RON PAULITE DOT COM

There is a now famous expression born out of the Watergate era, and first heard by the American public (and world) in the movie All the President’s Men, which sums up the basis for my belief that Ron Paul is NOT a true friend of greedy corporate behemoths–non human persons–which presently run the modernized world, de facto, from the smoke-filled shadow lands of secret boardrooms or secretive elitist gatherings and convent-ions. It is the phrase, “follow the money”.

In my own political transition phase from hard core neoconservative to a still fluxing version of libertarian-conservative (or as Ron Paul points out, not that much different from the “classical liberalism” of our founding fathers–SEE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism), I became especially fed up with the power grubbing corporatist elites running our modern world through lies, intimidation, manipulation and fear-mongering. In my zeal against corporate greed, deception, oppression, suppression and outright abuse of the ‘have-nots’ of the world, you might have easily mistaken me for one of those misguided, but well-intentioned, so-called “progressives” over at OpEdNews (where I occasionally publish articles), who feel that socialism is their real answer to take back control from the behemoth corporations preying upon our lives. But if you HAD come to that conclusion about me, you couldn’t have been further from the real truth of my deeper, more fundamental, convictions then or now.

Because I had studied the “social” consequences of some socialist experiments in history (I had particularly taken an almost obsessive interest in accounts from one experiment with socialism, called Nazism). It was partly my disdain for such an anti-liberty philosophy, and the pitfalls of making government into a god (in more ways than one), that had led me to originally support George Bush, under the assumption that he really believed in “small government”, as he claimed (besides my profound hatred of abortion, as you’ll hear about soon, in an essay I’m working on), as opposed to the largely anti-religious socialist “progressives” he ran against. I saw dangers in a continually growing government that was not only trying to provide for the financial needs of citizens (out of presumed benevolent motives), but was, as the inevitable result, intruding, more and more, into other areas of our lives (every bit as controlling when it’s run by “liberals” as when it’s run by “conservatives”).

Some people forget that the growth in government power which enabled a holocaust, had begun with an ideology of state benevolence toward its own citizens. Germany’s government growth was even hailed as a model of ideal government in the international community prior to the world’s discovery of its dark underbelly. Hitler was a world hero before he became a world villain. It had been “National Socialism” (NAZISM) in Germany (also anti-religious, as it turns out, which is not surprising to me, to find in a philosophy that looks to the state as the great provider of sustenance, morality and meaning)–with its eventual insistence on unquestioning support for the political “community”, and discouragement of individual thought and action–that had allowed (over time) for a Hitler to take over and squelch any protests, which might have moderated a furiously growing fascist fanaticism. That fascism, itself, resulted from the same sort of misguided reactionism to hardships, which always lies behind socialistic instincts. Within a caldron of dire economic depression and a profound sense of national shame that had developed in post-World War I Germany, not only did the instinct to seek big government solutions to financial ills emerge, but also the instinct to USE that increased government power to go after national scapegoats (you can never grow only ONE sector of government). Many groups and individuals were eventually scapegoated for their non-conformity to the new national unity (“community”), but the targeting of Jews became especially easy, simply because they were considered what WE TODAY might label “corporatists”. They were already natural targets for reactionism, since they were widely considered “foreign”, they held a different world view and identity than the accepted “community”, but under the circumstances the targeting became especially potent, because so many Jews were seen as highly successful in business and finance at a time when other Germans were suffering profoundly financially.

Of course, socialists, today, will be quick to say racism doesn’t factor into their philosophy or policies, and that that is a difference. But I wonder if their reactions against business, itself–and as a consequence, against LIBERTY, itself–as opposed to the REAL villains behind elitist corporatism, is all that different, in principle, from the indiscriminate reaction of Nazis against a caricature of a whole class of people, irrespective of what that class happens to be made up of (whether it is of race or, as is more politically correct these days, of an occupation, or CLASS of occupations). My difference with the socialists, is that while I also despise the greedy elitist corporatists who are now ru[i]nning our country and world, I do not, however, demonize all free enterprise, indiscriminately, so as to need a system–socialism–which would radically reduce liberty on every level (not to mention, pave the way for a DIFFERENT kind of elite–just as Hitler and his cronies did–to usurp control of the socialist “community”), and discourage individualism, in order to oppose the villain of corporatist elitism (one villain we essentially agree upon).

Some over at OpEdNews have argued with me, claiming that Ron Paul, if elected, would essentially be a tool of the mammoth trans-national corporations, since he speaks about certain pro-business policies such as “deregulation”. While I pointed out to them that Ron Paul is not in favor of NO government (and that means that he believes, like most libertarians, that true crimes of injustice are the legitimate pervue of a state to check), but of LIMITED government, I did ALSO point out something that Ron Paul has pointed out, himself, in the wake of the great crash of 2008 and this great recession that has followed. He has convincingly pointed out that it is the elitist governments of the world–the bought-and-paid-for political friends in power–that create the right enVIRONMENT for these essentially borderless countries (behemoth trans-national corporations answerable to no higher authority than themselves, in their imaginations and machinations) to form. He also points out–in an argument that could only now make sense, after the great corporate BAILOUTS of the last several years (which made people of MANY political stripes angry alligators)–that if it wasn’t for these same elitist governments bailing out their “too-big-to-fail” corporate “friends”, the same greedy corporations, who routinely make trillions off the backs of poor laborers, the politically powerless and the pathetically naive, would have collapsed under their own colossal weight of fraudulent and unjust practices.

