Ron Paul in 2008? Just Say No to Dr. No By Jason Miller

Dandelion Salad

reagan and ron paul

Ron and Ron: Two of capitalism’s finest

By Jason Miller
Thomas Paine’s Corner


“Capitalism is the legitimate racket of the ruling class.”

—Al Capone

It has taken Nuremberg-class war crimes, craven ineptitude by Congressional Democrats, foreclosures on every other home in the neighborhood, and a metaphorical gun to our heads when we fill our gas tanks, but growing numbers of us US Americans are shedding our smug insularity.

“Ron Paul in 2008” has become the mantra for untold millions who are realizing that the establishment in the United States is an abomination that needs to be torn down and replaced. Ostensibly, Dr. Paul is the populist maverick we need to shake up the system and set our nation on a path to sanity and viability. His political coffers are overflowing with cash, almost none of which came from corporate or “special” interests. He is principled and consistent. And his position on a number of important issues aligns with the interests of the masses.

When he appeared on Meet the Press on December 23rd, even Tim Russert, one of the system’s most prominent cheerleading whores, couldn’t rattle him. It would certainly have been difficult not to admire Paul’s frontal assault on a number of the “sacred cows” that Russert and his ilk in the mainstream media work so hard to defend.

Consider several of the broad-sides Paul leveled against our malignant status quo:

[MR. RUSSERT: Would you cut off all foreign aid to Israel?

REP. PAUL: Absolutely.

REP. PAUL: They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and we’re free. They come and they, and they attack us because we’re over there.

MR. RUSSERT: “Because we’re over there.” And then you added this on Tuesday: “But” al-qaeda has “determination. The determination comes from being provoked.”
How have we, the United States, provoked al-Qaeda?

REP. PAUL: Well, read what the lead–the ringleader says. Read what Osama bin Laden said. We had, we had a base, you know, in Saudi Arabia that was an affront to their religion, that was blasphemy as far as they were concerned. We were bombing Iraq for 10 years, we were–we’ve interfered in Iran since 1953. Our CIA’s been involved in the overthrow of their governments. We’re bought right now in the process of overthrowing that nation. We side more with Israel and Pakistan, and, and they get annoyed with this. How would we react if we were on their land–if they were on our land? We would be very annoyed, and we’d be fighting mad.

MR. RUSSERT: Do you think there’s an ideological struggle that Islamic fascists want to take over the world?

REP. PAUL: Oh, I think some, just like the West is wanting to do that all the time. Look at the way they look at us. I mean, we’re in a, we’re in a 130 countries. We have 700 bases. How do you think they proposed that to their people, saying “What does America want to do? Are they over here to be nice to us and teach us how to be good Democrats?”

REP PAUL: ….But the point is I’m not against the FBI investigation in doing a proper role, but I’m against the FBI spying on people like Martin Luther King. I’m against the CIA fighting secret wars and overthrowing government and interfering…]

Amen to ending over a hundred years of imperialistic foreign policy, breaking up the military industrial complex, cutting off our financial and military support of the genocidal squatters in Palestine, and reining in the torturers and assassins in our “intelligence” community. His pursuit of these goals is certainly an objectively sound reason to support Ron Paul.

Yet despite these highly laudable positions, Paul is potentially as treacherous as the creatures of the system most of us have come to loathe. Compared to opportunistic moneyed elites like Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton, Paul is indeed an alluring candidate.

However, he has at least one very deep flaw which would almost certainly make his presidency an unmitigated disaster for the poor and the working class the world over:

Ron Paul ardently supports the libertarian notions of laissez faire, free markets, deregulation, and privatization. In an ironic and almost comical twist, the imperialism, corporatism, and prefigurements of fascism he has so accurately identified (and vowed to eradicate) are symptoms of monopoly capitalism, a mature form of the system that his libertarian principles would serve to buttress and amplify.

