(ThyBlackMan.com) This morning Arthur Lewin wrote an excellent article on Ron Paul Vs Herman Cain Vs Barrack Obama. He made great points on how each of the two potential Republican candidates have been pushed aside by the press as individuals who “can’t win” even though they are doing great in polls. His article can be seen here – https://thyblackman.com/2011/09/28/ron-paul-vs-herman-cain-vs-barack-obama/ (——
I wanted to add one addition to Brother Lewin’s article. The addition is to help our readers here at Thy Blackman understand a few basic differences between being a conservative and being a libertarian. Examining these two candidates will do a good job of helping do that.
Versus
Ron Paul is a libertarian, Herman Cain is a far right conservative. This makes them almost as different as a Republican versus a Democrat.
Libertarians want no government intrusion. They hate government butting into their lives. They want the government removed from all personal decisions. They believe strongly in the right of each individual to live the life that they choose as long as living that life doesn’t hurt the ability of another person to live their own life.
Conservatives hold to the idea of a smaller government but not necessarily a non-intrusive government. They don’t mind the government being involved in personal decisions if those decisions fit with their conservative perspective. Their idea of smaller government generally means lower taxation, less government welfare and service programs, and more states rights as opposed to federal control.
An example of the difference — Gay Marriage. Ron Paul would most likely tell you that he does not care if two gays get married, but that it has to be personal in nature. The government should not be involved in any marriage, not just gay marriage. It should be between the two people and their religion or relationship, and the government has no business in providing anyone a marriage license or giving special consideration to married people.
Hermain Cain on the other hand would say it is the states responsibility to protect the institution of marriage as between a man and a woman. That that form of marriage is the in line with American Judeo-Christian tradition and is the form of relationship best to keep a moral and strong society. He would advocate using the government’s power to enforce that.
An example of the difference — Drug Legalization. Ron Paul believes that individuals have the right to choose to consume and do the things that they want (even if it harms them) as long as it doesn’t impose on the freedoms of others. This means that the use of drugs are the choice of the grown adult and the government should not impose itself to stop them. He is against the war on drugs, which he believes has created a prison state and increased our prison population to a ridiculous level.
Herman Cain on the other hand would say that he supports Ronald Reagan who instituted the war on drugs. That drugs are destructive to the individual and so the government should step in and do what is necessary to bother stop the seller and the user. He has a hard stance on crime and punishment so he is Ok with locking people up in record numbers for drug sales and drug use.
An Example of the Difference – War and Defense. Ron Paul believes that America should practice a non-intrusive form of foreign policy. What this means is that America should mind its own business, and only use the military if someone attacks us.
Herman Cain believes that the military is not just about defense but about prevention and intervention. That America should intervene militarily when it serves the purpose of securing America’s long term interest or helping countries that are unstable and need our help. He would advocate a large increase in defense spending to demonstrate to the world America is the strongest military power.
An Example of the Difference – Islam. Ron Paul believes that each American should be free to worship as they choose, as long as that worship does not harm the freedom of other people to worship. He would have no problem appointing an Islamic individual to a position of power if that person upheld libertarian principles.
Hermain Cain has clearly stated that Muslims have no business in politics because their religion is one that advocates through Jihad forced conversation. The people who practice Islam are a danger to America, and that Islam is a global threat to freedom.
This article is long so I will with this. Each of these perspectives has implications for Black Americans as a group. Neither candidate believes in affirmative action or government intervention in issues of race inequality. Both hold strongly to the fact that the free market should be what drives American behavior. Those concepts both have negative impacts on Black equality and correcting historical inequities.
If I had to choose I would choose Ron Paul because the elimination of the war on drugs in and of itself would be of great benefit to the Black community. But other than that, as an independent political pragmatist, I would have a hard time supporting either in a presidential election if they got that far.
Staff Writer; Dell Gines
For More Power Pack Business Info do visit; Own Small Biz.
Also connect with this brother via Facebook; D. Gines.
http://www.SHOP4LIBERTY.com HOW IT WORKS:
Retailers are willing to pay commissions on sales made through banner ads.
Shop4Liberty’s banner ads create commissions for the Ron Paul fundraiser….
SO… If you need to make a purchase online, and choose to do it through the retailers featured on this site (by clicking on the banner ads in any of the shopping categories), a percentage or flat rate commission of that sale goes to fund the Ron Paul Fundraiser. The Ron Paul Fundraiser will then fund FREE RON PAUL ACTIVIST KITS- so go to the site under “4 activists” and sign up for one! As the site gains in popularity and usage we will also be donating to R3VOLUTION PAC. FULLY NONPROFIT! Shop everything from travel tickets, music, clothes, electronics, appliances, books and much much more! RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!
