GOP Primary Megathread!

[Tamas]

....

They both want to abolish the Fed - though I'm uncomfortable talking about OWS types because I don't think they're clear-cut enough for that.  My guess would be that a significant proportion of 'OWS types' would support a return to the gold standard, if not most of them.

I think you underestimate how much that idea's spread.  It's replaced truthers entirely and all other stoned conspiracy theories.
.....

Yes this is my experience as well, I guess Shelf was a struck as I was at how unexpectedly different it was to what one expected, it certainly isn't the uniformly 'progressive' movement I was expecting.

And the whole issue about how much traction conspiracies theories have on them is rather weird and something I haven't yet got my head around.

Define "progressive" here please. While I doubt the Occupy movement (I get annoyed even calling it like that. People with spare time camp and protest - hardly a new phenomenom) is a unified libertarian group, what else than combination of return to classic liberal ideas with modern experiences adopted to it, could be labelled "progressive"? Going more to the left? The far left economy-wise collapsed in 1989, a lot of moderately left economies are in big trouble now because they have been maintained via foreign credit, etc. More right? Which right?

[grumbler]

Most political humor sucks because of that. It is so often smug and unsubtle that it can appeal only to ideologues who agree with the jokester's views.

I enjoy Stewart and I enjoy Yi.  Unsubtle and smug is funny, when it is deliberate overstatement.

[Admiral Yi]

But it's the wrong label, you're assuming they're the two groups are poles apart, I'm saying they're not. 

A for instance, a lot of the occupy people are very keen on reciting the stuff about the wrongness of fiat currency and most seem to take it as an article of faith that fractional reserve banking is a great evil. I really can't hear any difference between what they say and the Ron Paul people advocate.

And I've been saying for the last page or so that the stuff they recite about the wrongness of fiat currency is diametrically opposed to what Paulites recite about the wrongness of fiat currency.

[mongers]

But it's the wrong label, you're assuming they're the two groups are poles apart, I'm saying they're not. 

A for instance, a lot of the occupy people are very keen on reciting the stuff about the wrongness of fiat currency and most seem to take it as an article of faith that fractional reserve banking is a great evil. I really can't hear any difference between what they say and the Ron Paul people advocate.

And I've been saying for the last page or so that the stuff they recite about the wrongness of fiat currency is diametrically opposed to what Paulites recite about the wrongness of fiat currency.

Is it, I've seem them posting Ron Paul vidoes in their facebook groups, I've even seen posts of LaRouche stuff.

[alfred russel]

I think you underestimate how much that idea's spread.  It's replaced truthers entirely and all other stoned conspiracy theories.

The penetration of the idea is irrelevant for our discussion.  What does matter is the results the various parties think they will achieve through their protest slogan.  Occupy thinks that "abolishing the Fed" will somehow alleviate their own loan burdens and magically reduce income inequality.  It will do the exact opposite.  So IF Ron Paul were to somehow become president and IF he were to somehow get legislation passed on the Fed, the connection between the progressive left and Ron Paul Libertarians on this particular issue would disappear like water vapor.  There's only a connection as long as it remains in the realm of protest slogan.

I think where this breaks down is when you start discussing the potential for the enactment of Ron Paul's agenda. It will never happen--it is  the protest agenda of a protest candidate.

[grumbler]

They both want to abolish the Fed - though I'm uncomfortable talking about OWS types because I don't think they're clear-cut enough for that.  My guess would be that a significant proportion of 'OWS types' would support a return to the gold standard, if not most of them.

I think you underestimate how much that idea's spread.  It's replaced truthers entirely and all other stoned conspiracy theories.

Edit:  Actually thinking about it my landlord was spouting on about the gold standard when he camed round to re-do the silicone sealing.

Really?  You live in a land even kookier than the one I live in.  I've never met anyone who didn't laugh at the idea of the gold standard, and that includes a lot of Republicans and even a lot of people who otherwise support Ron Paul.

[Admiral Yi]

Is it, I've seem them posting Ron Paul vidoes in their facebook groups, I've even seen posts of LaRouche stuff.

I don't mongers, I haven't spent any time on Facebook reading what Occupyers write about the gold standard.  It's possible I suppose that the movement is rife with monetary hawks and I've just missed it.  But until I see some banners arguing for an increase in interest rates I'm going to keep on believing that they've tossed out that slogan based on a profound misunderstanding of economics.

[Sheilbh]

Yes this is my experience as well, I guess Shelf was a struck as I was at how unexpectedly different it was to what one expected, it certainly isn't the uniformly 'progressive' movement I was expecting.

I don't just mean with the OWS crowd, but more generally.  The gold standard has spread like a conspiracy theory.  To an extent I think it's because conspiracies are basically attempts at explaining an event that in some way doesn't make sense.  Rather than accept the genuine story, which may challenge something you believe or just seem so extraordinarily unfortuitous, it's easier to believe a concocted story in which it makes sense and the event had a reason.

I think many people look at the economic situation and, in this country, inflation and it's difficult to fully explain or comprehend.  The gold standard argument is basically a way of explaining it in a pretty easy to understand way - money isn't worth anything - and it can then get linked into conspiracy.  My landlord linked it exactly into the US paying for Vietnam.

