I have now felt the wrath of supporters and it is counter-productive to the importance of the revolution! by Gary Wood
(libertarian)
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Many who have read my column at Nolan Chart LLC or seen my blog at MyFoxUtah.com, or have watched my videos at my YouTube, LiveLink, or MetaCafe channels know without a doubt I am a Ron Paul supporter. Most of my articles, poems, or videos tell the tale of our historical, Constitutional need to listen and study Dr. Paul's message. After all, many know our monetary system is in major meltdown, our foreign policy is helping to destroy us, and our lack of focus on the founding legacy is detrimental to our future.
Imagine, then, my surprise at the response to my most recent video "Hey Paul; Give Me My Due!" It was a video that spun the media campaign against Ron Paul on its ear. The message was clear, silence Ron Paul and the backlash will propel his campaign to higher exposure and acceptance. Overall, it was a positive message in favor of the Ron Paul campaign and the ensuing revolution to take our country back to the founder's foundational legacy.
Based on many of my other videos, poems, and articles some have called me the drummer of the campaign while others have referred to me as the poet laureate. I have received over 12,000 views of one video as well as 5 star ratings, favorites, and positive comments on most of the videos while my articles have been read by thousands. I'm not attempting to blow my horn here, as my articles and videos have received relatively minor response compared to a great deal others produced in support of Dr. Paul's campaign. I point this out for one reason only, to help explain the shock I have felt from Ron Paul supporters based on my last video effort.
Have you heard or read about the feeling(s) some have regarding Paulites' and their negative replies to certain articles or events? Have you had to deal with defending Paul supporters who attack with vicious words and expressions any who dare speak counter to the desires of the supporters? What reports have you dealt with regarding the negative impact Paul supporters are having on his campaign?
I have dealt with all of the above and more. Liberty and freedom bring out all kinds of people so it was to be expected that some may not articulate well and cause a negative feeling to some looking at our efforts from the outside. Many Paul supporters are rude, use abusive language, and overall decry any they believe are speaking counter to their belief and it creates more negative than positive impressions.
I now know this to be fact. Ron Paul supporters, those of which I am among, have called me a Nazi, a terrorist, a traitor, and many other names I cannot repeat. Ron Paul supporters, of which I am among, have sent me emails threatening my life, wife, and family. Ron Paul supporters, of which I am among, have threatened to silence me and have threatened to destroy my existence on Earth. Ron Paul supporters, of which I am among, have stated in no uncertain terms they wish my very life were extinguished so as to have less confrontation in the path of liberty. Reactions from Ron Paul supporters have voiced opinion from my life being worth nothing to my voice needing to be silenced forever.
All this reaction was triggered because many Ron Paul supporters initially did not understand my latest video, "Hey Paul; Give Me My Due." (After viewing it twice many actually sent apologies for their attacks.) I will say only this, Ron Paul supporters, be careful with your hatred and misunderstandings.
You will create more damage to our cause than good if you continue to spew hatred and poisonous venom rather than reason and kindness. Threats and nasty vile hatred will not spread our message; only detract from the importance of liberty and freedom. If you feel hatred toward another based on your perception of their opposition silence your anger and reply with well thought out reason that spawns critical thinking rather than utter defense and detest toward Ron Paul supporters. If you cannot respond with reason and thought provoking concepts do not respond at all. I am an ardent supporter of Dr. Paul yet if this were not the case the Paul supporters crucifying me would have truly turned me against the campaign without an opportunity to learn the important lessons crucial to the success of the revolution.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 103
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Gary Wood only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Gary Wood is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
You've written an excellent and very, very important treatment of this problem. I too have felt some of the misplaced ire of some not very sympathetic Paul supporters who have mistaken my purpose in one or another of my articles. I don't know how to get through to these people, but your article is a good start.
I found myself VERY concerned this morning when I read about people that have heaped abuse on the Town Clerk in Sutton, New Hampshire. I myself wondered about the circumstances and about her motives; however, the knee-jerk reaction of many to simply accuse and abuse before thoroughly investigating is very troublesome. It will undoubtedly hurt the cause if not toned down.
Part of what we're dealing with is, of course, a backlash fueled by people with pent-up anger at the abuse that has been heaped upon us all of our lives by an increasingly tyrannical government. Combine that with immaturity and perhaps in some cases sinful hostility, and you have a very volatile mixture.
I really appreciate your article! Keep up the excellent work!
Thanks for the excellent article Mr. Wood. Haha with a name like that you must get all the ladies!I have noticed many Paul supporters that often do not understand my blatant sarcasm when tossing fake criticism Paul's way on issues that I completely agree with. I think we often let passion get in the way reason. Oh well, I guess its better to have too much passion than too little. It’s too bad that so many threats of violence are used in situations that don’t warrant it. I’m guessing some of it can be attributed to outside agitators as well. It is not difficult to act like a Paul supporter while intending to harm his campaign. I have seen a few attempts at this in my local meetup group and considering the passion that many people have to actively Bury Paul related articles on digg, taking the next step on threats toward Authors in his name is pretty simple.
At the same time, much of the needless aggression does come from true Ron Paul supporters. Lets just hope we learn to focus our energy in a more productive manner. Keep up the reasonable writing style, for some of us appreciate it and others will grow to.
"Most significant of all, the new partnership deal with Iraq, including a status of forces agreement that would then replace the existing Security Council mandate authorizing the presence of the U.S.-led multinational forces in Iraq, will become a sworn obligation for the next president."
If the war was democraticly authorized and lawful by Congress following Sec 8 of the Constitution , then this scam that is being forced on us, bankrupting us would not have mobilized so many from such divergent backgrounds and values.
Bottom line; nobody wants to be taken for a fool and we are uniting to make the next occupant of the White House follow the LAW.
Have some compassion dude! The people are drowning and so you are out there trying to save them and they give you a bloody nose...OK, but, the slaves are getting a little chapped around the anklets...makes them kinda irritable methinks. You guys try to be more clear next time you are writing something ... there are some dull tools in the shed...and as for you, mr and ms public, be good and quit picking on the nice writers they are the ONLY voice you are gonna have around here unless you do something about that voting machine farce...paper and pencil please!
I'm willing to bet that not all of Dr. Pauls 'supporters' are actually supporters. What better way to separate Dr. Paul from gaining new voters than to scare them away with very bad behaviour. Just like with the MSM; the truth is irrelevant, the intent is to affect the vote.
But none of that excuses the fervent supporters of their bad behaviour. We'll win more 'flies with honey than with vinegar'. Just remember that the detractors have also been used and abused by the establishment. They can no longer tell the truth from a lie, as they have also (along with the rest of us) been lied to for many many years by the MSM and the establishment.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-01-13 07:43:21
Excellent article. Well said, Gary.
badunit's comment is also true, but I have to ask him or her...do you also make the same comment about compassion to the "slaves" you referenced? Compassion is best (and most effective) when it is two-way rather than one-way.
This is not the first thing that I have read this morning on this very topic. I agree that we do need to stop acting that way. I have tried to respond in kind to others that have bad views of Ron Paul. It doesn't work. Their favorite response seems to be putting the rEVOLution into the same catagory of Jim Jones and his following, using the phrase "pass the kool-aid". More proof is the Luntz video where he says "see that's why I can't give you a break" I am sure that if we all stopped doing those childish things he would still feel the same way.
So Lets get to the people that don't know who he is, they are the ones who can still decide that they want Dr. Paul as their President. I know that people may get mad at me, but I beleive that it is time to stop the sign waving and go door to door. Most people probably don't even remember what they saw when they finally get home to look him up anyway. It was fine up and to a point, but now it is time to reach the votes that we can really get!
Some of those voters would be the older people who remember what it really was to be an American and live by the Constitution. Most of those people feel ignored and don't even have a way to get information unless we help them.
I hope that I did not upset anyone, that was not my intention.
Teresa, your comments shouldn't upset anyone as the time to canvass rather than honk & wave is at hand. While canvassing I hope all supporters do so with respect. If someone is interested give them information, if they aren't give them a smile and press onward to those that are. Don't argue with people on their doorsteps.
I know many of us feel that being kind will not work yet I would counter being angry and threatening works even less. One can be passionate, speak against opponents claims yet do so with reason and keep it at a debate level rather than an argument level. It's the argument level that creates losers on all sides. When we are the smaller percentage working to gain support we cannot afford to argue or be angry, we have to be smarter and let our passion show liberty is liberating rather than irritating.
I know slaves anklets and all but will a slave be freed faster by yelling and threatening the master or by working on breaking the chain. I appreciate all the comments so far on this and look forward to more as the revolution toward restoring our Constitution grows!
