Anonymous expose Ron Paul White supremacist links

121 posts / 0 new
Last post
no.25's picture
no.25
Offline
Joined: 14-01-12
Feb 4 2012 21:29
End the FED2 wrote:

Whats the problem? infowars present great information.Not that I agree with everything, but cant we really discuss the issues before judging?

Infowars is a cesspool of exaggerated insanity. The supposed merits of Ron Paul are a joke, any effort to convince us of them is futile.

BrazillianJiuJitsu1992's picture
BrazillianJiuJi...
Offline
Joined: 26-10-11
Feb 4 2012 22:20

All i can say is if you don't like the jius stay off the mat grin

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Feb 4 2012 22:45

hey hey, WELCOME TO AMERICA

Quote:
infowars present great information.

such as ...

Quote:
"The Order of Death" picks up where "Dark Secrets" leaves off. This new work exposes the connections between the Bohemian Club and Skull and Bones and other occult secret societies. Jones explores the roots of the Grove and its links to occult networks dating back to ancient Egypt and Babylon.

and

Quote:
Alex documents the Globalists' execution of the September 11 attacks

and

Quote:
13 Bloodlines Of The Illuminati by Fritz Springmeier
This is a lecture given before The Prophecy Club.

http://www dot lastingnetworks.dot com/alex/

jonthom's picture
jonthom
Offline
Joined: 25-11-10
Feb 5 2012 00:09
End the FED2 wrote:
2- Allright If you disagree with Ron Paul, but the disrespect ("homophobic piece of shit") could be avoided, I'm calm and compreensive but this kind of atitude just create more anger and division.

"This kind of attitude" does not create division. The division is already there. Conflict between anarchists and the Ron Paulites isn't "divisive" so much as just, well, conflict.

We're on different sides, fighting for different things, with different analyses, tactics and goals. He's a "free market" libertarian and senator; we are anti-state anti-capitalists. I'm not sure there's really much more to be said, to be honest.

His politics seem little more than a slightly radicalised version of bland US conservatism - infatuated with "state government" over "big government", closing the borders, isolationism, opposition to the UN and other international orgs, etc. - mixed with the odd bit of liberalism and a hefty dose of Alex Jones-style conspiracism. He's basically McVeigh in a suit and tie.

Out of interest, how did you find this thread in the first place?

ajjohnstone
Offline
Joined: 20-04-08
Feb 5 2012 02:47

Let's not even concede the word libertarian to Ron Paul - Anarcho (Iain M) has shown how it has been usurped fraudulently by the free-marketeers.

Paul is a propertarian, an antebellum tentherist supporting US States rights against the Federal State, a neo-confederate.

My efforts to confront his supporters.

http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2012/01/posts-on-paul.html
http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2012/01/ron-paul-propertarian.html
http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2011/12/st-paul.html
http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-plutocrats-took-power.html

sabot's picture
sabot
Offline
Joined: 21-06-08
Feb 5 2012 05:58

ajjohnstone
Offline
Joined: 20-04-08
Feb 5 2012 09:02

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenther_movement

Maybe you should study the background philosophy of your cult leader before following him .

Nor is he the only anti war presidential candidate, try stewart alexander of the socialist party of america...he will definitely be running against obama and definitely challenging him....unlike the hypothetical situation of ron paul

http://vote-socialist.org/

Arbeiten's picture
Arbeiten
Offline
Joined: 28-01-11
Feb 5 2012 09:34
End the FED3 wrote:
, why would a racist try to stop NATO intervention in an african country?

laugh out loud being a racist doesn't mean he supports 'humanitarian intervention' (perhaps, quite the contrary wink).

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Feb 5 2012 10:26
End the FED wrote:
Arbeiten wrote:
loooooool laugh out loud what an absurd turn in anti-semitism! 'did you know jews killed the jews'! laugh out loud

Suspicious that this counter-argument from End the FED has been completely ignored.

