Comments on: On Walls (& Ron Pauls)

By: Darryl X.

Darryl X. — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:27:01 +0000

First, let me say you and I have a common friend in Brian Marks. And second, AMEN ON SOMEONE PUTTING PAUL IN HIS RIGHTFUL PLACE. I was fooled for a little while, but the mask was flimsy and badly taped in place. Your blog is one of the better ones out there, politically, disagree with you as I may from time to time and point to point.

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:14:02 +0000

Thanks for the clarification, but still… He isn’t small time like a couple dozen racists in jena. Either way I’m off topic. The issue is immigration reform, and the image of walls going up is like hiding from reality. Is the article you mention online?

Jefferson was in favor of people seeking a new life in another nation, although he did have concerns that immigrants would come without acknowledging the new government. I’m no historian though…

“I hold the right of expatriation to be inherent in every man by the laws of nature, and incapable of being rightfully taken from him even by the united will of every other person in the nation. If the laws have provided no particular mode by which the right of expatriation may be exercised, the individual may do it by any effectual and unequivocal act or declaration.” - Thomas Jefferson

In debates the candidates won’t be asked the “particular mode by which the right of expatriation may be exercised.” They’ll just talk about secure borders and terrorists. Reforming the way we let immigrants in to this country and amnesty are the true issues that leave our gov’t in deadlock and racism further confuses the dialog.

By: christian

christian — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:08:34 +0000

Sean,

Thanks for your comment. To clarify, I did not call Ron Paul a white supremacist. I did call him a “small time right-wing nut” and say that in that way he resembled the white supremacists in Jena (and Ross Perot), but only by being a marginal figure on the right.

But that does bring up an interesting point- at what point does exclusion of mostly brown people in a country with a dominant white culture (of immigrant descent) qualify as white supremacy? I don’t see this as being a yes or no matter, but degrees of white supremacist and racist ideology.

Either way, Ron Paul has a similar position on immigration to the white supremacists. That’s enough for me. Sure, Giuliani is worse than Ron Paul- but Cockburn, Goff and others on the left aren’t endorsing Giuliani.

By: Sean

Sean — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:36:58 +0000

I think calling him a white supremacist is a bit extreme. Yes, on immigration, energy, and healthcare etc… he’s really off. Building a wall and deporting everyone is not the answer. Though most of his views are non-intervention style policy which is more like anarchy in a way… I think that is the appeal his supporters see in him. Maybe they are anarchists in libertarian clothes, in republican clothes. Sure, some are white supremacists, but they don’t wear shirts.

I strongly disagree with him on a number of matters, but I’m sure there are things that you can find common ground on:
- Against Nat’l id cards
- Fights Fed Reserve as a private entity
- Faults FDA for failing to protect Americans from dangerous drugs (as a side note Sid Wolfe has a good video presentation at http://www.tamethecorporation.org/agenda.html)
- Foreign occupation and war (you mentioned)
- Presidential debate exclusion might garner more supporters of open debates.

Giuliani wants fences, nat’l id cards, biometric checkout system (sounds fancy), etc… I think he one-ups Ron Paul.