Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Don't be Neoconned. Ron Paul on Understanding the Grave Threat to Our Constitutional Republic

NOTE from Stewart: If you consider yourself a conservative, and a defender of the Constitutional Republic the men of April 19, 1775 founded when they stood their ground and fired the shot heard round the world, but you have also taken to calling yourself a "neoconservative," I urge you to reconsider placing that label on yourself.

I also urge you to take a hard look at the intellectuals who make up the leadership in the Neoconservative movement. Neoconservatives are neither anything new, nor are they conservative. They are but the latest manifestation of the totalitarian, statist mindset that has plagued mankind for thousands of years. Their worldview is incompatible with that of the Founding Fathers.

Neoconservatives do not believe in limited government. They have no respect for the principles of unalienable, natural rights our Declaration of Independence proclaimed "to a candid world." And Neoconservatives, like their close cousins, the socialist far-left revolutionaries, despise the Constitution of the Founders, with its limited, divided, dual sovereignty structure. They worship not just executive supremacy, but government supremacy.

Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:
  1. They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.

  2. They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.

  3. They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.

  4. They accept the notion that the ends justify the means—that hardball politics is a moral necessity.

  5. They express no opposition to the welfare state.

  6. They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.

  7. They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.

  8. They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.

  9. They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.

  10. They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill advised.

  11. They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.

  12. They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.

  13. Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.

  14. 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

  15. They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)

  16. They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.

  17. They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

Neoconservatives are as much mortal enemies of our constitutional republic as the communists were during the cold war. In fact, as Congressman Ron Paul explains, you can trace the modern origins of noecoservatives to communist revolutionary leader Trotsky.

Congressman Paul's speech on the House floor, entitled Neo-CONNED, is one of the very best explanations of the actual beliefs of neoconservative scholars and political leaders. I urge you to read or watch this speech and learn the full extent of the threat to our Republic by the noecon siths who have cloaked themselves as real conservatives when they are anything but. I have posted video of the speech and then an excerpt and a link to the written transcript. - Stewart


July 10, 2003

Neo – CONNED !

The modern-day limited-government movement has been co-opted. The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution.

Since the change of the political party in charge has not made a difference, who’s really in charge? If the particular party in power makes little difference, whose policy is it that permits expanded government programs, increased spending, huge deficits, nation building and the pervasive invasion of our privacy, with fewer Fourth Amendment protections than ever before?

Someone is responsible, and it’s important that those of us who love liberty, and resent big-brother government, identify the philosophic supporters who have the most to say about the direction our country is going. If they’re wrong—and I believe they are—we need to show it, alert the American people, and offer a more positive approach to government. However, this depends on whether the American people desire to live in a free society and reject the dangerous notion that we need a strong central government to take care of us from the cradle to the grave. Do the American people really believe it’s the government’s responsibility to make us morally better and economically equal? Do we have a responsibility to police the world, while imposing our vision of good government on everyone else in the world with some form of utopian nation building? If not, and the contemporary enemies of liberty are exposed and rejected, then it behooves us to present an alternative philosophy that is morally superior and economically sound and provides a guide to world affairs to enhance peace and commerce.

One thing is certain: conservatives who worked and voted for less government in the Reagan years and welcomed the takeover of the U.S. Congress and the presidency in the 1990s and early 2000s were deceived. Soon they will realize that the goal of limited government has been dashed and that their views no longer matter.

Read the rest here.

1 comment:

revolution said...

Ron Paul and the Permanent Revolution

Part II

There is one major stumbling-block to a successful "Ron Paul for President" campaign. This obstacle is most obvious.

There is no unity whatsoever in the Saving The Republic Community, Right Extreme from the False Political Spectrum. The Saving the Republic Community is severely divided by literally thousands of Type-II Conspiracy theories. Please view the "Political Model" provided by the American Counter-Revolution. The Saving the Republic Community occupies the lower, bottom Right of the diagram.

Ron Paul, despite being the Libertarian Party 1988 presidential candidate, is the "leading" presidential candidate for the Saving the Republic Community. But...there exists an already established and "organized" Saving the Republic Community party...the Constitution Party.

YES! Ron Paul won the televised IDU-Republican-Presidential-Candidates-"Debates." So what!