Luckily the jews (I mean zionists) have managed to create a system that is responsible for all 'evil events' and yet they can't rig an election. If those zionazis watch Boardwalk Empire then we're all fucked forever.

riot_dude
Offline
Joined: 27-07-09
Feb 5 2012 13:10
End the FED3 wrote:
Well a great video made for "Megadeth-We the people" (great lyrics!) resumes some important information. A lot of people is open to new information and rejecting a sectarian mindset,so pay attention to dont be manipulated by anything done by you don't know who or any forum moderator like the one here that don't like too much free speech! I mean, he opened the topic and don't allow criticism to the article...

Megadeth for Presidentz!

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 5 2012 13:26

Jesus, I was thinking I might actually try to respond to this, but if your argument is that the "globalists" (who can be Bolsheviks, Nazis, Zionist, the UN or the IMF or fucking Steven apparently...) control everything well, shit, logic and a structural critique of capitalism...I'm just not sure it's going to find fertile ground in the tin-foil covered head of ETF.

Oh well, I guess I am a bit of a sucker for punishment. Here goes...

ETF wrote:
"Self-proclaimed socialists are enforcing austerity in Europe"! Thats right, for example Greece and Italy are ruled by non elected IMF/World bank bureaucrats supported by "socialists". So it's really important to not be fooled by rethoric,flags... You know the fabian society socialists... guess why their symbol is a wolfe in sheeps clothes. Socialism was used in lots of circunstances as a tool to fool the masses

You've missed the point here. You took one sentence while ignoring the larger argument. But anyway, It doesn't matter whether national leaders are elected dedicated socialist or unelected technocrats. Because we live under capitalism, there actions have to be dictated by the needs of the market. In this case, it was stabilising finance markets through increased sovereign debt and global austerity programs. Now this has the advantages that the ruling class (and, once again, this includes managers of both state and private capital) have used the crisis as an excuse to turn back the "gains" (a term I use very cautiously) of social democracy and
enforce a neo-liberal regime of deregulation, casualisation, low wages.

ETF wrote:
Yes he is a "free market" capitalist, which you can dislike but as I said to another guy, dont generalizate with the monopoly of magacorporations of the globalist lobby war profiteers. Also "free market" capitalism is not the same as extreme capitalism controled by the Federal reserve that creates trillions of debt,which make a lot of peoples debt slaves.

You don't understand capitalism. Capitalism inherently centralises power and wealth; capitalist consolidation is unavoidable and inevitable. The "freer" (unregulated) the market, the more likely this is to happen. The state, for its part, designed to ensure stability to ensure continued capitalist accumulation. Hence the prominent role of national banks in all advanced capitalist countries.

ETF wrote:
So that's it, he wont "finish capitalism",and as I said this drastic change cant be done in a recently brainwashed society without total chaos and how millions of people can be convinced to change all structures of society?also they are not ready at all to have an autonomous life.

Oh the stupid sheeple roll eyes We're communists here, we look at things like strikes and say, shit, look at all those people coming together to defend their collective interests. We don't believe people have to 'wake up' to begin this process. Just the opposite,in fact: It's the struggle that opens up the space for deeper political conversations about the structure and problems of capitalist society.

ETF wrote:
total different systems works in smaller comunities of people that share the same principles,that can be done (for example the amish in the US), not enetering in the merits of their society but it's and example of how these different systems can work.

It's not Amish: but yesterday in the UK probably dozens of people who post on libcom held pickets outside Pizza Huts to support a group of Sheffield workers who are fighting for better conditions. It's that solidarity we hope to use to build a new world not by magically hoping one day all people decide to subscribe to the same "principles".

ETF wrote:
I used to think "all politicians are the same and the system dont change". In the majority of cases we have the same elite financing "opposite" candidates but when someone is genuine, and by that i mean,not a puppet of bankers,corporations...