50% of american muslims are black.so,herman cain is agaist HALF of black americans.and that is somehow acceptable and makes him a decent man?
herman cain is a collectivist.he sees people as groups and not individuals.
there is no single policy on which he can be called as a liberty lover.he hates his own race -given his statements.
topmmyz, 30 years ago when Paul made that speech in Congress, he was objecting to persistent arming of dictators with sophisticated weapons. At that time the U.S. did arm the Shah against his own people, he doesn’t mention any WMD that could be deployed in any way agaubst the U.S. U.S. support weaponry stopped when the Shah was deposed. Today Iran has no significant military and is still no threat to the U.S. except in ill will created by our constant meddling.
KRS-One supports Ron Paul.
I like Herman Cains’ background, Ron Paul is the uncle that everyone loves, but I would throw my support around Newt, unless Palin enters the race!
I love this website’s articles, especially by Dell Gines and Arthur Lewin. Thank you both for your objective assessments of the GOP field. I truly believe Ron Paul is the only one we can put our confidence in… simply because of his consistency. If you have hope in something that is unwavering, chances are you will be pleased with its outcome.
I think the end to the War on Drugs is a major issue that needs to be addressed. Ron Paul again is the only person running who will stand up and fight this issue that has ravaged so many black men due to the cruel standard of racial profiling. To think how many drug offenders are in PRISON with people who rape babies and then murder them, etc. Absolutely unbelievable.
Great article. Ron Paul 2012!
Ron Paul is specifically a Paleolibertarian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism
This means he advocates minimal government in every aspect in accordance with the Constitution, but in his personal life he is a cultural conservative. He is also in the mold of the Old Right and the Founders classical liberalism(note the classic, liberalism is know identified as the opposite of what it once was)
Herman Cain is fairly good but believes in central economic planning, also known as the Federal Reserve. He is also more in line with progressive positions regarding foreign policy and has authoritarian social positions.
Ron Paul is just like Calvin Coolidge. Look him up.
Peace and Prosperity 2012.
Does anyone truly care about this once great country? Barack Obama? Sarah Palin? Ron Paul? Herman Cain? And the list goes on. At the end of the day a Politician is all about one thing, yes getting elected into office. Once that happens us “citizens” get push aside. Why is that?
@Jay says:
“I support Herman Cain for his consistent support for the Federal Reserve and for the TARP bail-outs. His endorsement of Romney in 2008 also impresses me. All of these issues are important to Black voters. Cain will also continue the Iraq and Afghanistan wars; continuing these wars just like Obama has done is hugely important to the Black community. We must never stop the wars and we must always bail-out the banks.”
You’re kidding, right?
@Drew:
“Ron Paul DID indeed vote AGAINST the Civil Rights Act.”
Not in 1964. He was busy being a flight surgeon in the USAF over in Vietnam. (BTW, of the entire DP/GOP field, he’s the only veteran!)
Not in 1990. He wasn’t re-elected to Congress until 1996.
You are correct in why he opposes it, but he never voted on either one.
Ron Paul is a true brother. His message reaches out across all races and persuasions and addresses to empower the individual. Like the great leaders of the 20th Century– Gandhi and Dr. King, he’s more interested in philosophy rather than power, and most important of all, he speaks the truth. When I cast my vote, it will be for Dr. Ron Paul.
@tommyz:
“Question on Ron Paul: I’m reading his books and I’m on #3, “A Foreign Policy of Freedom.” In it, he says that Iran is one of a few countries that owns “weapons of mass destruction.” Why then does he argue that Iran doesn’t even have any weapons of note? Also, I seem to recall that he claimed Iran had no Army, but that’s certainly not true. What’s the deal here?”
WMD means more than just nukes. Dr. Paul has claimed (correctly) that Iran doesn’t have nukes, but no such claim has been made about the other WMDs, chemical and biological weapons. We have them, too, as does the Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, British, Israelis, and probably a couple of other nations I can’t recall at the moment. Iran does have a standing army capable of 3rd-generation warfare, but it is no match for any 4th-generation warfare army (which includes the Israelis) or our 5th-generation warfare army. Most of its TOE is obsolete and old stuff. It is likely that Dr. Paul was mistaken on the claim of no army, but citing the quote for better context would be helpful.
