http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN/
OH MY GOD. He just said we don't need a monopoly on the initiation of violence.
He said the government should have the power to prevent foreign aggression, but everything else he's saying is boilerplate AnCap.
Just started watching it now. Is there anyway to see the beginning as well? Or am I stuck missing it because it's live?
Yeah, you're stuck. :P
You'll have to wait an entire like 2 hours.
According to dailypaul.com, we'll be able to watch it later on youtube.
HE JUST USED THE SPOONER ARGUMENT!!!!!!!!!!
I love how he keeps driving home the NAP.
HA HE DID IT AGAIN! The government is an aggressive monopoly. *THUMBS UP*
which spooner argument? seemed to me spooner had to do a lot of arguing in his life.
on gov in general?
HA IN YOUR FACE EVERYONE ON THIS FORUM WHO GAVE ME CRAP FOR THE GOLDEN RULE!
Go Ron Paul! Golden Rule FTW
Here he makes at the end, the speech he should have made at the beginning.
That's okay, he word dropped voluntaryism.
Grant - it's that either the Constitution was never created to restrict government, or that it was and that it has been completely ineffective. Either way, it's doesn't deserve to exist.
Well, RP didn't quite say that - he just said that it had failed. And that a constitution is pointless unless people believe in Non-Aggression.
Absolutely beautiful.
gotlucky - you beat me to it! ARGH!
lol Wheylous, that's what you get for helping Grant. No good deed goes unpunished.
All I can see is Nancy Palosi talking about women in Congress! WTF?
Here is the transcript of Paul's farewell address.
Yeah, it's over.
Or, rather, it's just beginning ;)
Damn it.
Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society. Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politicians is a pipe dream. We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000
Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism. Both views ought to be rejected.
initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence. Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with bad intentions.
It’s easy to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at will. Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt. It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to “do good.” They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.” The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority.
It’s easy to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at will.
Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt. It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to “do good.” They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.” The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority.
George Ought to Help, anyone?
A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people’s beliefs or habits.
A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society. All great religions endorse the Golden Rule. The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials. They cannot be exempt.
And yet look at all of the horrible wars caused over religion.
SkepticalMetal: And yet look at all of the horrible wars caused over religion.
What wars?
Therefore the Golden Rule is wrong. Thus the NAP is wrong too.
@ gotlucky
I'm a little curious to know what you're getting at.
Why bring up wars caused by individuals regarding religion? What relevance does it have to the quote by Ron Paul?
Eh, it was just a thought.
Then I guess my comment was irrelevant.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4161883
Lovely.
Mother of god...Conza was right...
Latest Projects
"Even when leftists talk about discrimination and sexism, they're damn well talking about the results of the economic system" ~Neodoxy
Yeah, he's against the government initiating violence. It doesn't mean he thinks that the government's existence is initiation of force. The government can exist and only do defensive things. He gives several (though flawed) examples of this (eg. America before 1913).
And people shouldn't blow Dr. Paul's mentioning of "voluntarism" out of proportion. It's not code for anarchy. Why would he talk about the proper role of government and at the same time advocate statelessness? Libertarians shouldn't be the ones distorting history. Paul was not an anarchist.
Well...in Revolutionary Catalonia, there were anarchist politicians...so perhaps he is indeed an anarcho-capitalist who just isn't an Agorist (in other words, he believes in using politics to minimize and ultimately abolish the state).
Come on Ron, you can't hang around Rothbard and Rockwell all of those years and not be one.
Clayton -
QC - the definition of government could be debated. Either way, he's most certainly at least a minarchist. And if he doesn't want to say he's an anarchist, he certainly points any listeners in that direction. If a young kid hears the speech and decides all initiation of aggression is bad, if he learns in a year or so that defense must also be aggressive due to taxation, he will already have this basis of the NAP and convert more easily. I can imagine this being RP's parting gift to the libertarian movement.
Anyway, even if he is just a minarchist - DUDE! There's a minarchist in the government! Not for long, but he's there.