So let, me quote myself again here as you've obviously missed the argument:

Chilli wrote:
So this isn't about integrity or principles or corruption or even financiers (in the UK, the Labour Party is 90% funded by the trade unions and its leaders opposed recent mass pension/austerity strike). It's about the nature of the state and the fact that all politicians are objectively members of the ruling class.
ETF wrote:
Some people just expect a big government giving free stuff for them,

Labour creates all wealth. What we receive back in wages and state benefits is always less than the wealth we generate as a class. So it's not "free", it's value we created in the first place, some of which we've managed to claw back through the "social wage" (not a term I particularly like, but for the purposes of this conversation...)

Quote:
thats how some politicians buy votes,giving small benefits,for this people probably ron paul wont be great because they will have to stand up and stop complaining about the government not giving them small benefits.

Yeah, because America has such an amazing welfare state roll eyes

Quote:
since the Kennedys all presidents in US are attached to the same strings,

So do tell, what magically changed with JFK? (Who, btw, had quite a globalised US foreign policy full of international intervention.)

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 5 2012 13:30

ETF, This is part of something I wrote years ago. Not perfect, but I'd like to hear your thoughts

-------------

Libertarian socialists (also known as anarchists) have long warned against the creation of so-called “socialist” states. As far back as the 1860s, Mikhail Bakunin, an anarchist and dissident member of Karl Marx’s First International Workingmen’s Association, warned that a social revolution that sought state power could lead only to a “red bureaucracy” that was just as exploitative as the existing capitalist order. Likewise, in 1926, a group of exiled Russia anarchists known as the Dielo Trouda group published the Platform of the Libertarian Communists. In it they warned that
seizing power by means of social upheaval and organizing a so-called “proletarian state” cannot serve the cause of the authentic emancipation of labor.

The State, immediately and supposedly constructed for the defense of the revolution, invariably ends up distorted by the needs and characteristics peculiar to itself... [All government] produces specific, privileged castes, and consequently re-establishes the basis of capitalist Authority and State; the usual enslavement and exploitation of the masses by violence. (Example: “the worker-peasant state” of the Bolsheviks.)

Libertarian? Is that like the Libertarian Party?

The short answer is a resounding no. The term “libertarian” has been used by the anti-statist left for over 150 years. It was not until the 1970s that a group of pro-capitalist extremists, seeking to co-opt the language of the revolutionary left, began to use the term. The Libertarian Party, as well a so-called “anarcho-capitalists,” are in no way libertarian. They merely want the state to function solely for the benefit of the capitalist class. Contrary to liberals, who believe the working class is more easily kept in line when the state curtails the worst aspects of capitalism, the Libertarian Party denies that government should have any role in protecting workers and consumers from even the most flagrant injustices committed in the name of a market economy.

True libertarians oppose all hierarchy and authority, beginning with capitalism and the state. The Libertarian Party, on the other hand, does not oppose the state as an institution, despite the fact government is objectively and irreconcilably authoritarian. The party seeks only to dismantle any social functions (public housing programs, public employment, progressive taxation, universal healthcare, unemployment benefits, etc) that social movements have forced upon the state, often having faced violent opposition from the government to do so. At the most basic level, the Libertarian Party fully supports the state in protecting private property (the police), defending national capitalist interests (the military), and maintaining class society (social control enforced by the police, the courts, and capitalist legislation). A truly libertarian world would be one entirely free of hierarchy and coercive authority. By supporting unfettered, unregulated capitalism and the most repressive aspects of the state, the Libertarian Party program, if ever put into effect, would increase the amount of hierarchy and authoritarianism present in society.

If Russia wasn’t socialist, what would socialism look like?

Libertarian socialists believe that every individual has the ability to make every decision that affects his or her life. However, we also recognize that many decisions are of a social nature. As such, all that are affected by a particular decision should have an equal say in the outcome. Related, libertarian socialists realize the economy is objectively social. In other words, one couldn’t do his or her job effectively if millions of others didn’t do their job effectively as well. For example, if sanitation workers didn’t clear the streets of trash, disease would spread so quickly that doctors would be too overwhelmed to handle the amount of patients who need care. Likewise, both doctors and sanitations workers need folks to grow their food, build their houses, make their cloths, and keep society’s transportation systems in working order. Those people, in turn, need health care and trash removal. Moreover, in our jobs, we all use products, inventions, and ideas inherited from previous generations. Knowledge itself is social, as it is built up and passed on from person to person and generation to generation.