@DG Well-written and fair article, thank you.
I would only point one one crucial error in Dr. Paul’s positions (not your stating of them, but in his actual positions) which is that he tends to confuse the difference and relationship between the superior rights of the people and the subordinate powers of government when he starts on his “states’ rights” arguments. States, like all artificial entities, have only powers and privileges granted to them through the natural rights of the people, who also possess powers and privileges. As such, states cannot violate the rights of the people either. That’s why the 14th Amendment is so important.
I would also point out one missed point about libertarianism: the minimal-government view of libertarianism, or minarchy, also stands for decentralizing government to be as close to the people as possible to give them maximal involvement in shaping it or shrinking it as they see fit. But there is a no-government view of libertarianism, anarchy (not to be confused with chaos, which is what looters and rioters cause), that stands for a stateless society run through voluntary cooperation and contracts, arbitration and private enterprise. In their view the governmental unit is local, not much more than familial, and completely voluntary, with no coercion or aggressive force like the monopoly government we endure today.
I’m gonna have to disagree completely with the assessments being made here. You have not represented conservatives properly at all.
On a federal level there isn’t any real difference between conservatives and libertarians. It’s not until you get to the state level and local levels that you find differences between conservatives and republicans.
Because both are about limited federal government. The libertarian also wants limited state government, but a republican could be in favor of more state powers. For example, Romney’s healthcare program on a state level is actually well within the republican and conservative platform. And when people get on to Romney about that, that is really a libertarian position. If Romney tried to implement that on the federal level, then he is a democrat.
Herman Cain is NOT far right. He is FAR LEFT. You are calling neo-conservatives conservatives, and that is not the case at all. Those positions you see are different are not conservative positions – they are neo-con positions. They are big government, far left positions.
This is why libertarians have usually voted republican. The libertarian party was formed because the republicans were becoming more and more big government, more and more neo-con.
Great article. Cain seems like a good guy and he’s someone I would keep as a friend, but that doesn’t mean I want him running the country. Ron Paul is an old timer that has been through it all. He knows what’s best for the county and we just need to give him a shot. We’ve been going with the status quo for almost a decade (minus a few presidents along the way). Why not truly vote for change and actually give change a shot. I’m a veteran and I’m voting for Ron Paul.
I believe some of the statements about both candidates were factually incorrect. Please research any and all opinions or statements of fact from this writer as he seems to be pulling the wool over your eyes.
Liberarian American of African descent.
I support Herman Cain for his consistent support for the Federal Reserve and for the TARP bail-outs. His endorsement of Romney in 2008 also impresses me. All of these issues are important to Black voters. Cain will also continue the Iraq and Afghanistan wars; continuing these wars just like Obama has done is hugely important to the Black community. We must never stop the wars and we must always bail-out the banks.
There are always too many Democratic congressmen, too many Republican congressmen, and never enough U.S. congressmen.
Ron Paul’s legislative history represents the good political change we always vote for, in elections, but never get!
The Dr. is the rarest of politicians; the more you find out about him and his policies the more you like him.
He is embarking with us on the political renaissance of this country; a revolution for the revival of American individualism; he personifies the long time yearnings of the working class and his policies are aimed at restraining the ruling elite.
Nevertheless, since his honest arguments are not the usual and repetitive, establishment rehearsed, deceptive phrases; the constitutional matters discussed by him might go over the heads of the party faithful.
However, he will win because he is the real deal; with pro-constitutional and pro-liberty ideals; who is offering his fellow Americans, common sense solutions for national prosperity. He is a witty, and truthful politician who is willing to explain to anyone the cohesiveness of his well-thought-out policies and the advantages of following the set of principles that founded this Republic, and made it a guiding light, an example for the whole world, and the sublime vision of John Winthrop when he spoke about a “City Upon A Hill.”
Ron Paul’s political economy predictions have become eye-opening for those voters who love America and want to build a better government; but have been in a deep party sleep, and accustomed to choosing the least of two evils; instead of opposing both evils and help to reconstruct the constitutional republic.
He comes to us representing loyalty to the United States; which is why Americans from all walks of life are standing with him and behind his Liberty message.
Ron Paul DID indeed vote AGAINST the Civil Rights Act. Not out of racism, but that act infringed upon property rights. What that means, in a way, Ron Paul would be a better choice not just for the black community but for ALL communities. My reasoning here is Ron Paul believes something CONSTITUTIONAL could have been done to change the status quo towards African Americans. Not an amendment that tells businesses who to serve to.
