Monday, February 27, 2012

Ron Paul Welcomed by Over 4000 People at Michigan State University

Yup, this is the kind of stuff your mainstream media will never cover. And it's always like this. Ron Paul's supporters are always the most passionate and enthusiastic.


Ron Paul Michigan State University 
Panoramic Shot of 4000 Ron Paul Supporters at MSU

I made a strong case for why Ron Paul attracts young voters. It is because this kind of stuff only shows up on Twitter (checkout these hashtags: #RonPaul, #tlot, #gop2012, and many more) and Facebook.  Social media exposes the truth. For some reason, the mainstream media has been fixated on the myth that Ron Paul is unelectable thus discrediting everything even his message and the strong grassroots organization he has.

Before Ron Paul's Speech in front of 4000 supporters

And so who is "electable" according to the establishment and the mainstream media? As Ron Paul gets 4000+ people in his rallies during his campaign, flipflopper Mitt Romney has this habit of talking to empty chairs:


Mitt Romney Addressing Empty Chairs

And the same thing happens to Newt and Santorum. And those who are exposed to these reports from social media are baffled by the blatant disregard of the mainstream media (I've posted several videos and articles regarding this matter on this blog). 

Ron Paul Addressing Supporters in Michigan State University

And the one value the supporters have learned from Ron Paul is consistent principled integrity. They will never backtrack. Many obviously will not support the nominee if the nominee is not Ron Paul and obviously goes against the ridiculous claim of the Santorum camp that Ron Paul is in alliance with Mitt Romney. Ron Paul has been fighting for the same thing for 30 years and aside from the hundeds of videos posted online that support that one can always just look at Ron Paul's consistent voting record in congress. He has always voted in favor of liberty and against the benefit of the politicians, bankers, and special interest lobbyists. All three other candidates and even Obama will fail severely in this aspect when compared to Ron Paul.


Other Related Posts:
1. Why Do I Support Ron Paul
2. Funny Video of Pelosi and Cheney
3. Hillary Clinton on Ron Paul
5 Harryleaks: February 2012 Yup, this is the kind of stuff your mainstream media will never cover. And it's always like thi...

Defending the Undefendable by Walter Block

Defending the Undefendable by Walter Block is an interesting criticism of State prohibition of "victimless crimes" and government meddling with the voluntary transactions and liberties of individuals.


In the video above, he talks about the book that I mentioned. The PDF of the book is available over at the Mises Institute site: (http://mises.org/books/defending.pdf). The book discusses several controversial issues such as illegal drugs, prostitution, gambling and many other "bad" things and tries to show them in a different light. I'm not even sure exactly if I can agree with all his positions in the book because he really stretches the non-aggression principle to the max with the different issues he discusses.

After waking up this morning, I actually decided to start this article regarding the prohibition of Jueteng, an illegal numbers game very popular here in the Philippines and how it has inevitably created a black market that funds syndicates and corrupt government officials. After one paragraph though I was plagued by a stupid writer's block also known as I got lazy. So instead I just figured I'll share the thoughts of Walter Block who's surely more experienced in arguing effectively against prohibition in general and save my rant on legalization of Jueteng some other time.

Sometimes, society refuses to listen to facts especially when it deals with taboo topics. The fact is that prohibition of victimless crimes waste taxpayer's money, it doesn't work in eliminating the prohibited acts, and actually makes these "dangerous" things even more dangerous. 

If you've actually checked out the HBO series Boardwalk Empire you'll see the dangers of the Alcohol prohibition in the US during the 1920's. That's not some conspiracy theory at all. It shows that historically, prohibition has been proven to fail and only makes things worse.

I've actually been watching a lot of Walter Block's speeches and debates online. He's actually the reason I read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt (available here: http://mises.org/books/defending.pdf) because he said it's one of the books, along with Atlas Shrugged that he credits to have converted him into libertarianism.

I really need to improve on my writing and persuasive speech most especially since the libertarian principles I have learned to love and embrace many times provide me with an unpopular position on several issues. I feel that I have a responsibility of sorts and that when I am unprepared or when I fail even in casual discussions, I can actually make libertarianism look bad or even misrepresent it. For now, the goal is to study and learn as much as I can.


Other Related Posts:
1. Libertarian Dubstep
2. How I Became a Libertarian
3. On Meeting Kevin Duewel of Students for Liberty
5 Harryleaks: February 2012 Defending the Undefendable by Walter Block is an interesting criticism of State prohibition of &quo...

