Ron Paul: Appearance, ‘Revolution’; Essence, Fascism

Although McCain is the Republican presidential nominee, Ron Paul still has support among some youth. Signs of “Ron Paul for President” appear in some anti-war activities. Paul was googled and seen on Youth Tube more than any other GOP candidate. The so-called Ron Paul “Revolution” attracted some working-class white youth because he opposed the Iraq war, globalization and a national ID system. But the real essence of Paul’s program is fascism and racism.

Alex Jones, an Austin, Texas, radio host, Minuteman supporter and leader of the “9/11 Truth Movement” has won some youth to Paul. The Truth Movement argues that 9/11 was an “inside job” perpetrated by Bush to justify war in the Middle-East and impose a police state at home.

But this is just a hook to attract people to Jones and others who spread the anti-Semitic filth of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” a 1903 fakery circulated by the Czarist secret police. Henry Ford and Hitler also used the Protocols and racism to deflect working-class anger away from the real enemy, capitalism. Unfortunately, even some fake left-wingers in Latin America and elsewhere have spread the Protocols to give a false explanation of finance capital. (For more on Jones see the current issue of The Communist Magazine.)

Anti-immigrant racism is the real essence of Jones. He says immigration from Mexico is a “globalist” trick to erect a “Communist military dictatorship” in the U.S. Similarly, while Paul rails against a national ID card for citizens, he demands more racist police repression of the inner cities (asserting in 1996 that 95% of black men in Washington, D.C. were “criminals”). On immigration, he calls for a militarized border, intensified efforts to round up the undocumented and new rules to deny citizenship to their U.S.-born children.

At a minimum, the Paul campaign, like Obama’s and Clinton’s, brings anti-war youth into the electoral system and fascism. Beyond this, they divert youth from an understanding of capitalist exploitation and imperialist rivalries — the basis of all modern wars — into a traditional Nazi ideology that blames elite “conspirators” for the problems capitalism generates.

In 1902, Lenin warned communists not to rely on spontaneity. Workers tend to rebel spontaneously against the ravages of capitalism. But on their own, these struggles won’t create the political class consciousness needed to destroy capitalism.

Communists in PLP show that only knowing the historical role of the working class can transform spontaneous anger into the communist class consciousness necessary for revolutionary change. We must become involved with those youth mis-led by Ron Paul, Obama and Clinton, and use CHALLENGE as our ideological weapon to expose these politicians as tools of the racist capitalist war-making system.

Advertisements
Tagged ,

4 thoughts on “Ron Paul: Appearance, ‘Revolution’; Essence, Fascism

  1. You’re wrong about Ron Paul, though I have to congratulate you for spreading the message about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That piece of fiction has done very great harm to the world.

    I would note however that capitalist exploitation is not the basis for wars but the cure for them. When goods cross borders, troops do not. Imperialistic rivalries and autarky tend to go hand in hand; capitalism and imperialism by contrast are rival forces. As they are both very greed motivated they often exist in uneasy alliance, but they don’t get along well. Inevitably one force or the other wins. In our society today that winner has typically been imperialism. Capitalism is being ground down under the heel of imperialism. The core Ron Paul message is support for capitalism and opposition to Imperialism.

    I do, of course, understand this leaves you outside of the pale on the campaign. I don’t desire to persuade you. I do hope that you will acknowledge that autarky, rather than trade, is more likely to cause war.

    Like

  2. Steve says:

    Neo-Cons will go to any lenght to continue the non-sense.
    Surely a blog for misinformation

    Like

  3. Private_Freedom says:

    You need to make a correction to your post.

    Ron Paul does not oppose globalization, insofar as it concerns trade and travelling between the peoples of various nations.

    What he is opposed to is world government, which is aiming to become central economic planners, which in the Austrian Economics school of literature is unwise.

    Globalization is a word that describes the world coming together via increased foreign investment, technology, and labour movements. It does NOT mean world government.

    Those who are unaware of the subtleties of economics usually assume that glogalization means NWO. This is incorrect. It is entirely possible, and indeed it is occurring, to have the world come together peacefully and cooperatively in business, which is inevitable anyway. The only question is will globalization be a peaceful process or a violent process?

    Ron Paul is for the peaceful process of globalization.

    Like

  4. Private_Freedom says:

    Woah, just finished reading the article, and there are even more errors.

    First (or rather second if you include my first correction), Alex Jones’ movement is not about hoodwinking people into becoming racist. Alex Jones is a patriot who understands that the 9/11 attacks did not occur as the official story goes. The evidence OVERWHELMINGLY points the finger at the government. How could WTC 7 have fallen like a controlled demolition when it wasn’t hit by a plane? Jones knows more about the event than I think you do, because if you did know more, then as a reasonable person you would see for yourself how impossible the official story is.

    Second, what’s with this anti-semitic clap-trap? How can you equate the 9/11 truth movement with racism? Aren’t you setting up a straw man?

    Third, and most important of all, how in the world can any sane person call capitalism evil? What is evil about peaceful cooperation in a division of labor, exchange society? Capitalism is responsible for all wealth creation. The PC you are using to write disparaging remarks on capitalism was created in a capitalistic economic system. Capitalism is not evil, it is actually the only rational system mankind can live in and be at peace. Where capitalism is absent, only poverty and tyranny can result (North Korea today, USSR and Nazi Germany). All three of these countries are/were SOCIALIST economies. Fascism and communism are nothing other than forms of socialism, because in both cases the means of production are CONTROLLED by the state. In the USSR this is clear, but in Nazi Germany this is not as clear because many people today mistakenly call it capitalist because that’s what most others call it. Nazi Germany was socialist, because even though private citizens owned the means of production on paper, all the substantive powers of running business was held by the Nazis. The Nazis controlled what was produced, where, in what quantity, to who the products were to be sold to, for what price, etc. So because the actual powers of controlling business firms was run at the state level, Nazi Germany was socialist.

