Now find a way to get ACism or more importantly principle of non-violence or the idea that taxation is theft and theft is wrong in all circumstances onto CNN or in the Metro and I'll not only vote for it I'll fund it out of my own pocket. Ron Paul doesn't do that. He says that fundamentally some level of governmental aggression is ok. In fact he goes further to say that some level is morally good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's only saying these things to reach a wider audience in order to get out the big picture(freedom/free markets). But who knows, we can't read his mind. The fact is that the total lack of the state is an EXTREMELY fringe position and finding that being taken seriously on CNN or the New York Times is a no-shot.

I don't want to keep going on this so this is probably the last point I'll make and it's just reitterating what I said earlier. A lot of ACists were once small government libertarians. We once thought that taxes were morally ok for some things. So you just have to give people the benefit of the doubt in that they have to travel the same path that most of us did. It's only natural. There is just no way that you can make most Americans accept ACism without first taking them down the libertarian, "small government=good" path. I think you need to appreciate that and understand it when anarchists decide to vote for Ron Paul as part of the method in spreading the word about free markets and individual liberty.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really honestly don't think it does. Now find a way to get ACism or more importantly principle of non-violence or the idea that taxation is theft and theft is wrong in all circumstances onto CNN or in the Metro and I'll not only vote for it I'll fund it out of my own pocket. Ron Paul doesn't do that. He says that fundamentally some level of governmental aggression is ok. In fact he goes further to say that some level is morally good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's only saying these things to reach a wider audience in order to get out the big picture(freedom/free markets). But who knows, we can't read his mind. The fact is that the total lack of the state is an EXTREMELY fringe position and finding that being taken seriously on CNN or the New York Times is a no-shot.

I don't want to keep going on this so this is probably the last point I'll make and it's just reitterating what I said earlier. A lot of ACists were once small government libertarians. We once thought that taxes were morally ok for some things. So you just have to give people the benefit of the doubt in that they have to travel the same path that most of us did. It's only natural. There is just no way that you can make most Americans accept ACism without first taking them down the libertarian, "small government=good" path. I think you need to appreciate that and understand it when anarchists decide to vote for Ron Paul as part of the method in spreading the word about free markets and individual liberty.

[/ QUOTE ]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Another point is that if the general public no nothing of our position I don't want their first contact with the true ideas of freedom to be a guy who wants to use taxation, the police and the threat of violence to forcefully evict hundreds of thousands of people from their homes. Sending mixed messages on a first impression is much worse than sending no message at all. Once people get the idea the Ron Paul is what all freedom loving people aspire to getting that image out of their head will be very difficult.

You went through the minarchist progression but you just said you have the propensity to argue and debate intelligently (and above all logically) about politics. If people aren't prepared to do that all I want them to hear from freedom lovers is violence is evil taxation is violence. Lets not confuse them.

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm with tomd here -- there seems to be an *apparent* tension between consequentialism and deontology in the ACist camp; if ACists are to whole-heartedly embrace Ron Paul (and it sure seems like that's happening on this forum), then it would seem to imply that the normative moral and ethical claims ACists are fond of making are at least somewhat meaningless, given how readily they abandon them if it means "a step in the right direction" or some face time on CNN or whatever other justification is used for supporting Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a consequentialist ACist, I'm just not going to crucify those that are. The position is so fringe as it is, why bother starting fights in our own camp? That's why I said the last post was "probably" my last of the thread (though I knew it wouldn't be)- because I was tired of going on the defensive for a group of people I'm not even part of (those that intend to cast a vote for Ron Paul).

Re: Ron Paul and the Singularity
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm with tomd here -- there seems to be an *apparent* tension between consequentialism and deontology in the ACist camp; if ACists are to whole-heartedly embrace Ron Paul (and it sure seems like that's happening on this forum), then it would seem to imply that the normative moral and ethical claims ACists are fond of making are at least somewhat meaningless, given how readily they abandon them if it means "a step in the right direction" or some face time on CNN or whatever other justification is used for supporting Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a consequentialist ACist, I'm just not going to crucify those that are. The position is so fringe as it is, why bother starting fights in our own camp? That's why I said the last post was "probably" my last of the thread (though I knew it wouldn't be)- because I was tired of going on the defensive for a group of people I'm not even part of (those that intend to cast a vote for Ron Paul).

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't want you to feel like you're on the defensive. We are all on the same team and what's more I don't doubt that ACers voting for Ron Paul do so for any reason other than their love of freedom, but I'd like to get them to reconsider that decision I hope this thread has been useful towards that end.