Ron Paul: What Happened To The Revolution? – OpEd

By

In a recent interview I was asked why Bernie Sanders, a self-described “democratic socialist” had seemingly attracted so much support among young people. In fact polls suggest Sanders is the most popular candidate among people aged 18-29, and 51 percent of that same age group appears fed up with “capitalism in its current form,” according to a recent Harvard study.

It was just four years ago that so many young people turned out to hear and support my message of personal liberty, non-aggression, and non-intervention at home and abroad. I was thrilled that so many young people were attracted to a candidate whose main message was “I don’t want to run your life.”

Socialism, of course, is the opposite philosophy. The socialist philosophy has at its core the desire to run people’s lives. It is by design an authoritarian system. Who would willingly give up so much of their own property to the state to redistribute to others? That is where the use of government force comes into play. Socialism tells how much of your money you can keep, how you can spend it, if you can spend it, which of your personal habits must be modified in order to qualify for your “free” healthcare, what course of study you must pursue to qualify for your “free” education, and so on.

But we also know the false promises can be very seductive. Socialism preys on that human fault that would like to have something for nothing. You deserve an education, the socialist tells young people, so I will give you one for free. He never tells the student that he will pay for that education many times over in the hidden tax called inflation. Or the student may “pay” for that education with unemployment after college as his potential employer was forced to shut down over the high taxes required to pay for all the things the socialist promises.

So am I surprised that it seems so many young people have fallen for the seductive lies of socialism? Well I don’t really believe they have. They are frustrated by a system they are told is capitalism. They are angry over the same things I have been talking about for years.

Our current system is far from the free-markets that we in the Austrian school of economics espouse. We have a system of cronyism, corporatism, inflationism, regulated and managed trade to the benefit of special interests, and the criminality of central banking. Unfortunately because of our faulty and biased education system and the relentless propaganda of the mainstream media, many young people are taught that the mess they see all around them is all caused by “capitalism.”

Politics is about getting people excited about a candidate. Ours is a much longer effort. The young generation that first attended my rallies in 2007 is by now in its mid-20s. They are raising a new generation that in many cases will be home-schooled and outside the propaganda machine that is modern public education. They understand that the real freedom revolution will not be won at the ballot box, but in the battleground of ideas. They continue to learn the freedom philosophy and they support the various educational organizations that provide the intellectual ammunition for our fight. I am more optimistic than ever that our message is taking hold and growing deep roots. Ideas really can change the world.

Contrary to what many would like us to believe, the Freedom Revolution is alive and well!

This article was published by RonPaul Institute.

Ron Paul

Ronald Ernest "Ron" Paul (born August 20, 1935) is an American physician, author, and politician who served for many years as a U.S. Representative for Texas. He was a three-time candidate for President of the United States, as a Libertarian in 1988 and as a Republican in 2008 and 2012.

2 thoughts on “Ron Paul: What Happened To The Revolution? – OpEd

  • May 10, 2016 at 2:15 am
    Permalink

    Ron Paul is not wrong in the current corrupt and crony capitalism that has taken root in
    America since we had Ronald Reagan since Nov 4, 1980. Before that we had Carter a gentlemen and outstanding President but for the hyperinflation and failed Mission to rescue Amrican hostages in Iran. No President since Carter is clean to work hard to bring world peace. What we need is strict term limits for the permanent career politicians in Congress, publicly financed elections and a total ban on political donations by any one but living citizens of America of $1000 per year and a complete ban on corporate and foreign donations for those seeking election at Federal and State level. As a retired Government I have experienced many millions in Government jobs connected with people in legislatures and Congress. That’s why productivity and Unionism produces third rate productivity and laid back public servants.

    Reply
  • May 10, 2016 at 10:59 am
    Permalink

    The Congressman wants to have it in both ways. He criticizes socialism on the practices happened in the USSR such as running people by government, authoritarian regime, taking property from people, inflation, and the like. He also thinks that there is no free market under what is called capitalism, and all the current problems in capitalist countries are not the result of capitalism or what he likes to call the free market economy, because, he thinks, there is no free market.
    But if we define socialism as in the original writings, then socialism did not create the problems in the USSR, because there was no socialism but etatism. This argument becomes similar to the Congressman’s point that what has happened in the market economies have nothing to do with the free market economy, because there has been no free market in these economies. At any rate, under American monopoly capitalism we have private property but most of the private ownership is owned by the one percent of the population. In the USSR people had never had such a problem. Second, the financiers are conducting central planning by the central bank which sets the price of money at rates close to zero and negative. No school of economic thought has taught people how market economy can set the price of money at a zero and a negative rate. In the USSR the economy was planned by the planning authority and the policy of zero and negative interest rates could not be found. In fact, The Austrian school (Bohmbawerk) was criticizing the USSR economy on incorrect economic calculation because the prices did not reflect the opportunity cost, because prices were determined by the central planning agency. Bohmbawerk criticism is applied to the current American and European economies as well, because if the price of money is set by the central bank, then market does not provide its signals correctly. Under the USSR the leadership confiscated large property, but under current capitalism even small property is being confiscated by the government and banks. Setting interest rate at a zero and a negative rate is actually representing confiscating of people’s wealth. Under western market economies, governments are controlling people and occupying their mind by propaganda. It is even worse than what happened in the USSR. Now, people cannot say anything, because a person can be easily considered a terrorist or supporting terrorism or be put on no-fly list. Finally, health care and education should be provided to people free, because these can enhance welfare of citizens. Under American monopoly capitalism it has become extremely difficult to obtain health and education. They have become extremely costly with very low quality. People have become sick of the imperialist wars for looting resources of small nations for the very few. It is also true that people are becoming slave to debt and government control. People have realized these issues and know they are losing their wealth and freedom and are exploited by the very few. Therefore, they are revolting and the financiers are building houses under the ground to hide when the bill sounds

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *