Topic: Politics
Ron Paul on Patriotism I have never considered myself to be a patriot. The way Dr. Paul has defined it caused me to reconsider that position.by Jahfre Fire Eater
(libertarian)
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Yesterday on the Lew Rockwell website there was a video speech and transcripts of Ron Paul talking about patriotism.
In the referenced speech Dr. Paul says that those who dissent from illegal, immoral and unconstitutional actions by the state are patriots. I do those things to the degree that I am willing; not to the point of subjecting myself to government sponsored consequences against me. However, I think the difference between the patriotism Dr. Paul spoke about and the patriotism I don't consider myself to exhibit lies in the intent behind the dissenting behavior regarding certain actions by the state.
The intent of my actions is to defend liberty. The intent of Dr. Paul's patriot is to shape and constrain the state. The actions arising from these two different intentions are obviously very closely related in their manifestation and desired outcomes.
It has long been my position that I am not a patriot. I don't hold with Nationalism. I chafe at high school pep rally indoctrinations. I don't pledge allegiance to symbols of liberty and freedom. I don't pledge allegiance to the republic for which that symbol stands...but I fly a flag from my deck. I believe in symbolism, I just refuse to pledge allegiance to it. I think emotional herds are easily manipulated for the slaughter.
My allegiances are reserved for the ideals of liberty and my fellow defenders of those ideals. Period. I am not anti-social. I can treat opposition and apathetic and misguided people with respect but I do not mistake them for compatriots. I am fortunate to live in the USA where I am able to openly express my opinions. This country has been very good to me and I live a life that tends to be very good for this country. I am not intent on creating a better USA. I am intent on defending liberty in a life-long struggle. If the result is a better USA, great. If another country opens its doors and welcomes defenders of liberty as a vital and necessary component for the vision of the future embodied in that country's charter, I'd leave the USA in a heartbeat. . . or so I like to think. The reality is I'm probably stuck here for the duration and it is up to me to live my life with purpose within the constraints of the world into which I was born.
I refuse to use my passionate defense of the ideals of liberty as the basis for an isolationist intellectual barrier against effective participation in the political process. Readers of my column know I do not coddle those I believe to be fooling themselves with their 3rd party affiliations. Before you jump to a scathing comment that I couldn't care less about, please check to see if the shoe fits you. I'm not making the claim that all 3rd party members are fooling themselves about their role in the political process. We need third parties. I don't want to see them dissolve. I just do what I can to ensure that those who join a third party, or independent status, understand the self-marginalizing nature of their choice and don't harbor unrealistic expectations based solely on the influence of their faith and passion. I don't think it is too much to ask that individuals gauge their behavior by its consequences with regard to their stated goals and objectives. I have met oodles of Libertarians and independents who are simply unable to do this. They are driven by blind faith and passion, not reason and objectivity. How ironic, huh? A foaming-mouthed Randroid can only have entirely missed Ayn's message.
I don't expect to change anyone's mind about their choice in party, I just want those who are wasting their time in useless activity to know, in no uncertain terms, that their intellectual isolationism results in the enemies of liberty being in charge of the GOP, the most powerful political tool on the planet.
Ron Paul Republicans are working vigorously to control as many local and state party positions as possible. From a position of authority (by way of being elected to those positions) within the party the message of those joined voices will begin to influence the direction of the party. The time to strike is now, while the party is reeling from the past election and while the GOP old-guard rank-and-file voters are milling about wondering what to do. I've always found that when faced with people who are waiting to be told what to do, the best way to see my goals met is to tell them what to do. Some will, some won't, so what? I don't care what most people do, only those who are doing productive activities -- either for, or against my goals. I'm drawn to encourage the former and discourage the latter; it is just what I do.
Furthermore, I don't care about the intentions other defenders of liberty hold. If they defend liberty because they belive it is the patriotic thing to do, great. If they believe dissenting from the state is patriotic and they wish to be a patriot and their actions result in the defense of liberty, great. If they intend to use the power of their minds and emotions to grow the LP into a major party that can one day overwhelm the two-party system then all I can do is point out how such folly leaves the GOP in the hands of their enemies. I don't see that as a patriotic act by any stretch of the word...but then, I don't place any stock in the concept of patriotism anyway. The real question is, "Do the consequences of your behavior align with your stated goals?" No one can answer that for you.
-Jahfre Fire Eater
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 9 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Jahfre Fire Eater only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Jahfre Fire Eater 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.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2008-11-20 13:59:23
Master C,
I do not hope for, expect, nor want followers. I don't understand why you found that worth asserting; with and exclamation point no less.
Every free thinking defender of liberty is, alone, a lethal threat to Socialism.
Your ridiculous assertion to the contrary must be a lame attempt at self-delusion because anyone who knows the first thing about Socialism knows that it requires, as a starting position, the elimination of every individual who would assert their right to liberty...because every one of us is a sufficient threat to Socialism that we attract individual attention from the progressive oppressors.
Long live SOCIALISM? That's a good trick. No one has managed to even make a good stab at it so far.
Your impressions about a snapshot of the world today have no bearing on the actions I pursue to create a better world tomorrow.
I think, therefore I'm dangerous, to the notion of Collectivism.
If in some wild flight of fancy you ever decide to address a single point I make in my articles instead of hurling ridiculous jabs at me I probably will not notice. I tend to skip your comments. Nothing personal, I just don't have much time nonsense.
Ever hear of CHINA, ITALY, FRANCE, GERMANY, JAPAN ~ SWEDEN, SPAIN, EGYPT, BRAZIL, ARGENTINA, POLAND, YUGOSLAVIA, MEXICO ~ CANADA! All of them have socialized health systems, nationalized banks, public transportation, subsidized housing, strong public unions, and a history that's longer than any CAPITALIST nation you can name.
Your brand of LIBERTY is more belligerence and obstinance than FREEDOM. And, I don't think your view of world history is very impressive, either.
Posted By: Mrs. Fire Eater
Date: 2008-11-22 12:55:54
I'm giggling because I'm remembering that article on intellectual illiteracy by Chris Hedges regarding the ability of Americans to comprehend and communicate larger topics. In the comments on that article, several people bungled the author's meaning and left emotional rants that implied a Christian like Hedges had no right to "bash" religion... the problem is that Mr. Hedges wasn't even talking about religion itself, but the "marketing of religion" in a shallow way to people who don't have critical thinking skills. In spite of having their misunderstanding corrected, they continued to argue their non-points, and also did not comprehend other commenters making fun of them for proving the whole point of the article, that many in America are intellectually illiterate, unable to comprehend what they are reading except in a very shallow way.
I don't know why I just thought of that... I'm sure it relates to this article and comments somehow.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
