Jason wrote:You are right in that the definition of statist that you have provided does not apply to my beliefs.
Note, that was a dictionary definition
, not just mine.
Jason wrote:I shall attempt to further explain my position utilizing the following -
Government sole job and duty is to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (property)....and as such governments (political connections of people) are instituted (required) in order to protect the governed (in order for protection people combine or unite together for the common good/welfare). Unless you like going without toilet paper....
I'd say governments role is mainly to manage public property. As for protecting life, liberty and etc. it can be much better done by private players (see State or Private-Law Society
Jason wrote:In the course of this duty it has become necessary to break up market dynamics (monopolies)....
I have a news for you: monopolies do not exist in a Free Market. (see The Myth of Natural Monopoly
) It is a myth invented by statist, and is false. Besides, in a Free Market, if someone produces a product people want at a cheep price, and thus capture a significant portion of the market, -- it is a good thing! They deliver better product at a better price! True monopolies exist only when government gets involved, and prevents entry into market by the immoral force of a wicked law. US post office is a good example of that. Many "utilities" are like that. It is GOVERNMENT that creates monopolies, NOT the Free Market. Exactly the opposite of what you believe. You've been taught a lie.
Jason wrote:and everything is best not left to the free market (there is some need of constraints).
That is a lie, because free market is nothing but the cumulative expression of individual liberty. By denying free market, you violate private property, the fundamental principle of Liberty. This is what statists do, and they are wrong, because they violate the law of God which says: "Thou shall not steal." This is why I said all statists are thieves at heart. Hence my "closet" comment for you.
Jason wrote:Because the reality at the end of the day is....there are major market players that determine or control prices and distribution (if left unchecked).
As well they should. The only way to "control" a free market is to provide a better product at a better price. It is like saying: "The reality at the end of the day is....people will do what they want (if left unchecked)." You bet 'ya! The only moral check on the use of property is not violating the property of others. All other laws are immoral and wicked.
Jason wrote:We currently have a market nearly completely dominated by just a few major players....especially "commodities".
It is often the case because of government involvement. And if not, then it's a good thing, because they provide a better product at a better price. Get it?
Jason wrote:Now in this current environment Ron Paul, via government force, would remove the capability of the people to provide for their own currency and shift to a globalized currency based on gold.
Wow! Do you even read what you write! It is like saying "You REMOVE government force BY government force!" Ron Paul wants to REMOVE government force monopoly on counterfeiting, by legalizing FREEDOM (not to mention the Constitution) and allowing Free Competition in Currencies. So he does not want to FORCE the people, but he wants to liberate the people by REMOVING government FORCE that created the immoral monopoly! It's like saying: "He FORCED people to be free." It is a contradiction of terms! Read what you write!
Jason wrote:All dictated by the same central banks and key global financiers.
Wrong again! "Central banks and key global financiers" have this influence PRECISELY because of government forced monopoly. Remove the government FORCED monopoly, and their empire comes crashing down!
Jason wrote:He also doesn't want to remove all taxes....just taxes on land or property.
Wrong again! He repeatedly stated he wants to abolish income tax too. Because ALL taxation is THEFT. (Or armed robbery, which ever you prefer).
Jason wrote:their burden of debt (now denominated in gold which they don't have).
Wrong again! Ron Paul wants to WIPE OUT the debt, liquidate it, because it was dishonestly hoisted upon the people, and therefore is not valid!
Jason wrote:The Bolsheviks gave out lots of promises of change (worker's revolution) once they got rid of the then current "oppressive oligarchy"...the Tsarist autocracy. Funny thing is....it just got worse.
Ron Paul wants to restrict and eliminate immoral government force. He has 30 years of VOTING record to PROVE IT. He wants to defend PRIVATE PROPERTY. Bolsheviks wanted to abolish it. As usual, your up is down, your black is white! Uncanny! It's like truth and falsehoods are reversed in your head! Wow!