In “The Shock Doctrine” Naomi Klein amply documents the widespread murder, mayhem, and misery caused by implementing a libertarian economic doctrine (as the United States facilitated under the tutelage of Milton Friedman and his acolytes) throughout South America, Southeast Asia, Russia, and China. Savage capitalism at its finest. And for evidence that it CAN happen here (in our “enlightened” Western culture), one need only look back to the Gilded Age and Dickensonian England.

Regardless of how malformed it was due to the relentless pressure applied by the United States via the nuclear arms race we initiated to break it and our HUGE economic advantages, the Soviet Union represented a powerful counter-balance to the forces of unrestrained capitalism. Upon its collapse, the capitalists of the world united and set out to eliminate the hard fought gains the working class had made throughout the Twentieth Century. And Dr. Paul wants to hand those cynical bastards the keys to the kingdom by dismantling what is left of government restraints on the bourgeoisie.

Contrary to the agenda advanced by Ron Paul, “all government” is not inherently evil. It is true that the federal government we have now is an enemy to the masses in many respects. But Uncle Sam is not our foe because he “over-regulates” the parasitic capitalists who are raping the planet, “steals” our money through taxation, or acts as a “nanny state” by providing what has become a nominal safety net for the poor and elderly, as Paul suggests. He is our adversary because he is looking out for the wealthy elite and views people like you and me as disposable. In contrast to Lincoln’s vision—“of the people, by the people and for the people,” we have a government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.

While Ron Paul MIGHT be able to slay the dragons of the military industrial complex and undue Zionist influence, his adherence to a “prehistoric” form of capitalism has the potential to essentially eliminate what is left of the rapidly eroding gains the working class and poor have made over the last century.

Despite his apparent opposition to the powers that be, a vote for Ron Paul is still a vote for our continued enslavement by a system predicated on greed, selfishness, and the prosperity of the few at the expense of the many. In fact, unless by some miracle a viable candidate who opposes capitalism actually emerges, the act of voting in our bourgeois democracy is little more than a validation of our servitude.

So don’t participate. Our ruling elite can’t mouth hollow platitudes about democracy if they don’t have voters.

Jason Miller is a recovering US American middle class suburbanite who strives to remain intellectually free. He is Cyrano’s Journal Online’s associate editor ( and publishes Thomas Paine’s Corner within Cyrano’s at You can reach him at

h/t: Speaking Truth to Power

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Ron Paul on Meet The Press 12-23-07 (videos)

Interview with Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine (video)

Ron Paul ??? excluded from Fox debate by William Westmiller (updated)


26 thoughts on “Ron Paul in 2008? Just Say No to Dr. No By Jason Miller

  1. Is that sorta like ‘you’re either with us or against us’?

    It’s finally funny to me how far off this image Ken has of Kucinich supporters being a bunch of hippies on a commune…

    What is definitely a BAD idea is Ron Paul, and while I originally was charmed by his anti-war vote, the current pile of dirt on him is prohibitive (no specifics here, please, the data is out there, and if I paint you into a corner with all the problems, you’ll either flee the forum and infest some other, or you’ll rebut with previously disproved ideology on Paul—it’s like you guys have somehow lost all your cognitive analytical capability when the topic of Paul comes up—I’m aghast at the sort of cultism around ‘apostle’ paul which demonstrates deeper scariness about him than even his platform and past reveals– tell me the truth, did you all pile so unquestioningly behind raygun and pat robertson too?).

    Fran, I’m no economic expert, but since when is the ENTIRELY FAILED raygunomic ‘trickle-down’ capitalistic fanaticism our “most recent (i.e. definitive? State of the art?) understanding of economic analysis”?

    I don’t know anyone of Kucinich Supporters who are communists or socialists, or who are completely anti-free market– is this some new blanket propaganda the paulies are brewing? Kucinich is no fundamentalist commie, nor even a socialist, at all. He happens to have a very sane and balanced, altruistic and wise, experienced mind, and his supporters appear to me the sanest and most intellectually sound fans I’ve seen (not so with any of the goppers, including the paultocrats)

    I am a CEO, a businessman for two decades, I’ve negotiated in boardrooms with some of the top public companies in my industry. Nobody could call me an anti-market commie. But I can definitely tell you this much: The Paulian plan of unchecked, unregulated free-markets is anathema to any idea you all seem to think he espouses about anti-corporatism. It’s either a myth or a lie. Promote one, you get the other. There is plenty of money to be made without promoting that abusive, anti-progressive malarkey.

