Ron Paul is a good guy. But he is naïve when it comes to foreign policy. 

His position is that America can better achieve security and world peace by showing good examples to other countries, including rogue nations.


The reason rogue nations come into being is not that America have not shown good examples. Muslims, Marxists, socialists, North Korean leaders, etc. are those who prove themselves good guys by defining Americans as bad guys.


Devils (bad guys) earn their raison d’etre by painting his opponents as devils. Their secrets of holding power and earning absolute loyalty from their people is to paint America as blak as possible. 


The reason organized gangs and other criminals come in to being is not that officers do no show good examples. Bad guys come into being all the times. It is what nature does. Nature grows all kinds of enemies and by doing so facilitate the evolution of the strongest or the fittest. Naive and weak guys have no place in this world.


In fact, the ancestors of modern man were not particularly good guys; they were simply strong guys.


If Ron Paul pursues national security of America by showing good examples to bad guys, America would soon become the prey of the bad guys.


More often than not, idealists ruin the world by pursuing daydream type of ideal.

I think Ron Paul is dangerous because he is naïve.


Views: 176

Replies to This Discussion

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000002859 StartFragment:0000002657 EndFragment:0000002823 I agree, Ron Paul is a good and decent man,


I agree, Ron Paul is a good and decent man, as far as I can tell, and that if a person or nation lives according to principles that consider life and all material things as worthy of consideration, and refuses to stoop to barbaric principles, such as torture, and exploitation, and manipulation of all that exists for one’s own benefit, then that person/nation speaks and acts consistently and honorably. Strength and power does not have to be denied, but used judiciously. No one benefits by weakness or powerlessness. 


Power of an eagle over a rabbit depends on seeing and doing what eagles do, just as the power of a rabbit over an eagle is doing what rabbits do. 


Power of criminals depends on moral and ethical codes that disregard others even as the power of principled people depends on care and compassion for others, even those who are weak.  If we were animals of the jungle with red tooth and claw instead of homo sapiens that rise to principles of law, fairness, justice and peace then we could get away with living according to the laws of nature.  Humans have the capacity to think, reason, self-regulate, make decisions and join with others of like mind, which might include using law enforcement and even war. 


Some individuals are born weak or malformed or injured or diseased.  If we live out our animal nature, these would be put on ice drifts to perish in the cold, or starved or denied water.  Because we think of ourselves as being “human” we willingly and ably care for such people. 


Yes, some individuals are born evil, without a sense of care or community.  Some criminals become so because of environment.  Does it matter wither nature or lack of nurture causes the criminal?  Yes and no.  Because we have the ability to learn about criminal and anti-social attitudes and behaviors we can intervene from conception to death and strive to provide a society based on good health and a caring community. 


Now, the question is, how do we create a healthy and caring community?  Some say religion works to make individuals and nations kinder and more loving.  I disagree with that assessment.  Religions give dogma, rules, regulations, attitudes, beliefs, customs, traditions and values that may or may not produce healthy and caring communities. 


If Ron Paul pursues national security of USA by showing “good” examples to “bad” guys, we assume USA’s way of government is “good”.  I disagree with that assessment as well.  USA, a capitalist, free market, free enterprise, “Christian” nation is fundamentally flawed.  So? … How deep into this pit are we willing to dig in order to solve these problems? 


I think Ron Paul is dangerous because he is misguided.  


Why on earth do you think I am a socialist or communist?  Are those the only choices for organizing society?  I think you had better broaden your perception a bit.  


As to "Occupy Wall Street", I say that is the only thing that works, given the resistance of 1% of the population to realize they are part of a nation and can prosper if they have workers.  Only employed workers can buy products.  What good is wealth if it is owned by 1%?  Sure, they can have nice home, cars, education, health care, clothes, and stuff ... but the time will come when the 99% will rebel. History tells a vivid story of popular rebellions. Is that what you want?  Even the workers who work for slave wages rebel. What are the 1% going to do?  Build a spaceship, fly to another planet? Leave the workers behind?  OH!  That might solve all our problems.  

Small business and wage earners have to fight for justice, freedom, democracy, or whatever they want ... these attributes are not going to be given without a fight. If small business and wage earners think 1% of the population will relinquish their profits without a fight, perhaps they don't know what justice, freedom, and democracy are all about.  

You know, I think you are right!  I do not belong in this group.  


Reply by Brian 9 hours ago

Joan Denou, your philosophy is upside-down.


Well, first of all Brian, my last name is Denoo.

You start your sentence: "1% is the enemies of people and they shall be destroyed by the 99 %" is the ideology of communists/socialists.