Friday, February 24, 2012

Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely

I wasn't even born when it happened. Everything I know, I know because of the stories I hear or the literature I read. My father says he was casually playing golf that day; my mother attending to her business. It's clear to me that not everyone was part of this. Many critics and historians even refer to this as an "imperial manila" phenomenon, that EDSA, although looked crowded, was in fact a very small portion of the population.

They didn't have Twitter or Facebook like they do now in Egypt or Libya. At a time when the State had control of all media, all they had was Cardinal Sin broadcasting on a Catholic radio show of some sort, urging people to take part in civil disobedience. 

News had spread that Ninoy had just been shot. It is unclear who ordered the assassination. The US, those who propped up the dictatorship for many years, decide to pick up Ferdinand Marcos and for some reason decided to bring him to Hawaii (a bit odd, in my opinion). 

Cut to present time: an article from senator Bongbong Marcos (son of Ferdinand Marcos) accurately depicts the current state of our nation a quarter of a century after the EDSA revolution. And I do agree: the state of our nation is probably far worse than before. And just like his demagoguery and vague rhetoric of how "change should begin with ourselves," you have to ask yourselves, what is your proposed concrete solution?

I started this article out with the theme of seemingly being against the EDSA revolution, well, perhaps because I am. Power was merely transfered to the military officials who defected from Marcos (Enrile, Ramos, etc), the cronies (who were already heavily enriched during the regime), and to other members of the influential elite. And not to mention that there're so many things I dislike about the 1987 constitution that is holding back our progress and development (better I save this discussion for a different post). But one thing that I want to make clear: I am against the popular public opinion that Marcos was our best president ever and I hope I am able to remind everyone why.

On this day, let us remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Let us remember that these infrastructures, buildings, schools, hospitals, and the many other projects commissioned by Marcos or his wife  — they were all paid for by the taxpayers of that time or are still being paid for by taxpayers today because of the heavy debt and interest passed on to us by that regime. Let us stop treating him as if he took money out of his own pocket to build all those things. If anything, his wife's edifice complex burdened our generation and those to come with debt (unless we decide to balance our budget and fix our deficit spending).

Let us remember that Marcos, as I hinted a while ago, took over media and suppressed freedom of speech. If there had been internet then, he would have legislated a crazier version of SOPA. And you know why he would be able to legislate it? Because he was both the legislative branch and the executive branch! There was even a time when he was the president, the congress, and the prime minister! It's an undeprecendented model of governement that matched a ridiculous hunger for power.

Let us remember that he denied people the writ of habeas corpus. This is outright injustice and immorality. At suspicion, any one of your family or friends could disappear without warrant and there will be no trial. Even those accused of the most heinous of crimes, have the right to a fair trial and an impartial court. Let us remember that many of those who were jailed weren't even rebels but were just journalists or politicians who wanted to speak out against tyranny.

Let us remember that Marcos is only a man and that the 1$ = 1 Php people love to talk about isn't something he did at his whim. Your money, fiat currency, is naturally devalued over time because of central banking and the increasing of the quantity of money by the Keynesians. If anything, the value of the peso then could have easily been so distorted.

Let us remember that he almost had The Beatles killed when they went here to Manila and refused to eat breakfast with Imelda.

And yes, let us remember Imelda's 3000 shoes  — a disgusting display of vanity and ultimate proof that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

For those who believe that we need some sort of iron hand or centralized authoritarian power to make our nation safer and prosperous then I beg that you remember the things above — just a few of the dangerous capabilities of a dictator. I beg of you to consider some of the proposed peaceful and non-authoritarian solutions mentioned in this blog or mentioned in the other blogs or websites I have linked here.

I, personally, could never condone a dictatorship. It's such a dangerous philosophy to have. It bothers me that many don't share this position. I hope I have reminded you that we can't assume benevolence and therefore we cannot concentrate power to just a few or, most especially, to just one person.

Let us remember that the government only governs because of our consent; that government should always only be our servant and never our master. Let us never forget that democracy is better than tyranny.


Other Related Posts:
1. Libya Civil War: When Governments have no Constraints
2. The Philosophy of Liberty
3. The Singapore Argument—is it really good governance that made them prosperous?
5 Harryleaks: February 2012 I wasn't even born when it happened. Everything I know, I know because of the stories I hear or the literature I read. My father says h...

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Deficit Spending of Governments... and me.

In the private sector, when you have a business, or when managing your personal or family's income, there's this concept of balancing the books or making sure you that you are not spending more than what you are earning. In the government, this doesn't exist at all. It's baffling how bureaucrats, statists, and Keynesians, think that spending more, borrowing more, and printing more money is always the solution in spite of the debt and devaluation of the currency. 