    There is nothing wrong with selling your wares, making HONEST money and employing staff (if it’s done scrupulously and fairly, and hopefully locally, US fed labor laws were hard won, tho improvement is always a process and small business is somewhat unfairly burdened, I feel).

    But there is DEFINITELY something VERY wrong with fanatical free-markets and this ‘un-feddered’ local-only law that Paul proposes. The reasons are too tedious to go into yet again, but suffice to say both ‘competing’ ideologies from prior thinkers on economics had assets, as well as some severe liabilities. In the raygun era, we learned the untenable pitfalls of both.

    Real ‘communists’ on a national scale don’t really exist, nor ever did, as far as I can tell. It’s certainly fallen far out of fashion long ago, and no longer a threat, so the pressing of the ‘red-scare’ button ain’t gonna have much effect any more—

    I hear the former anti-commie fanatics who did all that damage under the myth of the ‘red menace’ which Latin America still tangles with today, have now converted their false-alarmism to ‘the war on terror’, and failing to find any ‘terrorists, they’ve instead settled on environmentalists as the next great threat to keep their minions feeding on fraud.

    (But In all fairness to the reds, given the endless serfdom of czarist russia, one could imagine they were trying to come up with some egalitarian solution for people, and certainly gave it a lot of thought and effort, and no the ideology did not start out as ‘evil’, but quickly corrupted it certainly was, perhaps that was also partly cultural).

    Definitely time to stop with the sleazy free-market extremism, it’s not realistic, nor even smart.

    Time to stop preaching that the culture of pure greed is the ONLY thing to be espousing. No true ‘thousand points of light’ can ever result from that selfish, speculative psychosis. It’s a bald-faced lie aimed at infesting the culture with greed, flowing the funds to the top as always, and at the expense of everyone and everything else.

    One thing severely and conspicuously missing from the paul discussion is his barely mentioned deregulationist environmental policy (Detractors seem too distracted dealing with his distortions about impeachment, and his evidenced attitudes about race—which are indeed ‘medieval’ See my prior posts on these matters). It’s a HUGE hole in his entire position.

    Much of what was in fact grand about american culture completely and utterly, and (I suspect) irretrievably evaporated with the onset of the Reagan 80’s, and we never recovered at all.

    Time to cherry-pick the best of what economic and social theorists have come up with, reject the rest that didn’t jive with human nature, and stop being extreme! You know it’s not viable either way, especially if you’ve studied economics and/or human addictive psychology.

    And there are certain things in society which are by nature nationally ‘communal’, and which you just can’t privatize. Deal with it!

  2. You’re interpretation of the free market “libertarian” position is flat out wrong. Ron Paul, and most free market advocates, DO NOT support the quasi-socialistic government-business model that you so rightly deride.

    The current state of affairs is a direct result of the encroaching size, power and scope supported by people like Dennis Kucinich.

    I’ve never understood why socialist hate big business so much but think big governement will solve everything. Just imagine Microsoft with the power to force you to buy their products and kick in your doors and you have the government, only multiplied by a factor of a million.

    Socialism is a bad idea, no matter if the govenrment outsources it or not. With our government, at all levels, now sucking down about 50% of our GDP, I don’t see how anyone could really call us a free market society.

    Ron Paul advocates a constitutional, Federal republic. Which is what we are supposed to be. If you socialist want to get together and form a commune then that is just fine. You just don’t get to force others to join your commune.

    Bottom line, you either support Ron Paul, and freedom, or you support some version of socialism. If the latter, then ANY of the candidates of EITHER party will do.


