http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…

The article itself is fine but the comments are beyond ignorant. Rather than looking into the historical facts which Paul spoke of or attempting to argue political theory, philosophy, or the language of the US Consitution these Huffington Post’ers just blather on.

• The war against the CSA did not answer the question of secession. It answered the question of who was more powerful / had more people to send to their death.
• The Constitution makes no mention of secession. In the early years of the country there was no question that if a group could voluntarily enter into a governing agreement that they could not back out of it. The Declaration of Independence points this out clearly.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

• Ron Paul has not all of a sudden, due to a black (he’s not “black” but born of  “white” and “black” parents, what is this the slavery “one drop” days?) president, start supporting the concept of secession. It’s an ignorant and likely bigotted statement to claim such a thing.
• Ron Paul does advocate removing at least the property rights infringement aspects of the Civil Rights Act. The federal government has no authority to make such a law and it’s a gross infringement to one’s right to property.
• FACT: The Pledge of Allegiance was created by Francis Bellamy in the late 1800’s to get people to more or less worship the state given he was a a state socialist and a flag salesman who would gain from such a pledge becoming popular.
• IMO it helps to make actual arguments based on logic and facts rather than mud throwing and ad hominems.

While reading MR Zine, a state socialist online magazine, I came across an interesting article.  In a nutshell the author talks about how he attended an MR event and someone stole his girlfriend’s coat.  It’s interesting to read his comments about how he can’t imagine a communist doing this.  I’m not going to go the route of taking a cheap property rights shot at the poor guy, or knock the violence inherent in his beliefs.  Chances are the author and I agree on a majority of political points.  I am however going to use the article to make a point about political thought and how it changes.

Personal experiences weigh much more heavily in developing one’s beliefs than anything you’ll ever read in a book or see on TV.  The economy can be going to pot and people can be shouting about it in the streets, but until you have a personal experience that you can link to the problem, it is almost meaningless.  Ideas change at the human scale.  The fact that I smiled and waved at a cop yesterday and he stared me down like a fugitive does more to bolster my dislike for police officers than reading about someone getting shot.  I feel that this is true for the majority of people.

So if you want to associate with people and discuss these sort of things, my advice would be to remember that the personal is what matters most to others.  Take the time to listen to people, try to understand what has happened in their life.  You’ll both benefit from the exchange.