Ron Paul, member of the IDU-Republican Party, needs to be able to harvest every vote that exists in the hands of the Saving the Republic order "to win." The Constitution Party stands in his way. Why?

The Constitution Party is the only Right Wing (on the False Political Spectrum) "Third-Party"alternative political party to survive the 2004 "elections." The Constitution Party is a party in complete disarray over one issue that has "split" the party...abortion...thus reducing the "electoral-influence" of the party. With the issue of abortion aside....there is not much difference in Ron Paul's campaign and the Constitution Party's political position.

Simply stated: the existence of the Constitution Party and the Ron Paul presidential campaigns automatically "splits the vote" of the Political Refugees (the Followers of the Elite of the Saving the Republic Community). Both the Ron Paul and the Constitution Party political positions are based on some similar form of a Type-II Conspiracy Theory. A Constitution Party candidate will siphon off the much needed Ron Paul votes in 2008...should the Constitution Party come up with a "viable candidate"...such as Pastor Chuck Baldwin.

This situation will create a conundrum for the Right Wing of the False Political Spectrum. Who is the true voice of the Saving the Republic Community? Presently the Constitution Party, despite the growing wave of support for Ron Paul in the Saving the Republic Community, remains "neutral" in its support of the last "Great White-Hope."

This reality is easily visualized in a two part essay published by on July 7, 2007 written by Mary Starrett, Communications Director for the Constitution Party, "Dr. No, The Three Musketeers and the Seven Dwarfs."

Mary Starrett's opening sentence (paragraph) makes a most valid observation,

"There's reluctance among conservatives to see the ideological flaws of the current crop of president-wannabes but unless we're willing to line up each one of the 11 Republican contenders and strip off his 3 piece posturing to look deep into his political past, we'll simply be fooling ourselves (again) when it comes to supporting a candidate for president."

American Counter-Revolution totally agrees, unless we look deep into a candidate's political past "We'll simply be fooling ourselves (again)". And when one is "looking" into the political past of a candidate...this retrospection should also include the reality and existence of the Permanent Revolution.

Mary Starrett then reinforces her opening statement with the following accurate observation about the Saving the Republic Community,

"Much like a woman who wants to get married so badly she ignores those "deal-making flaws...We just don't want to face the truth..." (Emphasis added)
Again, American Counter-Revolution agrees...Patriots don't want to face the truth...the Saving the Republic Community refuse to recognize the reality of the Permanent Revolution. This observation becomes quite clear in Part 2, page 5 of "Dr. No..."(as printed from,

"Ron Paul: The Congressman from Texas is quite simply, 'the best they've got'."

This simple "declarative-sentence" speaks many volumes. Please read this sentence several times. What can we learn from this simple sentence?

Mary Starrett views Ron Paul as a Republican...not an IDU-Republican controlled by the Fabian Society. This "political reality is OK." Ron Paul (as well as his 'Patriotic-Pals') does not openly recognize he is a Fabian-IDU-Republican.

If Mary Starrett was aware of the Permanent Revolution, She should/would have made "an issue" of Ron Paul's affiliation with the Fabian's controlled IDU-Republican Party...thus giving "Her Party" a propaganda edge as a "Third Party" competing for Saving the Republic Community votes...but she did not!

Mary Starrett is not unaware of the dilemma presented by the Ron Paul IDU-Republican presidential bid,

"The dilemma we have is that we cannot sit around and wait to see what the Republicans are going to do but build an ark that true Constitutionalists can find refuge on when it dawns on them that the Republicans and Democrat parties will let them drown."
American Counter-Revolution agrees. Please admit "the waters around you have grown." But please understand..the Constitution Party is definitely not the "ark that true Constitutionalists" will be seeking with the failure of the Ron Paul IDU-Republican Party presidential bid. The Constitution Party does not recognize the reality of the Permanent Revolution.

The Constitution Party does not recognize the reality of the existence of a unified American/British Capitalism (directed by Fabian ideology) seeking to establish a unified Capitalism. Remember...International Socialism is completely impossible without an International Capitalism as the sole means of production for Planet Earth.

The final impact of the Constitution Party will be important...but barely noticed. The Constitution Party will only "split the vote" of the Saving the Republic voter. Thus...resulting in another Fabian victory "at the polls."