About every four years a very particular and intriguing event is held somewhere in the United States of
America Demagogy, and many signs show that this year’s event will be at least as lame as every other year.
Similarly to how other countries elect representatives to govern them and act in their best interest, we in the United States of
America Demagogy elect notorious globalists and demagogues to govern us, and act against our national interest.
You would be thinking that with the economic crisis that touches our country more then any other, with nationalist movements rising more than ever in Europe and every other country, with the disastrous results of half a decade of ethnomasochism and globalism, Americans would start to wake up and demand that their government start working in the national interest.
But apparently Americans are more concerned with gay rights, birth control pills and the legalization of marijuana.
These same Americans don’t seem to notice that they will soon experience a very painful blowback to use Ron Paul’s favorite term, once the Fed stops printing money. The errors of half a decade of ethnomasochistic governing and foreignism won’t be repaired with yet another bailout, and the consequences that Americans are starting to see are only the tip of the iceberg.
It was pretty funny last year to watch the Occupy Wall Street movement, yet another blatant excuse for anti-Americanism promoted by our ethnomasochistic media, because of the wide ignorance of the protesters.
Not only were they proposing even more international socialism to resolve problems created by international socialism, but really if they think our economic situation now is difficult, wait and see how it will be when the Europeans or the Russian take us over.
And no, there won’t be a massive bailout to magically solve our decades of trade-deficit, debt accumulation and other consequences to our anti-American globalist actions.
Even Ron Paul’s policies to cut government spending are widely insufficient at best, on the wrong track at worst.
As much as we need government spending’s limited, that alone won’t solve most of our problems. Germany, China, India, Denmark, France, Sweden Russia and most of the globe all have economies that are a lot more government depended than us (59% of GDP for Denmark, 56% for France) and their economy is in better shape than ours.
In 2008, we had to choose between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, but trust me in 2012 we will have both.
As long as American interests aren’t the top and only priority of the voters, you might as well keep Obama and his current administration because no candidate is projecting much change in our ideology.
And apparently, seeing the possible candidates for the 2012 elections, the public opinion hasn’t evolved one bit despite the economic crisis of 2012.
As for me, once again I will not vote for anyone.
I was considered voting Ron Paul earlier this year but seriously it’s not even worth the effort, and I wouldn’t want to encourage the globalist system with my vote.
As long as we won’t have American elections, based on American interests and not demagogy, voting will be as useless here as in central Africa.
As much as I am supportive of most of Ron Paul’s economic projects, including the public debt reduction and the non interventionism of the State.
Now the grass isn’t all green in my opinion as a few points are making me doubt and express serious reserves about the benefits of having this candidate in the White House.
Lets take this video for example as it illustrates particularly well what I mean.
Why Ron Paul shouldn’t be president
“A man led by principles”
Unfortunately, this illustrates much to well the actual mindset of most politicians.
In our country that lacks ethnocentrism like no other, Ron Paul reinforced this non-partisanship by his messages based on “principles”, “what is right to do” and so on.
“voted against every tax”
It is clearly a form/substance debate here, but I am particularly opposed to the way he spreads the libertarian/liberal message.
It seems here that the only reason he is supporting liberalism is because it is against taxes and individual liberties. Yet another non-ethnocentric way of presenting it.
The correct way for a patriot to present the liberal ideas would be “It would be beneficial for the USA to […]”.
You see the difference ? By not being ethnocentric, like any politician should be (and is in other countries), he is reinforcing the ethno-masochism sentiment we currently live in.
Part of liberalism is individual responsibility (as opposed to collective irresponsibility promoted by socialism), eluding the facts of ethno-masochism is not part of making American people more responsible and more patriotic.
As such, I don’t even consider Ron Paul as a liberal. For me he is just a variation of the traditional socialists and anti-American that populate our political institutions.
A lot of his ideas are good, but not for the right reasons.
Why do you think that a lot of countries, for most enemies of the USA, are supporting Ron Paul ? If Ron Paul was really the “one” candidate that could revitalize our economy, why are the foreigners supporting him ?
1. They like USA and wish the best for us ? Hippie approach, highly improbable (except for Kosovo maybe). Most of the foreign media now promoting Ron Paul are the same that promote nationalism and anti-American in their own countries.
2. They want discounts in Calvin Klein fragrances ? Most of these countries have already showed that they are excellent in plagiarizing American products.
3. They want to serve their best interests and know what is beneficial for them ? Almost there.
4. They want America to continue so far down the ethno-masochist path that they wont be able to get back up ? Point.
The same medias that supported anti-Americans throughout the world, that even supported the OWS fallacy, are now promoting Ron Paul’s viewpoints in OUR country ?
And they want us to believe its in OUR interest ?
There is a common saying, “Whoever is feared the most by your enemies is a good ally”.
Just read or watch what the French/German/Belgians were saying when Reagan (a pro-American AND liberal) was elected. They were diabolism him by all means, portraying him as a fascist anti-European nationalist and totalitarian, while their own politics were a hundred times more nationalists and chauvinist than Reagan’s would ever be.
Now we have Italian and Indian dudes supporting Ron Paul. There is clearly a difference in the public opinion overseas. Did all these countries that hated us, supported anti-American organization and politicians, and spread lies in their media suddenly change their views on our country ? Or did they just see an opportunity to reinforce the ethno-mascochist in America ?
I’m not trying to sound as if I base my judgement purely on overseas public opinions, it’s obviously not the case but it serves as a perfect illustration of my point.
I do believe that the future of the USA will be, and must be, of liberalism. But clearly Ron Paul is not the best solution, despite the fact that I like most of his propositions.
On the other side of Ron Paul we have Gingrich, who is patriotic, but tends to be too much Keynesian/Statist for my taste.
The approach of a liberal candidate, or any candidate, should not be some sort of idealist quest to please the masses. As I said, if you want to promote freedom for the sake of freedom, or peace for the sake of peace, nothing stops you from joining Greenpeace or any other charity organization. But please don’t pretend your are trying to help America by doing so, the only things that can help America are NATIONALISM and PATRIOTISM.
The same remark goes to the religion fanatics (Santorum) and other Bachmann/Palin and all the others. If your concern is not the sovereignty and power of the USA, gtfo of politics and join some random organization, you will probably help your country more by doing so that by monopolizing the White House for 4 years.
In conclusion : Ron Paul, good ideas but not for the good reasons.