Dr. Stephen Davies on Cutting Government Spending

We've recently seen the US raise their debt limit. Also, many in Europe are in crisis because of this kind of ideology. And interestingly enough, many countries, including the Philippines, seemingly want to take the same path.

Libertarians want to change that. Libertarians want fiscal responsibility from government which is only sensible, right? It is only common sense to address debt and deficit spending.

You see, by increasing the money supply, Keynesians devalue your currency thus lowering the purchasing power and creating inflation of prices. Government debt, deficit spending, and printing of money are direct taxes and burdens to the people.

That being said, I've actually been reminding myself of the government because of my own personal deficit spending. I'm going to the beach again on saturday and surely spend more than I am making. 

How will I be able to write and inform the world about different solutions to our world's problems if I don't earn? Well, you can help. Just by checking out these other helpful links you'll be able to do your part in saving and educating the world haha:


It will also be a really really big help if you subscribe to any of those blogs including this one (see that subscribe to posts button on the left panel? it can directly send blog posts to your mobile or mail through Google Reader if you want).

I've been researching and learning more about the Iran/Israel conflict lately and surely I'll be writing about that maybe when I get back next week so watch out for that!


if you liked this post then you might also like:
1. Paul Romer talks about Charter Cities at TED
2. David Cameron Talks About Post-Bureaucratic Age
3. Keynes vs Hayek
5 Harryleaks: February 2012 In the private sector, when you have a business, or when managing your personal or family's inc...

Monday, February 6, 2012

Why is Ron Paul Attracting Young Voters?—How the Internet and Social Media is Changing the Landscape of World Politics

Social Media, the Youth Vote, and the Internet as a Platform for Competing Ideas

I've posted a lot of videos showing how the mainstream media and proponents of the establishment are ignoring and marginalizing Ron Paul—many times even pretending he doesn't exist. It's not a conspiracy theory at all. For someone who's been following Ron Paul since 2008, I could say that they are blatant at suppressing his unpopular dissent—a showcase of close-mindedness and a mockery of democracy. They'd usually shrug him off as crazy, unelectable, or both.

Many in the mainstream media are baffled by the fact that Ron Paul, the oldest candidate in the race, is getting the support of the youngest voters. This is what would be the envy of all politicians: rockstar treatment and diehard enthusiastic supporters. In one of the recent CNN debates, they referred to him as having "an army of young voters" which I think is an accurate description.

Now if we analyze this, we can say that these young voters are the dominant users of social media whereas older people would usually still get their information from TV or newspapers or even when they do use the internet they would still go to the big mainstream media companies.

The problem with old media like TV or newspapers is that it's a one-way method of communicating or disseminating information. It's very different from new media in the internet where people can comment, debate, compare, reference, and collect data. When politicians or pundits say contradictory statements, for example, anyone can combine the two and expose them by uploading or sharing it to the world. And when people try to do this with Ron Paul, they realize that it's almost impossible because his consistent principled integrity cannot be tarnished.

Again we go back to a FOX news debate in 2008 where he was booed, laughed at, and marginalized for advocating a peaceful non-interventionist foreign policy. This was during the height of the Bush doctrine of "if you're not with us then you are against us". What the neoconservatives didn't know is that their marginalizing of Ron Paul will backfire at them. The ability of Ron Paul to stick to his principles in spite of being booed and laughed at only showcased his integrity. Videos and reactions popped up everywhere on the internet and Ron Paul's campaign for liberty went viral and since then has garnered hundreds of thousands of supporters all over the world including me.

As people learned more about Ron Paul, they realized that for decades, Ron Paul has warned against the recession and the housing bubble; he warned against war propaganda; and the politicians, pundits, and the mainstream media ignored him.

That's why it's no surprise that these establishment politicians are pushing for legislation like SOPA where they'd have control of the internet. It was moving to witness the whole world stand against that kind of tyranny. It was a testament to how US policy and legislation affects the whole world and not just Americans. It is also proof that we must never give any government or group of people such authority for it will only undermine progress, truth, and liberty.

The power of social media makes me hopeful about the political landscape of the world. It makes me optimistic about how maybe one day money and influence will not be the deciding factor of who wins elections. With that being said, I do have to admit that the recent primary and caucus results have been very depressing. Do expect that all I'll be blogging about until November will be Ron Paul.


If you liked this post then you might also like:
1. Hillary Clinton on Ron Paul
2. Why I support Ron Paul and his Relevance to Filipinos
3. Why Jeffrey Sachs is Mistaken about Libertarianism and Ron Paul
5 Harryleaks: February 2012 Social Media, the Youth Vote, and t he Internet as a Platform for Competing Ideas I've posted a lot of videos showing how the mainstr...
< >