Because the economy is objectively social, anyone who claims to “own” the fruits of the economy (i.e. a corporation or an individual capitalist) is effectively stealing from the workers who created such wealth in the first place. Instead of an economy driven by profit and greed, an ethical and rational economic system would be based on fulfilling human need (including the needs of luxury, rest, and relaxation) with the least amount of effort. In this socialist economy all individuals would engage in socially productive labor and all jobs would be recognized as equally valued and equally important.

Libertarian socialists believe that for socialism to truly thrive we must establish democratic control of every aspect of the economy. Workers must begin by democratically controlling their immediate workplace. Instead of managers appointed by profit-driven corporate bosses or government bureaucrats, workers must exercise self-management. Decisions concerning everything from what is produced to how it is produced can be made in regular meetings in which every worker has a vote. In short, workers will exercise worker control.

Once democracy is established on the most basic levels, workplaces and entire industries can federate upward using a system of instantly recallable, rotating delegates to plan for the larger economy.ii However, the assembly of workers of whom the delegates represent will always have the ability to override the decisions of their delegates. Moreover, fundamental decisions will be put to a referendum, making sure that executive authority ultimately rests in the people.

On a practical level, libertarian socialists, after expropriating the owning class and all its property, would seek to abolish all unproductive toil. This means that all positions that do not actually create wealth (think managers, landlords, real estate agents, corporate executives, the entire marketing industry, bankers, salespeople, police officers, politicians, bureaucrats, etc.) would be eliminated. All individuals could then gravitate toward the work they find most rewarding. Likewise, cooperation is always far more productive than competition. Engaging in productive labor within a democratic environment would encourage much greater efficiency. The stress, both individual and social, associated with the capitalist work regime would disappear. Moreover, with the profit motive removed, technology could be applied to the larger social good. Instead of advances in technology being one more excuse to cut jobs, it would help decrease the workload for everyone. Plus, with all engaged in productive work and the parasitic capitalist class abolished, the amount of work required from each member of society to would be drastically reduced. If, after all of this, ‘undesirable’ work still existed, it could be democratically divided between all able bodies.

Politically, the abolition of class society would naturally entail the abolition of the state. Government, as a hierarchical institution designed to protect a ruling elite, only came about with the advent of hierarchical economic systems. In a society in which all aspects of public life are placed under direct democratic control, there would be no need for the institutionalized violence and oppression that is government.

noodlehead
Offline
Joined: 30-05-11
Feb 5 2012 14:08
End the FED3 wrote:
The right to small property is much more libertarian than "scientific socialism" where the only party that represents the working class promises a society with no classes, but impose a dictatorship,then confiscate the lands of every small farmer and whoever controls the party has all the power/resources in his hands (in the case of russia 1917, the globalist bankers- explained in "Wall street and the bolshevik revolution").I dont like big govnerment dictating every aspect of life... Like maoists humiliating small farmers not knowing their revolution was sponsered by the richest people in the world

You don't understand what we are trying to say because you have not seriously tried to understand the foundations of our philosophy. We are not just anti-state we are anti capitalist too. We have nothing in common with Ron Paul. I can try to explain some of these basic ideas.

1)We do not believe that private property rights are libertarian in any way, we believe that they are part of a fundamentally exploitative system.

And do not confuse property for possessions, property is something that is invested to profit from. Possesion are things that we use like a car we drive or a house we live in is not property, although rooms in that house we rent out would become property.

2) We are just as critical of the russian revolution as you. If communism is a classless stateless society based on democracy and mutual aid then we believe that it is a total contradiction to try to create that society by sezing the power of the state. Communism can only come from below.

You are right when you say that a better society can only be created when these values are spread right across the society. Which is WHY we oppose electoral top down political action.

We want a society based on grassroots self-organisation so the actions that we take need to empower people with the confidence and the skills to one day take over the economy.