  3. Only a rebuttal to the final stanza (which I assume was fecetious or rhetorical…)


    (The botches got away with this because only like 30% ever voted, and only 50% of those “won”, so only 15% of the populace gave this man his ‘mandate’)

    And if you want a constitutionalist who actually drafts plans for viable withdrawal and has done so at every stage of this invasion, and who actually legislates for accountability and the rule of law, and who has a profound and compassionate and egalitarian vision for the new direction people seem at long last to so crave, then:


  4. dandelionsalad,

    As you mentioned in a previous post you really do have many of the same links I was planning to post. I have been exploring your site and am constantly amazed at the interesting and important information exposing tyranny, fascism, and corruption in an effort to spread freedom, liberty, peace, justice and goodness.

    It is amazing the amount of cross-over there is between libertarians and liberals. Sites like yours are causing me to have a newfound and sincere respect for the left, liberals, and Democrats.

    And of course there is all the lively debate which is healthy and required in a functioning democracy. I believe the internet (and sites like yours) may be the one thing that can save our country by allowing debate and flow of information so that we can expose corruption while selecting the best representatives through debate.

    I believe Dennis Kucinich is an honest man of integrity and goodness who would make a great president! Good luck! Thanks for the great site!

  5. Free market capitalism means complete freedom for the business class to exploit the working class.

    I don’t appreciate being compared to Lenin. I do not support Lenin, the communist party, or the communist economic system. Nor do I support any type of dictatorship.

  6. Lets say that Corporations aren’t part of free markets. I don’t see Libertarians advocating abolishment of corporations and corporate personhood. Ron Paul and the Libertarian Party support both Corporations and Corporate Personhood.

    Yes Corporations are a creation of the state. Why do you think we have Corporations? Its because businesspeople want to be shielded from liability and so they can monopolize the marketplace. The goal of any capitalist is to make as much money he can. By crushing his competitors and monopolizing the market he can make huge profits.

    Ron Paul doesn’t want to give power back to the people. Giving power to the people would mean supporting Democracy. Ron Paul opposes Democracy because he wants to maintain minority rule where the politicians and their elite masters keep the masses under their control. Ron Paul supports corporate welfare for oil companies.

    Dennis Kucinich all the way.

  7. Pardon the hyperbole, but ‘robots’ are a more accurate term, for the reason that paulians are not questioning the reality of the positions and the platform.

    There are HUGE holes in the deregulationist friedman-on-steroids idea, and indeed the author is correct, it’s a hugely flawed philosophy, it’s been tried, and failed, and indeed the rampant, unchecked trickle-down ideal )as well as the resultant culture of greed) is largely the reason for the problems we now face.

    But this is certainly not the only problem with Paul!

    We should put together a graph of the growing pile of reasons to resist Paul, and then the knee-jerk party line that inevitably arises from the crowd of clones, and then the rebuttal showing the reality and facts. It would be an interesting chart to develop.

    Pointless to run out more specifics on forums, they only just leave when they know they’re cornered, and go infest some other forum with the same knee-jerk responses. But much piling poop on paul now begins to paint a picture of a politician who’s not quite what he leads his supporters to believe he is, and much of what he genuinely is honest about, is very wrong-headed and ill-advised, and often down-right dangerous.

    It is indeed a huge concern that the apologists of the apostle’s poor positions are so rabidly incapable of seeing reality through their starry eyes. They’ve stopped thinking, and instead seem to respond to every concern with some limerick out of the little red book of official paul party line.

    Very scary, people, remember that’s what you did with Robertson, Reagan, Swaggart, and then Rush, Coultergeist, and now bush. Americans keep trying to find their revolution, and keep getting lead like lemmings off a cliff. You have to look, listen, learn and question. Until paulies can do that (and almost none seem to do), then they will be ‘paul-bots’ not ‘passionate supporters’.

    I’m all for passion, and pushing hard behind a position may feel cathartic to those who want change. But you’re also supposed to look where you’re pushing, and the paul people are, from my hard won experience, definitely not doing that, at all.

    Just my battle-fatigued take.

  8. In defense of the Ron Paul supporters, I like to think of them as being very passionate in their support for his candidacy.