This is a great article and expresses exactly how I feel. I became a Ron Paul supporter just a month ago and have been enlightened by the clarity of his message. I now feel, however, that his message is being muffled by his supporters. I feel significant ground has been lost. The change in Sean Hannity was amazing. He went from ‘fair and balanced’ to calling those who support Ron Paul ‘kooks’. And I’ll admit, while asking supporters to tone it down will help the campaign, the fact that asking is necessary makes one hesitant in spreading the message, and may even give them pause to question whether their support is well placed. Maybe my conversion is not yet complete.
I've dealt with this phenomenon quite a bit in various Ron Paul forums. Either there are quite a few politically naive, angry, or plain antisocial individuals with reading comprehension difficulties supporting the r3volution, or there is an awesome online cointel campaign against this candidate. Or maybe it's some combination of both. In any event, antisocial behavior and just plain lack of tact probably remains the single most important reason mainstream baby boomer law and order Republicans aren't lining up behind Dr. Paul; even though they believe the message and taught a lot of it to their kids, they're all still supporting Thompson or McCain.
I know of what you you speak... I post on a lot of boards, and write a blog, and after posting what I thought were constructive criticisms of the campaign in order to help better reach more people in amore effective manner (and win more delegates!), I was assaulted with basically a 'how dare you criticize ROn Paul' attitude from a vocal minority of supporters. What Dr. Paul advocates is TOLERANCE of dissenting viewpoints, and the majority of his supporters adhere to that credo. BUt all it takes is a very small and misguided amount of 'true believers' as they liken themselves to be to damage both the media image of the Campaign as being 'fanatical', as well as disrupting the cohesiveness and unity of the movement from within.
I don't know what to do, other than to maintain dignity and rise above these illogical and (there 9s no other word) fanatical onslaughts! I am in NO WAY characterizing the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters as anything other htan sober, thoughtful and intelligent advocates of freedom. But all it takes is for a few vocal and vociferous knuckleheads to throw sand in the gears for the rest of us.
I've felt some of their ire too, and it's really awful. Please remember that the vast majority of the Paul movement consists of rational, intelligent people who are well informed about their government. It's too bad we can't compete with the f**kwads in being vocal.
By the way, I see you're using TinyMCE as an editor here... does the double space drive you as crazy as it does me? I found a fix for it if you're using drupal. Contact me and I'll help you out.
As a fellow Nolan Chart columnist, I thank you for your excellent article. We must win others by our example as well as words and ideas. Let's not sink down to the level of the Neocons and warmongers!Â
I'm thankful for the young who support Ron Paul and freedom. Some of their choices of expression are "new" to me just like their jewelry once was. I kind of think that the young are communicating among the young. I welcome their increasing numbers.
But, yes, I do wish they would (could?) raise the level of their rhetoric. Yes, I do wish that each "f" was not followed by three asterisks. And I sure wish that they would not abuse people.
But I ask: where would we be without them? Isn't it great that those who don't look and act like "us" love freedom and our candidate.
Let's just hope Ron's young supporters watch Ron, listen to Ron, see how Ron acts and reacts. Ron the calm gentleman. Ron the man with careful, well-chosen words. Ron the man who left profanity behind when he finished his tour with the Air Force.
Young supporters - take some of the thoughts above to heart. Think about what has been said. Do your best, try a bit harder to emulate the man you support. But stay excited.
Hello all: the problem i see, i mean the main problem i see with Ron Paul's political and economic program, is his neoliberal economic model. Neoliberalism is not really the solution for countries with economic problems like USA. The most rational alternative would be a welfare humanist economic model (Socialism of the XXI Century), not neoliberal capitalism.
NEOLIBERALISM:
What is Neoliberalism?
A Brief Definition for Activists
by Elizabeth Martinez and Arnoldo Garcia, National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights
"Neo-liberalism" is a set of economic policies that have become widespread during the last 25 years or so. Although the word is rarely heard in the United States, you can clearly see the effects of neo-liberalism here as the rich grow richer and the poor grow poorer.
"Liberalism" can refer to political, economic, or even religious ideas. In the U.S. political liberalism has been a strategy to prevent social conflict. It is presented to poor and working people as progressive compared to conservative or Rightwing. Economic liberalism is different. Conservative politicians who say they hate "liberals" -- meaning the political type -- have no real problem with economic liberalism, including neoliberalism.
"Neo" means we are talking about a new kind of liberalism. So what was the old kind? The liberal school of economics became famous in Europe when Adam Smith, an Scottish economist, published a book in 1776 called THE WEALTH OF NATIONS. He and others advocated the abolition of government intervention in economic matters. No restrictions on manufacturing, no barriers to commerce, no tariffs, he said; free trade was the best way for a nation's economy to develop. Such ideas were "liberal" in the sense of no controls. This application of individualism encouraged "free" enterprise," "free" competition -- which came to mean, free for the capitalists to make huge profits as they wished.
Economic liberalism prevailed in the United States through the 1800s and early 1900s. Then the Great Depression of the 1930s led an economist named John Maynard Keynes to a theory that challenged liberalism as the best policy for capitalists. He said, in essence, that full employment is necessary for capitalism to grow and it can be achieved only if governments and central banks intervene to increase employment. These ideas had much influence on President Roosevelt's New Deal -- which did improve life for many people. The belief that government should advance the common good became widely accepted.
But the capitalist crisis over the last 25 years, with its shrinking profit rates, inspired the corporate elite to revive economic liberalism. That's what makes it "neo" or new. Now, with the rapid globalization of the capitalist economy, we are seeing neo-liberalism on a global scale.
A memorable definition of this process came from Subcomandante Marcos at the Zapatista-sponsored Encuentro Intercontinental por la Humanidad y contra el Neo-liberalismo (Inter-continental Encounter for Humanity and Against Neo-liberalism) of August 1996 in Chiapas when he said: "what the Right offers is to turn the world into one big mall where they can buy Indians here, women there ...." and he might have added, children, immigrants, workers or even a whole country like Mexico."
The main points of neo-liberalism include:
THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.
CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.
DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on the job.
PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.
ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."
Around the world, neo-liberalism has been imposed by powerful financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. It is raging all over Latin America. The first clear example of neo-liberalism at work came in Chile (with thanks to University of Chicago economist Milton Friedman), after the CIA-supported coup against the popularly elected Allende regime in 1973. Other countries followed, with some of the worst effects in Mexico where wages declined 40 to 50% in the first year of NAFTA while the cost of living rose by 80%. Over 20,000 small and medium businesses have failed and more than 1,000 state-owned enterprises have been privatized in Mexico. As one scholar said, "Neoliberalism means the neo-colonization of Latin America."
In the United States neo-liberalism is destroying welfare programs; attacking the rights of labor (including all immigrant workers); and cutbacking social programs. The Republican "Contract" on America is pure neo-liberalism. Its supporters are working hard to deny protection to children, youth, women, the planet itself -- and trying to trick us into acceptance by saying this will "get government off my back." The beneficiaries of neo-liberalism are a minority of the world's people. For the vast majority it brings even more suffering than before: suffering without the small, hard-won gains of the last 60 years, suffering without end.
Elizabeth Martinez is a longtime civil rights activist and author of several books, including "500 Years of Chicano History in Photographs."
13101310Arnoldo Garcia is a member of the Oakland-based Comite Emiliano Zapata, affiliated to the National Commission for Democracy in Mexico.
13101310Both writers attended the Intercontinental Encounter for Humanity and against Neoliberalism, held July 27 - August 3,1996, in La Realidad, Chiapas.
THE BEST ALTERNATIVE FOR NEOLIBERALISM IS 21ST CENTURY SOCIALISM:
Socialism of the 21st century
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Heinz Dieterich at the World Festival of Youth and Students in Caracas 2005Socialism of the 21st century is a political term and slogan, supposed to describe new forms of socialism in the 21st century.