My point is Herman Cain is a hypocrite. 60 years ago everyone was saying African Americans have no business in American politics. Now we have a black President. Then he turns around and says Muslims have no place in American politics? So what if a Muslim runs for President. If he supports the idea of TRUE personal freedom like Ron Paul does, I’d vote for him too… and I’m white.
hermain cain is really a fraud, he has managed to deceive the public into thinking his 999 policy is going to reduce the taxes etc. But if you listen to it thoroughly it is “REVENUE NEUTRAL”. meaning government is still going to suck the same amount of money from us as before. and whats more, he will add a new tax, consumption tax in addition to the taxes already in place. So some might think its fine, since we are paying the same amount anywas.. guess what, may be in a 6 monts his 999 wil become, 10 10 10.. and 12 12 12 ..
So it is useless tinkering with the number, if you want real change, you should vote for ron paul. He is saying he will remove the income tax completely. he opposes any sort of consumption tax cause it hurts the consumers and not the corporations… he will remove taxes on savings and capital.. so you can save money and not worry about tax….he is opposed to taxes on tips etc.. and these things he is not saying to get votes.. he actually has bills waiting in the congress.
second problem is cain is more of the same, he opposes federal reserve auditing.. thats the elephant in the room. 15 trillion dollars being passed out to government buddies… which is making us all poor.. and he wants to ignore that?
and lastly wants to continue these no end illegal wars.. and start new wars immidiately with iran.. cause some day iran MIGHT get a bomb.. let me tell you this, in this age of technology, ANY COUNTRY will be able make a bomb SOMEDAY.. this is all war propaganda. libyia has one of the largest oil reserves in africa, iraq has oil, afganistan is the important passage of oul pipeline, etc.. cant you see this, its all for oil.
Besides, ron paul knows a lot more, he is like a historian, a constitutional scholar, and he explains using precedents… not like hermain cain, who sells pizza, and who openly admits he doesnt have much foreign policy knowledge.
i got even more.. ron pauls opposing drigwars and death penalty cause it is unfairly affecting the minority and poor .. etc etc. but that will be later.
Very well thought out article on the differences between the two candidates. I believe what is best for the black community is what is best for us all. Individual liberty and the freedom to pursue our life’s passions and interests. We were taught to “never judge a man by the color of his skin but judge him by his character.” Mr. King did not mention communities but “a man.”
Ronald Reagan did not declare the war on drugs, that was President Nixon, although he was really just continuing pieces of prohibition policy. Reagan did vastly expand the war on drugs though by harshly increasing the punishments for drug possession which is very much responsible for the increased crime rate.
The free market, with lower taxes, fewer regulations constraining would be small businesses, and more surplus capital available to invest in productivity increasing equipment, would help every demographic, including blacks.
The writer mentioned that Ron Paul didn’t support the preference based on racial quotas and that the free market system wouldn’t help the black man. I disagree. I know people who sell their goods on the street and do not sell based on skin color, they sell to who they get the most money from. That’s the free market. They set their own price for their wares, their goods and services. They market, the word gets out, and they make their cash and are happy. No one thinks about the color of their skin, it’s all about happy transactions.
Ron Paul would do more for the black community than any president in our lifetimes – to include LBJ. The problems in the black community are perpetuated by the federal government – whether it is horrid public schools, a terrible economy, market distortions that reduce black employment, public housing, the drug war, our foreign wars of intervention or a militarized police force – and Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate (Democrat or Republican) that would work to fix them all.
Good for you, Dell! I wasn’t sure what your conclusion would be until the end but I was thinking as I read, “How many black men are in prison because they possessed, sold, or consumed some marijuana. How many black families have been affected because of the war on drugs?”
Just a minor note of alteration: I wouldn’t say that Ron Paul, as a libertarian, believe in no government intrusion. He supports the Constitution which allows for a very, very small amount. Most conservatives want to pay lip-service to this sort of ideal and would love for you to believe they believe it too, but will go on to say, “What ‘we’ [meaning, the government under Republican control] ought to do for the economy, families, etc., is…”
I think Ron Paul cares personally about defending the traditional definition of marriage but he doesn’t believe this authority belongs to the federal government. He would say federal government shouldn’t have any say in marriage whatsoever, even the traditional kind.