It is participation in grass roots bottom up strugges that will be the key to spreading ideas essential to building a better future across the whole population.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 5 2012 13:54

That graph is good shit!

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Feb 5 2012 14:08

I would vote for MEGADETH to be fair

noodlehead
Offline
Joined: 30-05-11
Feb 5 2012 14:12

A wobbly from the states made that image it got 230 shares on FB. I think one of the big big reasons that anarchism is failing to reach a mass audience is the lack of good propoganda thats not in essay form. Images and video are pretty essential

i cant make that image get any wider, anyone know how i can not make it squished?

Chilli Sauce wrote:
It's not Amish: but yesterday in the UK probably dozens of people who post on libcom held pickets outside Pizza Huts to support a group of Sheffield workers who are fighting for better conditions. It's that solidarity we hope to use to build a new world not by magically hoping one day all people decide to subscribe to the same "principles".

What makes solidarity and mutual aid not principles?

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 5 2012 14:28

Noodle, yeah, fair point. I've been focusing a lot on the "action precedes consciousness" idea quite a bit lately. So I agree, those are principles, but they're best expressed when they are second nature. So, at my work, I have workmates who do support each other, but would never use the terms "solidarity" or "mutual aid". I guess the point I was trying to make is that vocalising those ideas isn't the things as enacting them and often they're enacted long before they're vocalised. ETF seems to think we'll all get together one day and say yeah, we agree, Ron Paul's been right all along along and now that we all think the same way, the world is going to be a better place. On the other hand, I don't think the revolution is going to happen when we all decide to become anarchists (and I think you'd agree).

Oh yeah, ETF, do you think this:

Quote:
In regard to Paul in particular, you're neglecting to mention that he wants to privatise fucking everything, remove the "privileged status" of unions, and destroy whatever semblance of a welfare state is available in the US. Isn't he even against having a minimum wage because it's "not in the constitution" or some shit?

is going to benefit you? Or will such measures, in fact, greatly increase the power of corporations in the US?

Railyon's picture
Railyon
Offline
Joined: 4-11-11
Feb 5 2012 14:54

I agree, good graph.

Chilli Sauce wrote:
Oh yeah, ETF, do you think this:
[...]
is going to benefit you?

ETF is a bourgie shocker!!

Maybe that's exactly the issue... who knows. I doubt he'll be back though.

Or he's gonna be back with a vengeance (and more hilarious pictures).

I wonder if Ron Paul is aware (and ashamed) of people like this in his fan base?

lettersjournal
Offline
Joined: 12-12-11
Feb 5 2012 20:14
RedEd wrote:
lettersjournal wrote:
Working class self-organization, a prominent blogger on this site, has posted numerous things on his blog here endorsing videos that are full of the same Ron Paulite/Alex Jones/etc conspiracy theories.

I've only noticed one conspiracy-ish thing (The New American Century) but haven't been paying much attention. Do you have other specific films in mind?

There was another blog post - now deleted - celebrating the movie "America: The Coming Fascism", a film by Russo, the late follower of Alex Jones. The film features a long interview with Ron Paul.

BrazillianJiuJitsu1992's picture
BrazillianJiuJi...
Offline
Joined: 26-10-11
Feb 5 2012 20:20

Didn't ron paul say that he was against the civil rights bill lol, classy cunt.

How far does he take states rights, would he be opposed to the abolishment of slavery on the grounds that southern states were pro slave?

He just seems another white christian nutjob who argues liberty is the ability to super exploit people, which he seems to envision creating a land of unicorns and small buisness owners.

jonthom's picture
jonthom
Offline
Joined: 25-11-10
Feb 5 2012 20:38
BrazillianJiuJitsu1992 wrote:
Didn't ron paul say that he was against the civil rights bill lol, classy cunt.

Yup

Quote:
How far does he take states rights, would he be opposed to the abolishment of slavery on the grounds that southern states were pro slave?