According to his own words, Heinz Dieterich has developed his concept of the Socialism of the 21st century in 1996, and has publicised it worldwide since 2000, especially in South America.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 Bolivarian process
2 Failed systems
3 Basic institutions
4 External links
[edit] Bolivarian process
Dieterich is considered the (informal) advisor of the bolivarian development process, executed by Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez. According to Dieterich, neither the “industrial capitalism” nor the “historical really existing socialism” has managed “to solve the urgent problems of humanity, like poverty, hunger, exploitation, oppression of economical, sexist and racist nature, the destruction of natural resources of life, and the absence of a really participative democracy.” [2]
[edit] Failed systems
Both systems were subordinated under “similarly superior development circumstances”. Dieterich mentions amongst other things the necessity for capital accumulation, the Fordism, the world market, the competition of systems, “as well as the undemocratically vertical party, society, and state structures – which have mercilessly narrowed the degree of freedom in the development of both system concepts against the will of their protagonists”. [2] The current age stood under two “world historical omens”: “the exhaustion of society projects of the bourgeoisie and of the historical proletariat, as well as the transition of the current bourgeois civilisation to a post capitalist world society: the univeral basis democracy.”[2]
[edit] Basic institutions
Dieterich demands the “construction of four basic institutions of the new reality of the post capitalist civilisation, namely:
the equivalence economy that is based on use value and the value theory, not-market-economical, and democraticly determined by those who directly create value;
the majority democracy which uses the plebiscite in the case of important questions that concern the whole society;
the basis democracy based state as a representant of the common interests with a suitable minority protection; and
the critical and responsible subject, the rationally, ethically and aesthetically self-determined citizen.”[2]
This were the “basic institutionality […] that showed the historical project of Marx and Engels its startegical direction.”[2]
As the existing society should be replaced by a “qualitatively different (system contrary) one, “the program of the socialism of the 21st century is a necessarily revolutionary one.”[2]
Here are the main points of Neoliberalism:
Posted By: Kevin Mitchell
Date: 2008-01-14 12:49:25
I would agree with Kimble, a few posts back that there would be various cointel operatives within the Revolution, underming the efforts of the many. The fact that he appealing to the disenfranchised( although I have noticed a large cross section of society at his rallies)- would contribute to that element of 'hooliganisnm'.
Having said that, this is where Ron Paul comes in. If he is a true leader, he ( and those in his campaign) need to be vigilant and expose the cointel aspects. He also needs to instill the message of non violence and respect among his supporters. It seems at times he is a little overwhelmed by all the loud and cheerleader type slogan yelling at his rallies. He needs to understand it is his horse running for the barn door.
Posted By: Mike Cunningham
Date: 2008-01-15 12:06:14
The Foul mouthed "Paulites" who are threatening people they do not agree with are doing way more harm than good. Brit Hume yesterday in a burst of indignation smeared Paul again because some jerks were calling and threatening somone who supposedly "made a mistake" on vote counting but ended up correcting it....not before the damage was done. Hmmmmm, how convenient.  That was just what Brit and His handlers wanted.....to portray Ron Paul supporter as violent crackpots and idiots. Thanks, guys! There is allways the possibility that they are not true RP supporters at all, but shills that are working to smear our man. Either way.......if that is what you have to resort to, then get lost. RP would never condone that kind of crap.
Posted By: patrick henry
Date: 2008-01-16 13:32:58
Just remember how pissed you guys were when you pulled your head out of the sand and found the truth. These people feel that their LIBERTY is worth FIGHTING 4. I agree that threatening people of the MSM is giving them ammo to shoot at us with, but consider the frustration of people that feel the govt is stepping on their heads while the MSM polishes the shoes.
Most people that you will argue with are not Dr. Paul supporters and do not understand LIBERTY. Lets spend our time and energy educating the masses to what LIBERTY means, because only then will people understand the message.
People are tired of mudslinging, lets travel the high road and use superior intelligence and reason. If that doesnt work we always got the 2nd Ammendmant (for now)
My local radio station talk show host (who would probably share at least 70% of the libertarian principles but won't even talk about Ron Paul on the air because supporters deluge impolitely and at inappropriate times. I know the message is powerful and incites alot of enthusiasm, but this is a once in a lifetime shot. Now is not the time to stand out negativly from the crowd. This is an incredibly tough uphill battle against the media and is going to take months not days or weeks. Don't Panic!
Even if it kills you and you really at times want to punch people out for unwavering stupidity give them politeness, rationality and make them have as much respect for you as the cause. Otherwise it is futile, the media will only show the worst of the Paul campaign, never put it in a fair light.
The time to fight the 4 cops violating your rights is not in the back of a police car, it's in court, with a good lawyer and alot of witnesses. The whole world is watching.
And remember the character of the man we're all praying for, and think of how he would react. If people really want this, don't comport yourself in a way that would disappoint the man himself.
Under Ideas to beat the media: Once I sign up on MLK day and buy campaign materials, I'm going to take to the streets with a laptop, save catagorized videos, and let the Dr. speak for himself as much as possible. Don't forget to include some of the big highlights of the medias campaign to ignore him, there is a great piece from russian TV on the campaign website. One of the first things unfortunately alot of people(at least here in NY) will tell you is "Never heard the name." Explain that he is (currently) 4th in the vote total and explain WHY they have never heard of him.
This is worth holding your temper for folks, at least till after the election.
