Apparently Herman Cain's numbers surged after the Florida CPAC debate.
Meanwhile, Ron Paul's numbers are stagnant and there is zero reason to think Mr. Paul could ever win the election.
Why?
The reason is that Herman Cain is soaring is that Mr. Cain actually stated an idea.
Herman Cain's 999 Plan is not even a good idea ... but it was an idea stated in a strong affirmative manner in a nation desperately seeking for ideas.
Libertarians actually have better ideas about restoring prosperity than Mr. Cain.
The problem is that Libertarians state everything in dismal terms that the public just doesn't get.
The classical liberals of long ago realized that government was a limiting factor in society. Reducing government reduces limits and allows for an unlimited people … creating prosperity.
Marx and Hegel were reactionaries. They sought to destroy the new order created by the classical liberals and return the world to a structured society akin to feudalism.
The goal of Marx was to destroy the free market created by the classical liberals from within. To destroy the free market, Karl Marx created a perversion of the free market called "Capitalism."
Karl Marx was the father of Capitalism. Marx wrote a long treatise called Das Kapital. In Das Kapital, Marx described how a ruling class could capture and control centralized exchanges to become an oppressive force.
Marx showed that an unelected group of people ruling the economy from centralized exchanges and central banks can be as bad for society as a top heavy government.
Marx was successful in getting people to rise in rebellion against his strawman capitalist. The dystopia Marx created with his false dichotomy; however, was a thousand times worse than his anti-thesis capitalism.
Unfortunately, Libertarians are caught in a rut of arguing for top-down capitalism rather than a bottom up free market.
Rather than trying to restore a free market that liberates everyone in society, Libertarians argue for Marx's anti-thesis … a capitalism in which a corrupt ruling class lords over the people through the manipulation of capital.
Since Libertarians are a notoriously pig-headed group, they never realize the extent to which they are dupes.
To restore the free market, Libertarians must confront both the bloated government and the captured markets.
Which brings me back to the topic of this post …
If Ron Paul went from just being a curmudgeon to a person who supported alternatives to the captured markets, then Ron Paul would surge ahead in the polls.
Mr. Paul is doing good with his effort to "Audit the Federal Reserve." Yet auditing the Federal Reserve does not create a vision for how we can restore society.
Simply repealing ObamaCare does not create a vision of how we could restore health freedom in a market dominated by top heavy insurance companies.
Libertarians could easily change this by creating free market alternatives to the captured centralized markets that dominate today's financial world.
Sadly, Libertarians would prefer that we lose the last of our Constitutional liberties before accepting that they are nothing but stooges when they argue for Marx's antithesis.
Ron Paul would rather lose the presidency than to take the half day required to present positive alternatives to oppressive institutions like insurance or the captured exchanges on Wall Street.
This effort to audit the fed is pretty much the only positive thing I see Conservatives doing at the moment (I will blog on the Utah Monetary Summit tomorrow). It is so sad that Republicans simply will not challenge any of the root assumptions of Marx's Capitalism.
Marx's Capitalism was corrupt. One does not resolve Marx's dichotomy by arguing for the anti-thesis. One resolves Marx's dichotomy by rejecting it altogether and by restoring the classical liberal vision of the US Founders.
Libertarians would win if they presented freedom in a positive manner.
No comments:
Post a Comment