Ron Paul: "Bernie is just a variant of Trump"

Perhaps he meant that neither seem to have a lot of details to back up their governmental dreams
 
Do you have a lick of evidence for Sanders being "authoritarian".

Why do you ask questions as if you have any intention of listening to the answer?

Sanders is authoritarian because he is about expanding the power of the Federal Government. He's for using Federal Government force for more taxation, more regulation, more intervention into the market, and so on. If you do not comply to these Federal Mandates, the Government can then arrest you, incarcerate you, and so on. That's perfectly authoritarian. It's saying that you aren't free in these respects, you're under the threat of force to comply.
 
Bernie's authoritarian because he wants to ramp up taxes on Wall Street and other big companies. He also wants to raise the minimum wage. He also wants to regulate wasteful industries.

Limiting big business's ability to stuff as much money as they humanly can in their pockets = authoritarianism.

Wrong. Big Business USES Government for their own purposes. Government and business is in bed deeply with Wall Street. Pushing MORE Government into the market just creates MORE incentive for Big Business to use it's influence.

Big Business isn't scary when it cannot use Government to further it's own agenda. Big Business is scary when it is able to use Government for it's own agenda. This is Corporatism, Crony Capitalism, etc. The cure for the mix of Government and Big Business isn't giving them more incentives to be in bed together. The solution is to remove all Government meddling in the market and then you remove the biggest weapon that Big Businesses wield.
 
Wrong. Big Business USES Government for their own purposes. Government and business is in bed deeply with Wall Street. Pushing MORE Government into the market just creates MORE incentive for Big Business to use it's influence.

Big Business isn't scary when it cannot use Government to further it's own agenda. Big Business is scary when it is able to use Government for it's own agenda. This is Corporatism, Crony Capitalism, etc. The cure for the mix of Government and Big Business isn't giving them more incentives to be in bed together. The solution is to remove all Government meddling in the market and then you remove the biggest weapon that Big Businesses wield.

I wish more people would recognize that there is no government, there are no corporations, that they are one entity, and this is the problem.
 
Well Ron Paul is right he is a supporter of the military industrial complex and of Federal Reserve and "evil Israel".

So now Anung and Bernies hardcore Ron Paul fans should disown Bernie since Ron Paul is their true Messiah.

By the way I am not a fan of Ron Paul and like Bernie. But by Ron Paul's definition and criteria Bernie is a supporter of the 'system'.
 
Why do you ask questions as if you have any intention of listening to the answer?

Sanders is authoritarian because he is about expanding the power of the Federal Government. He's for using Federal Government force for more taxation, more regulation, more intervention into the market, and so on. If you do not comply to these Federal Mandates, the Government can then arrest you, incarcerate you, and so on. That's perfectly authoritarian. It's saying that you aren't free in these respects, you're under the threat of force to comply.

You don't know what authoritarian means. Clearly.
 
Wrong. Big Business USES Government for their own purposes. Government and business is in bed deeply with Wall Street. Pushing MORE Government into the market just creates MORE incentive for Big Business to use it's influence.

Big Business isn't scary when it cannot use Government to further it's own agenda. Big Business is scary when it is able to use Government for it's own agenda. This is Corporatism, Crony Capitalism, etc. The cure for the mix of Government and Big Business isn't giving them more incentives to be in bed together. The solution is to remove all Government meddling in the market and then you remove the biggest weapon that Big Businesses wield.

Big business hasn't been the force that's driven the movements for collective bargaining rights, public healthcare ("socialized medicine"), and pollution control.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
O'Reilly has said the exact same thing.

 
Wrong. Big Business USES Government for their own purposes. Government and business is in bed deeply with Wall Street. Pushing MORE Government into the market just creates MORE incentive for Big Business to use it's influence.

Big Business isn't scary when it cannot use Government to further it's own agenda. Big Business is scary when it is able to use Government for it's own agenda. This is Corporatism, Crony Capitalism, etc. The cure for the mix of Government and Big Business isn't giving them more incentives to be in bed together. The solution is to remove all Government meddling in the market and then you remove the biggest weapon that Big Businesses wield.

That's exactly right. Removing the gun (force of government) from the room is what's necessary, not replacing it with an RPG.
 
That's exactly right. Removing the gun (force of government) from the room is what's necessary, not replacing it with an RPG.

But unless you're an anarchist of the Tolstoy variety (which Paul is not), you're not advocating removing force from the room.
 
Wrong. Big Business USES Government for their own purposes. Government and business is in bed deeply with Wall Street. Pushing MORE Government into the market just creates MORE incentive for Big Business to use it's influence.

Big Business isn't scary when it cannot use Government to further it's own agenda. Big Business is scary when it is able to use Government for it's own agenda. This is Corporatism, Crony Capitalism, etc. The cure for the mix of Government and Big Business isn't giving them more incentives to be in bed together. The solution is to remove all Government meddling in the market and then you remove the biggest weapon that Big Businesses wield.

So the solution is to get rid of the weapon (government) and leave the perpetrator (Big Business) alone. That makes no sense.

Without government regulating it, big business has free reign to be as brutal and tyrannical as it wants. Government is the ONLY institution that can even hope to stand up to it. Like my signature says, it can be democratic, big business cannot. The solution is to make government democratic. Not to give big business more freedom to do what it wants.
 