The penetration of the idea is irrelevant for our discussion.  What does matter is the results the various parties think they will achieve through their protest slogan.  Occupy thinks that "abolishing the Fed" will somehow alleviate their own loan burdens and magically reduce income inequality.  It will do the exact opposite.  So IF Ron Paul were to somehow become president and IF he were to somehow get legislation passed on the Fed, the connection between the progressive left and Ron Paul Libertarians on this particular issue would disappear like water vapor.  There's only a connection as long as it remains in the realm of protest slogan.

That last sentence should be rewritten there's only a connection as long as it remains in the realm of campaigns.

I don't understand your point that what's relevant when discussing a political campaign isn't its penetration, or that people share those views but whether it would still be widespread and whether different groups would still share it if it actually got enacted?  That's an odd way of looking at it I think. 

For what it's worth I think almost all of Paul's support would evaporate if he became President, ended the Fed and instituted the gold standard.  The effect would disappoint and dismay almost everyone.  So unless we discount all of his support on this issue I don't think we should discount just one bit.

[Sheilbh]

But until I see some banners arguing for an increase in interest rates I'm going to keep on believing that they've tossed out that slogan based on a profound misunderstanding of economics.

I don't think Ron Paul's supporters are supporting an increase in interest rates, Yi.  They're revolutionaries on this.  They might as well pick up the pitchforks.

Ron Paul's significantly more than a monetary hawk:
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/end-the-fed/

[Razgovory]

What are you talking about?

What's your confusion?

The Civil Libertarian thing and the betrayal of such.

[Admiral Yi]

Based on your last post Shelf it seems we've been discussing different things then.  I was talking about the possibility of Paulites and various flavors of zany leftist to find common cause.  It seems you've been talking about the possibility of Paul's platform finding enough popular support to eventually be adopted as policy.

To your second post:

I don't know anything about Paul supporters.  Haven't read their Facebook postings, haven't seen any of their banners.  I'm going on what Paul says about the gold standard.

[Razgovory]

Well there's obviously a link.  I think the article's got a lot of truth to it. 

The amount of truth in it couldn't fill a thimble.

Paul wants a return to the gold standard because he believes fiat money leads to inflation, bubbles, and crashes.  OWS wants to abolish the Fed because Fine Arts and Gender Studies majors don't have a clue about monetary policy and have spun up a narrative that the Fed exists to make the rich richer.

Paul wants to shrink the military and retreat from overseas commitments because he thinks the US is overstetched.  Peaceniks want to shrink the military and retreat from overseas commitments because they think the US is the sole source of evil in the world and that all conflicts (those not started by the US) can be resolved by travelling puppet shows and aggressive tree planting.

You really don't take the time to find out what the other side thinks, do you?

[mongers]

Yes this is my experience as well, I guess Shelf was a struck as I was at how unexpectedly different it was to what one expected, it certainly isn't the uniformly 'progressive' movement I was expecting.

I don't just mean with the OWS crowd, but more generally.  The gold standard has spread like a conspiracy theory.  To an extent I think it's because conspiracies are basically attempts at explaining an event that in some way doesn't make sense.  Rather than accept the genuine story, which may challenge something you believe or just seem so extraordinarily unfortuitous, it's easier to believe a concocted story in which it makes sense and the event had a reason.

I think many people look at the economic situation and, in this country, inflation and it's difficult to fully explain or comprehend.  The gold standard argument is basically a way of explaining it in a pretty easy to understand way - money isn't worth anything - and it can then get linked into conspiracy.  My landlord linked it exactly into the US paying for Vietnam.

Yes, I agree it's surprising.  A friend and myself were discussing the very subject over G&T's this afternoon, we couldn't believe we knew several people who take these conspiracies at face value without any critical thinking going into considering them.

[Razgovory]

They most definitely don't want the same policy on the Fed.  The last thing in the world the OWS types want is a gold standard that slams the brakes on money supply, jacks up interest rates on student loans and credit cards, transfers wealth from debtors to creditors, and instantly makes the US national debt unsustainable.

They both want to abolish the Fed - though I'm uncomfortable talking about OWS types because I don't think they're clear-cut enough for that.  My guess would be that a significant proportion of 'OWS types' would support a return to the gold standard, if not most of them.

I think you underestimate how much that idea's spread.  It's replaced truthers entirely and all other stoned conspiracy theories.

Edit:  Actually thinking about it my landlord was spouting on about the gold standard when he camed round to re-do the silicone sealing.

What would be the fun of that?  Yi's comments are obviously not intended to be taken seriously, and more than, say, Jon Stewart's when he also does the hilariously over-the-top characterizations.

True, but my objection's with his rather under-stated characterisation of Paul's policies.

Prove they want to abolish the Fed.  It's a fairly disparate group, but I doubt a majority wish to abolish the fed.  Few people actually understand what the Fed actually does, and that include almost everyone who wants to abolish it.

[sbr]

Well there's obviously a link.  I think the article's got a lot of truth to it. 

The amount of truth in it couldn't fill a thimble.

Paul wants a return to the gold standard because he believes fiat money leads to inflation, bubbles, and crashes.  OWS wants to abolish the Fed because Fine Arts and Gender Studies majors don't have a clue about monetary policy and have spun up a narrative that the Fed exists to make the rich richer.

Paul wants to shrink the military and retreat from overseas commitments because he thinks the US is overstetched.  Peaceniks want to shrink the military and retreat from overseas commitments because they think the US is the sole source of evil in the world and that all conflicts (those not started by the US) can be resolved by travelling puppet shows and aggressive tree planting.

You really don't take the time to find out what the other side thinks, do you?

Why would he if he is always right?