Is Ron Paul a "SOCIALIST?"

Ron Paul probably does not realize he is a Socialist… and that is a good thing. 

Those who have little understanding of Socialism or Marxian Theory will begin flinging words like “statist” or “collectivist” as a child would fling the epithets of “shuddap-face” or “grundy-pants.” If you are a “Ron Paul supporter” because you think the “individual” is king-cheese or your “taxes” are “too high” or you object to (pssst… you-know-who) being “chiselers on relief,” you are way too dim to read this. Please go away.

Still here? Good… now work with us on this: First, consider the wiki list of the “Political Positions of Ron Paul.” Be honest… do you see much there to disagree with? Second, stop thinking of “Socialism” as an epithet like “boogie-breath” or “stupid-head.” This is particularly hard for US citizens, but give it a shot. Now, listen to Albert Einstein: “How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?” Does this sound far from the “Paul position?” Further, Einstein says, “Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition.”

Now, check this out: under “lower taxes and smaller government” (yeah: warmed-over Reagan) “Paul has also been an advocate of employee-owned corporations (such as employee stock ownership plans). In 1999, he co-sponsored The Employee Ownership Act of 1999, which would have created a new type of corporation (the employee-owned-and-controlled corporation) that would have been exempt from most federal income taxes.” Combine this picture with the Nordhausen “Strike Bike” story that has echoed throughout the world. This idea has potential beyond the wildest imagination of most US Citizens whose greatest dream is their own McMansion and riding mower.

Some of us understand “unsustainability,” while others (like Ron Paul) are confident that The Invisible Hand will solve everything. Could we both be correct? Perhaps “free markets” need a much smaller stage to perform their magic. Maybe “collectives” work the same way. Perhaps without huge centralized subsidies, the giant prison-industrial-military cartels will simply dry up and blow away… without blowing the rest of us away. Some of us believe this can happen by cutting off their funding. Others believe this will happen if we cut off their heads.

Either way, both “Progressives” and “Paulites” seem to agree that endless escalation of guns and gulags is not in our best interest. Here’s something else: the mush-mouthed platitudes of both pre-selected “candidates” are for the ears of the stupid and the enrichment of the vampire-elites. Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, (yes- Nader and others) and yep… Ron Paul appear to be few voices with the courage to call the “War on Terror” a fraud and the USA PATRIOT Act a crime. It is telling that the “major parties” have actively suppressed these voices.

As remote as the odds were, a Ron Paul Presidency may have enabled the viability of true Socialist working collectives and a new form of Common Ownership. Localization as an antidote to Globalization could enable a new concept of The Commons in the USA. Still, it is uncomfortable to subscribe to such blind faith in “markets” (among other things) and whatever Truth—to find common bedfellows among white-supremacists (it’s a fact AND YOU KNOW IT).  So I am not ready to join the “Ron Paul rEVOLution.” So the "rEVOLutionaries" decided to go to the Republican “convention” and make their voices heard.

That worked out well, didn't it?