I don’t know who you quote, but it was/is not me.  I do not believe nor did I say such a thing.  If anyone is to be destroyed it is U.S.A.  In addition, I have been to socialist and communist countries and observed the long-term effects of those political systems.  Just as Kondratieff claimed in the early 1900s, that communism, socialism, and capitalism will not survive because the seeds of their destruction are in the structures themselves.  You might want to read some of his stuff. Just Google Nikolai Kondratieff, a Russian economist under Stalin and you will find pros and cons of his theory.  It is fairly obvious why he could predict the failure of socialism and communism and for his ideas Stalin put him to death in 1938. 


Kondratieff looked at production, consumption, stagnation, growth, changes in technologies, profits, earnings, interest rates, debt, investment opportunities, speculation, inflation, deflation, recessions, and stuff like that.  He predicted the Achilles’ heal of capitalism was the boom and bust and the consequences on an economy on owners of labor and on owners of capital. 

You say, “The haves are not the people who make the have-nots poor” and then you describe the trickle down theory of economics. Gee, I thought we had figured out that fallacy of thinking years ago.  You then fault government for regulating business and causing failures.

OK, owners of capital can plan, design, build, hire people to make a product, sell the product for more than the costs of production, and because of an oversupply of labor, wages can be forced down.  Regulations intended to protect workers and insure living wages benefit owners of labor and that benefit comes out of the profit of owners of capital.  Over time, Kondratieff and others state that the gap between owners of capital and owners of labor spreads.  Over-production occurs, people don’t have money to build homes, buy cars, pay for health insurance or educate their kids, medical expenses get out of control for working people, banks make some stupid and greedy decisions, get in trouble, tax payers bail them out and greed continues; an economy under such pressure cannot sustain prosperity.

I am not saying owners of capital do not earn their pay, if it is kept in relation to wages of working people.  Who benefits by the stagnation of our economy?  Who pays the bills?  Who suffers under these conditions? 

When I was in China in the 1980s, the Chinese people were so happy to see a white person and they would bring their children with them to translate between us to learn about my culture.  They wanted to know about housing, jobs, education, health care, retirement plans, food and just about everything you can imagine.  I was the only Caucasian in some of the towns I visited and they just couldn’t hear enough about U.S.A. They wanted to know about freedom, liberty, justice and how we had such a high standard of living.  Those people in those times wanted a higher standard of living.  They didn’t want mansions or cars or fancy clothes.  They just wanted an easier life. 

Working hard is not the answer in our nation.  I lived for a few years in El Paso, Texas.  We all had maids because we could get a full day’s labor from hard working, dependable, reliable, honest women and paid them only $2.00 per day.  I raised my maid’s wages to $10.00 per day and you would have thought I committed a crime.  My neighbors scolded me, threatened me, shunned me and every other thing you can imagine to get me to restore her wages to $2.00 per day.  My response was that if we continued to pay those wages we were setting up the conditions for rebellion.  Indeed, that is what happened. 

Your statement, “The haves are the business creators and job creators” ignores or denies the role of good and decent people working to make the engines of our country run.  Without carpenters, electricians, plumbers, grocery store people, nurses, police, fire fighters, caregivers, teachers, sales people, tree trimmers, roof repairers, auto mechanics, garbage collectors, janitors, maids, farmers, and small businesses, where would our nation be?   

It is not the nurse’s aid that makes our country poor, it is the attitude that nurse’s aids do not deserve a living wage. 

It is not the person who cares for the elderly in nursing homes that makes our nation poor, it is the belief that caregivers do not deserve a living wage.

It is not policeman on the beat that is making our community poor, it is the attitude that cuts in budgets that require laying off law enforcement that diminishes our quality of life. 

There is no place in my philosophy that says there should be equal wages for all, from CEO to janitor.  I do say there is work that needs doing, people who are ready and able to do that work, and they deserve/earn a living wage. 

Where is it written that owners of capital can expect to exploit, manipulate, cheat and lie without sanctions?  What gives them a right to millions or even hundreds of thousands of benefits, while the ones who make enterprise work are the ones who show up every day and do their assigned tasks.

NO! You are wrong!  Poverty comes from much more than lazy or irresponsible behavior.  It comes from systemic conditions that suck time, effort, sweat, and resources out of working people into the pockets of those who willingly exploit others. 

A country that acknowledges the important roles of owners of capital, owners of labor, and government, working together to make life healthier, happier, cleaner, more peaceful and more just is the kind of society in which I want to live.  


I do not feel like a long discussion, but yes, Ron Paul is naive in his foreign policy stance, you can't just withdraw military forces from around the world all at once and expect no consequences... the power vacuum created by complete retreat to the 'homeland' would make good kindling for WW3.


© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service