I suppose we can look forward to a response during the runup for the 2012 election…

My, my…someone’s quite the little optimist :)

I suspect it’s also because they realize that the presidential campaign is over so there’s really no point…plus I think Ron Paul’s campaign cut back on staffing so the response times to average folk writing in is even slower than before.

It’s rather frustrating the RP campaign won’t respond. Why they think ignoring such problems is a good idea, is beyond me.

I suspect it’s because they don’t see the mailer or engaging in race-baiting as a problem.

Going obviously off-topic, but I think an interesting metaphor for the type of critical mass I can see that could lead to what Kaliqula envisions can be found in the video game (I apologize for wasting my time with video games…. ;D) Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of The Patriots:

“Metal Gear Solid 4 portrays a world where the restriction of military intervention on foreign soil has been eased, fueling the need for private military companies (PMCs) to fight proxy wars for business purposes.”

In addition, the line between soldier and civilian becomes increasingly blurred, as the world is catapulted into perpetual proxie wars.

Taken in account with oilnwater’s counter that the sword has an opposite edge as well, I could somewhat foresee a time where the line between soldier and civilian is blurred to the point where the control of populations go both ways: goverment controlling people and people controlling people to fight the government.

Obviously, not a very optimistic nor bright (let alone hopeful or morally right) possibility, but interesting & ominous all the same.

Nope.

And, as far as I know, neither has anyone else. There’s no mention of the ad on the campaign’s blog.

Returning to the original thrust of the thread – have had any response from the Paul campaign or have any further info on the mailer?

I agree that supporting government will ultimately entail at least some level of contradiction or even hypocrisy. For now I’m okay with that.

But you make good points about this thread.

there is no doubt that the right of succession is a fundamental component of a classical liberal or “libertarian” state. To deny that, then you are denying the very essence of our “Declaration of Independence.” However, how is it really morally justifiable to give a “pass” to the South to have succeeded to perpetuate the contemptible institution of human slavery under the guise of libertarian doctrinal purity?

In the end, the lesson to be learned is that there is a real underlying distinction between libertarianism and classical liberalism. Libertarianism is fundamentally an anarchist position(true to it’s 19th century historical roots) and classical liberalism is an 18th century enlightenment minarchist model that has not held up over time, indeed is likely flawed from the start.

You may think anarchism is not viable. To the contrary, i would posit that anarchism is more viable and potentially much evolutionary stable than minarchy. Our 21st century global communications model is built fundamentally on an a de-centralized, anarchist model. The internet could survive just fine without the State. Say you put the internet under a minarchist, centalized monopoly control and I guarantee you within a specific time frame, it would devolve into an overbearing, centralized control framework.

Ultimately, you are going to have to come to same conclusion that I did…Liberty is simply not compatible with monopoly enforcement. Anarchism is the only likely framework to sustain Liberty. David friedman, not Milton Friedman. Sure, it’s not going to happen within our short lifetime span, but I have to suppose that a 23rd century anarchist society is going to look down on the flaws of the 20th century with the same degree of smugness we look down on the flaws of pre-enlightenment European church/monarchy fusionism. How barbaric indeed…