So the solution is to get rid of the weapon (government) and leave the perpetrator (Big Business) alone. That makes no sense.

Without government regulating it, big business has free reign to be as brutal and tyrannical as it wants. Government is the ONLY institution that can even hope to stand up to it. Like my signature says, it can be democratic, big business cannot. The solution is to make government democratic. Not to give big business more freedom to do what it wants.

This shows why so many people hold the position that you do. You're actually more afraid of a business than you are Government. And this makes no sense whatsoever. You have to voluntarily do business with a business - unless Government is involved. You have to do business with Government no matter what.

Businesses aren't free to be tyrannical, unless they've come into possession of powers granted to them by Government. In a Free Market a business is held in check by it's own greed. A business can't charge $1000 for bananas because another business will charge .25 for bananas and the greedy business will destroy it's reputation and consumers will take their money elsewhere. A business who desires profit can only do so by marketing and appealing to the largest amount of people it can. If they are abusing people, people will choose to go elsewhere.

With Government there are no such controls. And Government can fuck you whether you like it or not, whether you chose to do business with them or not. A Government can strip you of your rights. A business cannot.

So when people like you make the argument that a business can be as brutal and tyrannical as it wants, and they champion more Government power, I have to wonder where your screws went loose. It's as if you're not even TRYING to understand what's going on. You're so determined for the enemy to be a business that you're blinded to reality. It's the same with the masochists and Islamists. These people are so convinced in their narrative that the West is at fault for everything, that they're willing to back genocidal groups just because those groups oppose the West.
 
This shows why so many people hold the position that you do. You're actually more afraid of a business than you are Government. And this makes no sense whatsoever. You have to voluntarily do business with a business - unless Government is involved. You have to do business with Government no matter what.

Businesses aren't free to be tyrannical, unless they've come into possession of powers granted to them by Government. In a Free Market a business is held in check by it's own greed. A business can't charge $1000 for bananas because another business will charge .25 for bananas and the greedy business will destroy it's reputation and consumers will take their money elsewhere. A business who desires profit can only do so by marketing and appealing to the largest amount of people it can. If they are abusing people, people will choose to go elsewhere.

With Government there are no such controls. And Government can fuck you whether you like it or not, whether you chose to do business with them or not. A Government can strip you of your rights. A business cannot.

So when people like you make the argument that a business can be as brutal and tyrannical as it wants, and they champion more Government power, I have to wonder where your screws went loose. It's as if you're not even TRYING to understand what's going on. You're so determined for the enemy to be a business that you're blinded to reality. It's the same with the masochists and Islamists. These people are so convinced in their narrative that the West is at fault for everything, that they're willing to back genocidal groups just because those groups oppose the West.

Not to mention, government is already an arm of corporations and private interests (central bankers, MIC). Expanding state power, especially at a federal level, expands this existing private power.

It's an awkward dynamic.
 
Bernie will go down as the Ron Paul of 2016.

No. Absolutely not. They couldn't be more dissimilar philosophically. In fact the only common denominator between the two is their rejection by the establishment, but in that sense Trump also fits into that category.
 
So, last chance, any rebuttal defending the equating of Sanders/Trump or explanation for my being a moron myself for pointing out how ludicrous the comparison is and what an utter dolt Paul is?

It's pretty simple really. They're both looking to grow the size of government and authoritarianism, albeit in different ways.
 
Ron Paul, not surprisingly, doesn't understand simple concepts. There is indeed a similar aspect to Sanders and Trump but it isn't authoritarianism like Paul states. Instead the similarity is populism. Sanders plays to many classic left-wing populist sentiments while Trump plays to many classic right-win populist sentiments. There are many similarities between the two types of populism but very profound differences as well (most notably the nativist-racist components of right-wing populism).

Paul is correct that Trump tends toward authoritarianism but you have to not know what that word means to apply it to Sanders. As is often the case, Paul doesn't understand the meanings of words he uses.

Or rather both authoritarianism and populism. They're not necessarily mutually exclusive. In fact, that's what makes it even more frightening when people are clamoring and cheering for more controls to be brought on them. You're either dealing with Trump's clamp on social freedoms or you're dealing with Sanders' pressure on financial freedoms (ex gun rights if you consider that a social liberty).
 
Ron was especially upset by Trump's quote about America not being a country where people who cannot afford medical care should be left to die in the streets.

Far too tyrannical and authoritarian a position for an enlightened libertarian.
The only time I miss Ron Paul is when I remember him in debates stumbling to answer questions about healthcare. Oh boy was that fun.
 
So the solution is to get rid of the weapon (government) and leave the perpetrator (Big Business) alone. That makes no sense.

Without government regulating it, big business has free reign to be as brutal and tyrannical as it wants. Government is the ONLY institution that can even hope to stand up to it. Like my signature says, it can be democratic, big business cannot. The solution is to make government democratic. Not to give big business more freedom to do what it wants.

You and everyone else that decides whether they want to buy a businesses' product is the force majure that "stands up" to a business not government... unless you're going to say that the government has more people evaluating the businesses' product more of the time and making decisions with their own resources.

Also, as a a matter of fact business is democratic. Actually, its the only democratic process that takes into account what the minority thinks about its policies.
 
Back
Top