His argument seems to be, as with everything else, "let the market sort it out" (i.e. have the north buy the slaves and release them):

Quote:
He just seems another white christian nutjob who argues liberty is the ability to super exploit people, which he seems to envision creating a land of unicorns and small buisness owners.

Spot on.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Feb 6 2012 01:46
End the FED wrote:

Holy shit! That is the best picture ever!

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Feb 6 2012 04:51

(deleted)

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Feb 6 2012 07:59

Are those worm necks?!

Redwinged Blackbird's picture
Redwinged Blackbird
Offline
Joined: 3-11-11
Feb 6 2012 17:07

Ron Paulites are plagued with the fantasies of themselves one day becoming rich, wealthy, owners of their own companies... Because they have studied Schiff, Mises, Hayek, etc, they think anyone can become a rich owner of a business as long as government "stays out of the way" of the the functioning of capitalism. They talk about "real capitalism" which is where people don't use the state to control markets, etc... Never in their theory (at least in my experience having discussions) does anything about the workplace model (owner/labor, surplus value created by workers who don't own capital, etc) come up. Capitalism to them is "the free exchange of goods and services" and for some reason they don't recognize that it is extremely authoritarian. I think it was in that Work book that they termed people like the Ron Paulers as being under the spell of the market.

Despite their idiocy, I have found that I have an easier time getting along with them than I do with authoritarian Democrat Obamanoids that apologize for his unholy marriage with banks and industry and see the solution to a government controlled by corporations to be using the government (that is run by corporations, remember) to control business and industry. HA!

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Feb 6 2012 17:14
BrazillianJiuJitsu1992 wrote:
Didn't ron paul say that he was against the civil rights bill lol, classy cunt.

How far does he take states rights, would he be opposed to the abolishment of slavery on the grounds that southern states were pro slave?

He just seems another white christian nutjob who argues liberty is the ability to super exploit people, which he seems to envision creating a land of unicorns and small buisness owners.

He's not racist at all! He just respects the rights of states and businesses....to be racist!

Besides, the Civil Rights Act is totally authoritarian!

/sarcasm

Hey Letters, what's your opinion on this? You argued that the SOPA/PIPA laws should be viewed as of no relevance to communists. Do you feel the same way about the repealing of the Civil Rights Act? Would it be of no consequence to you if the US were to backslide into even more awful racist oppression?

Not that I think the Civil Rights Act solved the problem of racism (obviously). But would you really be content to watch the re-introduction of Jim Crow?

Arbeiten's picture
Arbeiten
Offline
Joined: 28-01-11
Feb 6 2012 20:45
Chilli Sauce wrote:
Are those worm necks?!

worm bellies bruv

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Feb 8 2012 06:31

OMG fuck off.

And yes I am a Jewish zionist Illuminati111!!1

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Feb 8 2012 06:53

Dude you are clearly incredibly racist and antisemetic. Fuck you and fuck off.

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Feb 8 2012 07:10
End the FED5 wrote:
tastybrain wrote:
Dude you are clearly incredibly racist and antisemetic. Fuck you and fuck off.

Race and religious card? No,this is just "divide and conqueur" that benefits the elite.

First of all as I said before I have much respect to jews that oppose the globalist lobby which include AIPAC,ADL.

No I'm not racist at all, much respect to these guys here (also see the top comment!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB-vYuYhdSE

No? Than how come these lovely graphics you keep posting portray the star of david as a symbol of evil? Why are all the Jews devil-people (like Greenspan with fangs)? Why is Obama dressed in a fucking PIMP SUIT for fucks sake???

Do you follow your idol's position on repealing the Civil Rights Act? What about militarizing the border (which Paul changed his position to oppose ONLY on the grounds that "it could be used to keep us in") and eliminating government assistance and health care for immigrants?

EDIT: Yeah you like a rap song. SO FUCKING WHAT? It's perfectly possible to be a massive racist and like some things non-white people did. And the fact that lots of people who have seen this video like that comment means absolutely nothing. I would bet good money almost everyone who "liked" that comment was white. (White people listening to Lowkey and Immortal? Naaahhhhhh..... never happens...)