    I personally disagree with most of what Paul’s platform stands for.

    Also prefer to stick to the issues.

  9. 90% of the comments here sound like robots just roaming the internet, harassing Dr. No opposition.

    I really would consider moving away from the United States if Ron Paul was to be elected president. Not because of him, but because of his supporters. Creepy people who would create some sort of Paul cult.

  10. Hope, very good points. Of course, I believe Dennis Kucinich is a better candidate.

    To quote a friend, “It would be easier or safer to protest under a Paul admin.”

  11. People like to claim that libertarians want to throw people on the streets, not give them healthcare, and assume the absolute worse about the person.

    That is not true.

    Libertarians want to give economic freedom as well as social freedoms, which lead to people being able to afford and buy their own healthcare, which will be at reduced costs due to a healthy free market.

    Instead of having a system that makes people dependant on government. Those who want control want people who are dependant on it, and as long as they have their hands in your pockets with taxes, they can freely make you dependant on the services, because you don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

  12. John Doe writes:

    “Wake up people. Free market capitalism causes Corporatism/Fascism.”

    This means freedom causes the lack of freedom. Wake up John Doe. You are having a rhetorical nightmare. The lack of violence does not cause the use of violence. Peace does not cause war.

    Lenin wrote: “First, confuse the vocabulary.” John Doe is working at it.

  13. You don’t think free-markets work, because you don’t know what a free-market is. Corporations are not part of free-markets. Corporations are entities of the state, that is why corporations have charters. Charters are government granted license to limit the liability of the owners of an organization. The government creates corporations. The base of all monopoly and corporate power is the government.

    If you would like to fight corporate power, you can not increase the size and scope of government. That will not work since corporations are entities of government and control the most powerful levers of government. When people talk about the free-market of the early 1900s, they are wrong. The government was even stronger then than they are today. The government created the railroad monopoly, telephone monopoly, television monopoly, oil monopoly, through their ability to charter and subsidize corporations. You cannot take back power through increasing the size and scope of government, but only by decreasing the size and scope of government along with their ability to subsidize corporate power.

  14. The dollar slid across the board on Friday as data showing a 9 percent decline in sales of new U.S. homes last month heightened concern about the economy, putting the greenback on track for its worst week in more than a year.
    The housing report, which was weaker than economists had expected, also bolstered the case for more Federal Reserve interest rate cuts in 2008. Earlier this week, the S&P/Case-Shiller index showed a record decline in U.S. home prices in October.

    This is what’s happening to YOUR house. All the ‘money’ and ‘equity’ you thought you had saved – eliminated! The equity through falling house prices – and the money because we are DEBASING OUR CURRENCY. That low fed rate you’re reading about gets created by printing money and lending it to people. With more money, the money YOU have is worth LESS. So your money is worth less and your property is worth less – where can you turn to keep ahead of inflation? I think you BETTER turn to Dr. Paul. He’s the ONLY one running that has a HOPE of being able to deal with this.

  15. If the founding fathers would have dissected the Revolution before the fact such as many are doing in this case–I fear we would still be Torries under English Law.

    Look, 1776 was the start, the details were worked out later–to act as if there is a viable choice of keeping the Status Quo in power or electing the ONLY ONE that means to radically change things so it can be made better is becoming rather tiring.

    And I believe it shows where we have ended up, afraid to step to the edge–still wanting a safe comfy center to lounge in.

    Come on Be Brave Ye Timid–we will have a more free system based on the Constitution–I would say that’s all the tools we need to smooth up the rough edges in the future.

    Long Live Freedom, Vote for the Children, Vote Ron Paul–


  16. While I agree with your take on the corporate state of politics, I disagree with your assessment of Libertarianism and Ron Paul.

    The Libertarians DO believe that government is necessary– both on the State and Federal levels– but that the Federal government should be limited by constitutional mandates.

    I also heartily disagree with your stance on voting.

    If you don’t vote, you are GIVING the country away to the very people you despise; it is only by actively reaching out to people and encouraging them to vote along with you for a particular cause or candidate that any change can occur.