But, to the chagrin of those who would like to label Ron Paul a tool of corporate behemoths, Ron Paul has one stark piece of evidence in his favor, demonstrating–beyond a reasonable doubt in my mind–that, although he believes in legitimate business freedoms, he is NOT the friend of elitist corporatists that my friends over at OpEdNews suppose him to be. Which brings me back around to the phrase I used to introduce this post: “follow the money”! Does it not follow, that if the behemoths, themselves, truly believed Ron Paul and his “deregulation” (that is another misunderstood issue, which detractors would do well to study more closely) would be their special tool of corruption, that at least some of them would be propping him up with some big corporate money? I DON’T SEE IT! Did I MISS SOMETHING??? Follow the MONEY! All I see is the corporate elitists of the world, who control the elitist media, doing everything in their corporate elitist power to MINIMIZE Ron Paul and his liberty r3VOLution! To keep him, as far as they can, out of the public limelight! Some detractors answer me, “why buy yourself an ideologue when you can buy a stooge?”, and I have to admit that there could be a point there to explain why corporations might prefer a Romney over a Paul, except for just ONE SMALL THING.

Ron Paul is NOT for sale! Or as HE puts it:

If there were less to buy through influencing campaigns, there would be a lot less incentive to invest so much in the process. (LIBERTY DEFINED, 29)

And THAT, I believe, is the essential problem, and the reason corporatists so despise Ron Paul (and fight his groundswell of support at every turn)! They know, for a surety, that he is NOT the friend of corporate corruption, secrecy, elitism and oppression! Ron Paul would find it exTREMELY difficult to bow to “community” bosses, because he believes in liberty of thought, action and expression. He despises suppression in all its forms. He wouldn’t be afraid to go after their clear crimes and corruption, either, and they WORRY about that! The elites, who always believe they are smarter–and that they know better–than anyone else, recognize that they cannot BUY Ron Paul (he has a 30 year record of standing firmly on his principles, and of adhering to constitutional restraints in spite of profound levels of peer pressure from the “community” to break “free” from the Constitution that guarantees our freedom), and therefore they know that they would not be able to CONTROL him for their own benefit, or for the benefit of THEIR ideologies, if he were to be elected. I also suspect that they’ve been less than inspired by Ron Paul’s OWN anti-corporatist rhetoric, and especially by his outright support for whistle-blowers such as Julian Assange of Wikileaks (WARNING! Some neocons have said, and the Obama administration has implied, that you will never be able to get a government job if you click on this link!), who expose their essential corruption, their secretive agendas, and their sometimes criminal fraud, as well as that of the increasingly secretive governments which prop them up.

If you have accidentally imagined Ron Paul is just another corporate tool, then why don’t you listen to some of his own words on the issue. I’ve selected just a few quotations by Dr. Paul, for starters, that seem to me, to be rather revealing on the issue (and notice how he associates SOME corporatism with even the neo-socialist movement):

Government intervention that works with corporations–a form of corporatism–is now an acceptable form of socialism, sometimes referred to as fascism. Unfortunately, if left unchecked it leads to outright military fascism of the worst kind…. (LIBERTY DEFINED, 136)

Powerful special interests rule, and there seems to be no way to fight against them. While the middle class is being destroyed, the poor suffer, the justly rich are being looted, and the unjustly rich are getting richer. The wealth of the country has fallen into the hands of a few at the expense of the many. Some say this is because of a lack of regulations on Wall Street, but that is not right. The root of this issue reaches far deeper… (LIBERTY DEFINED, XIV)

If you object, you are put on a hit list. If you fight to reveal the truth, as Wikileaks or other websites have done, you are targeted and can be crushed. (LIBERTY DEFINED, XIII)

Wikileaks is the most recent example. It has been charged that Julian Assange, the Internet publisher of the information he has gained access to, has committed a heinous crime deserving prosecution for treason and execution or even assassination. But should we not at least ask how the U.S. government can charge an Australian citizen with treason for publishing U.S. secret information that he himself did not steal?
It’s safe to assume that if the elites who want to run our lives justify lying, they obviously have something to hide… (LIBERTY DEFINED, 216)

And to top this bit of FOOD FOR THOUGHT off (the whipped cream, if you will), consider the merits of what Ron Paul says in the following video, in which he claims Obama is NOT technically a socialist, as much as he is a CORPORATIST. Elsewhere, Ron Paul has pointed out that Obama is a classic ELITIST corporatist, but we’ll leave that discussion for another time:

Also, check out the following essays/posts by “Paul Bear” on Ron Paul:

STEP OUT OF YOUR COMFORT ZONE!
Ron Paul On Christianity, Morality & War (& Neo-Wars)
Father Ron Paul (or WHAT Is A RON PAULITE?)
They Follow America’s Example
The Cause That MEETS, Strengthens
Thanks To Those Who Irritated Me!
Where Tax Dollars Go (To Surveil Political Types… Like YOU?)
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!! (A Short Story)
Ron Paul Appeal Transcends Borders
A Personal Message From Ron Paul (And ‘BEAR NAKED’ BAKING WITH PAUL BEAR)