    Fourth, to think that the Ron Paul movement brings youth into fascism is perhaps the biggest farce I’ve ever heard about his movement. I mean, are you on drugs? FASCISM = PAUL??? For the last year or more, Paul has painstakingly taught those who would listen that this country is turning fascist and we need to do something NOW to stop it. The Ron Paul movement is the fight against fascism!!!

    Fifth, Capitalism itself does NOT exploit. GOVERNMENTS exploit people of other countries, because it is THEY who use force. Capitalism is PEACEFUL. If you observe an empire waging war around the world, and this country is traditionally called capitalistic, that does not mean capitalism is evil. It means the GOVERNMENT is evil. They invade, they send CIA operatives to kill leaders, they sabotage other nations. If private citizens commit crimes, and they get away with it, it is a failure of government in that they did not punish them. The absence of punishment for committing crimes and committing crimes itself is what characterizes our government today.

    Sixth, your reference to Lenin and they way you conceptualize the economy clearly shows you just finished reading Das Capital by Marx, and now you think you have the prerequisite knowledge to make statements on economics. I guess I shoudl tell you that Marxism as an economic ideology has alreayd been refuted as being dogmatic and religious, not scientific or economics driven. Marx could never get over the very critical flaw in his doctrine, namely he could not explain how his arbitrary two classes of people, bourgeoisie and proletariat, can be explained from an individual’s perspective. He also could not derive exactly when and how a proletariat leaves the ranks of proletarians, and enters the bourgeoisie, and why they all of a sudden lose the mental character of being a proletariat. He also condemned ANY theory that came from what he tought was a “bourgeoisie” and promoted ANY theory from a proletariat. Instead of looking at all theories from a reasoned and rational perspective. Marxism COLLAPSED, you know that right? The worldwide collapse of socialism was the collapse of Marxist ideology. Marxism cannot work because it starts from an aggregate or group perspective, and attempts to explain individual behavior. This is a fruitless effort. Any and all economic theories worth their salt must start from the individual and proceed outward from there. Marxism assumes that individuals think according to what group they belong to. If this were true, then am I to take this to mean that whites and blacks ipso de facto think differently on a logical basis merely because of the color of their skin? Or how much money one makes? Or any other characteristic that puts an individual in a group? If anything, Marxism is what promotes racism, because racism and Marxism each assume that people think and act according to what group they belong to. Also, Marx was incorrect because he believed in a radical form of the labor theory value, a theory long since refuted. He also thinks profits are a deduction of wages, when in reality, wages are a deduction of profits. Proof? If I sell you a tree log for $100, that I cut myself, with a saw I bought for $50, then my revenues are $100 and my costs are $50, meaning I made a profit of $50. If the saw instead cost only $10, then my profit would be $90. If the saw cost $1, then my profit is $99. If I built the saw myself with materials lying around, then my profit is the full amount of my revenues, namely $100. If I hire a worker to cut the tree, and I pay him the COMPETITIVE RATE, which is not under my control at all, but market driven, then my profit of $100 would be reduced by whatever I paid the worker. Thus me, the capitalist, CREATED that wage earner as an economic role. I am not EXPLOITING that worker. I could choose to NOT hire any worker, in which case I could make $100 profit. Capitalism is exactly this. What you are saying, and what the communists say, is that I deserve to have that tree log stolen from me by the communist mob, who believe that private property should be abolished altogether. I mean really, is that what you truly believe is right and moral? I doubt any reasonable person could ever think that.

    Ron Paul is a libertarian, and libertarianism is about the freedom of the individual from class oppression, the type of oppression you deplore! The only difference is that Paul knows who the baddies are, whereas you have no idea so you blame the peaceful tree loggers! You simply have no idea what the Ron Paul movement is really all about. You are so confused. This is actually typical of an out of the closet Marxist like yourself. You are a communist at heart, and thus you are anti-freedom and pro-oppression. NO WONDER YOU HATE RON PAUL!!

    Seventh, and finally, if you want to educate yourself on what Ron Paul is really all about, you have to understand WHO educated him. The Austrian School of Economics is where he learned the truth, and if you want to make intelligible statements rather than Marxist intellectual GARBAGE, then read the following, in order:

    1. Henry Hazlitt, “Economics in One Lesson”
    2. Murray N. Rothbard, “What Has Government Done To Our Money?”
    3. Ludwig Von Mises, “Human Action”
    4, George Reisman, “Capitalism”

    When you are doen reading these , you will find that your brainwashing of Marxist communism has been a huge error, and you will at first hate your teachers. But after a while, you will come to terms with your hatred of mankind, and you will see that the nature of mankind can only live peacefully and productively in a 100% laissez faire capitalistic economy. You will see the wonder and splendor of how brilliant and amazing the above thinkers really were, and you will eventually come around and see how beautiful mankind can be if they only knew economics.

    Marxism….wow….I am really surprised that there are still people in the world who cling to such a contradictory and fallacy-filled doctrine.

    Like

Comments are closed.