    Also– if you don’t vote, you can’t bitch. ;D

  17. Wake up people. Free market capitalism causes Corporatism/Fascism. Freedom for Corporations allows Corporations to take over the government.
    Our Republic was created to protect the aristocrats and advance their interests. America was created by Freemasons.

  18. WHAT!?!?!

    PREHISTORIC? i was unaware that the most recent understanding of economic analysis is prehistoric.

    as a social scientist and an economist, i completely support Ron Paul’s economic stances.

    a nanny state is completely what’s happening, parents are handing over responsibilities to the state. i work for a school district, and over the past few years more and more parents rely on 6 to 6 programs, i see kids come in at 6AM leave at 6PM, kids as young as three and four start out this way, parents have less influence on their children then schools do.

    why should we allow such a useless government to literally nanny our children. the state wants to control us, and we’re letting them because the state is telling us its better that way, and keeping us so busy we can’t do much else.

    i see a feudal system of the twenty first century: and it is people like Rudy, Hillary, Obama, Edwards, and countless others who would have you think otherwise to ensure it.

    this government is by the rich, for the rich, Paul’s a populist because he’s a constitutionalist and a libertarian, he wants to give the power back to the people, power that was illegally stolen from us since Lincoln came into office.

    Federalism is disgusting and is easily manipulated by the rich. it is far easier to corrupt a few similar fools, than many different fools.

    we should prove Plato wrong and elect someone who has opted, although too smart for politics, to enter it.

  19. I would suggest that this is a critical time in American history where we need to unite against the slide towards fascism. I agree that Ron Paul is not perfect but he is infinitely better than any of the other major candidates.

    Ron Paul has promised to take the saved money from overseas wars a put it towards domestic programs including saving Social Security, Medicare, etc. (while allowing young people to opt out of these programs if they choose). And realistically with a Democratically controlled congress Ron Paul would not be able to do any harm but would at least speak truth and make people aware of dangers of fascism in America.

    Also, I would ask you to consider that perhaps collusion between an over-reaching government and corporatist interests, that expand by purchasing favorable legislation, may be at the root of fascism.

    Severely restrict the coercive and subsidizing powers of government and suddenly, the corrupting influence of the legislative “For Sale” sign disappears and all businesses are forced to compete honestly for your purchases. Consumer choice alone would then determine success or failure. Monopolies cannot exist without the force of government behind them. This is the current corporatist, mercantilistic model of government Ron Paul seeks to correct. (Still he wont really accomplish much domestically with a Democratic congress — so social programs will probably stay the same.)

  20. Claiming that the United States ever implemented a “libertarian doctrine” around the world is so opposite of the truth that it is difficult to believe anyone sane could write it.

    Libertarians do not “implement doctrines” in other people’s countries.

    Claiming that big government phoney money Milton Friedman was a libertarian is the same kind of absurd word-gaming that this very dishonest article is filled with. Equating Fascism (big government) with Libertarianism (small government) so that Communism (all government) can win the debate is pathetic and maliscious.

  21. Communists always call Fascism “capitalism” so they can condemn capitalism. They call government controlled markets “free markets” so they can condemn free markets. Their game is to call fascism freedom, and when it doesn’t work, they say, “See! Freedom doesn’t work! We need more government control of other people’s wealth and property.”

    This article lies about Ron Paul. He is for government if it is constitutional. This article says he is against all government. That’s the sort of lie communists tell. If you don’t accept totalitarianism, you’re against “all government”.

    BTW, there is no such thing as “monopoly capitalism”. That’s another rhetorical invention of the communists. Monopolies do not come about under capitalism. They come about under fascism, which they label as capitalism so they can get away with condemning free trade and private property. Monopolies only occur when government interfers in free markets to restrict competition. There are no counter-examples in all of economic history.

    Private property is the communists’ real enemy, because communists are nothing but thieves all dressed up in Marxist rhetoric. What they hate are those who earn and own. They condemn “greed and selfishness” because they want to steal what they didn’t produce.

Comments are closed.