Just a note about pragmatism: that’s what got us to this point. We have our whole lives ahead of us in which we can vote for the lesser of two evils. We only this once in a lifetime chance to vote for the most honest, most consistent, most committed to liberty candidate that this country has EVER been given in Ron Paul (and I include Thomas Jefferson himself in that list of candidates). Don’t lose this once in a lifetime opportunity. Vote for Ron Paul and, win or lose, be satisfied that you did the right thing with the voice that you had.
DG, you should read Wilt Alston’s articles, if you haven’t already. He is a black libertarian anarchist and you might find his perspective interesting. http://www.lewrockwell.com/alston/alston-arch.html
DG, thank you for your kind words and for continuing and deepening the discussion.
Gary Johnson and Ron Paul are the only candidates worth voting for. I think that the emergence of Gary Johnson into the race validates the principles that Ron Paul stands for. They should be No. 1 and No. 2 in the polls, not Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. Ron Paul’s message of personal and economic liberty for all individuals is spreading like wildfire. Gary Johnson is spreading that message as well. If Americans could hear Paul’s positions on the economy and the Federal Reserve he would be the ONLY candidate. If you support the principles of liberty and Ron Paul’s campaign check out my blog “The Compassionate Capitalist”
http://ccapitalist.blogspot.com/2011/08/no-one-listens-to-outcast-until-he-is.html
How has Obama helped the black community? He has done nothing. He’s just another politician owned by the corporations. And this idea that we NEED the government to help black people, and that black people would fail without the government is actually a racist invention of liberals and Democrats. We’re all Americans, and we all deserve to live in a free and prosperous country. I’m voting for freedom in 2012. I’m voting for Ron Paul.
I like them both. Either one of them will be 100 times better than Perry!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjRcO1Sm0HU
Question on Ron Paul: I’m reading his books and I’m on #3, “A Foreign Policy of Freedom.” In it, he says that Iran is one of a few countries that owns “weapons of mass destruction.” Why then does he argue that Iran doesn’t even have any weapons of note? Also, I seem to recall that he claimed Iran had no Army, but that’s certainly not true. What’s the deal here?
This articles statements on libertarianism is quite accurate, but there is a serious missing element to the characterization of Ron Paul. Economics.
Ron Paul and his fellow Austrian School of Economics patrons predicted the Depression of the 30s and also predicted this depression. Whereas Mr. Cain’s views caused this economic crisis. To state a Paul/Cain or Cain/Paul ticket as possible ignores their vastly different economic views. Cain’s experience at the Kansas City Fed screams “insider Keynesian School of Economics” to me. Sure his rhetoric sounds nice now, but I can’t personally accept it.
Due to vastly different views on economics a Paul/Cain or Cain/Paul ticket would be equivilent to having the President of the KKK and Martin Luther King Jr running on the same ticket.
Please read more into Dr. Paul’s economic views.
@Freedom, I did not know that thanks for the feedback.
@Jacob, when we get to heaven maybe we won’t see race. The SEEING of race is not the problem. Nor even the IDENTIFICATION with a race. It is what occurs after that. I am half white half Black with a little bit of Native American. My wife is white, which makes my children 1/4 Black. They look Hispanic, but self identify as Black. People know they aren’t white even if they are unsure of what they are.
When I write my piece on why libertarianism is dangerous for Blacks I will go into the fallacy of presume that folks will be color blind. This problem is especially exacerbated under the ‘free as we can be’ mantra of the libertarian.
Finally, an article that I learned something from.
Thanks for the article Mr. Gines. It appears to be unbiased and informative. I did find one point however that is not completely correct about Paul. True, he does believe the Federal govt. should not interfere in marriage. However, he believes it should be regulated at the state level. This is Paul’s stance on most all issues, which highlights his not only Libertarian stance but Conservative as well.
Though I think you characterize Ron Paul fairly, I am deeply concerned with your usage of the term black community. It is too bad that we as a people are so unwilling to move past race.
A case in point: I was adopted and do not know my race. Also, I am married to a woman who is half Korean and half Black. What race will our children be? What race is my wife? We are not black, not hispanic, not asian, and not white. Why do we have to be any race? Can we not just get past race and focus on individual rights? A free market helps everyone regardless of what labels you decide to arbitrarily assign to people.
Only when we stop seeing people through the lense of racism will we finally have a truly free society. There are only individual rights.
Thanks Rhynosaur. I was trying to be as fair as possible, being neither a libertarian or conservative.
Good article! As a Libertarian myself, I would have to say your definition of Libertarianism is pretty accurate. Ron Paul 2012!
I’ve got to go with the guy really fighting for our freedom which is clearly Ron Paul who has predicted all this mess. The Troops have shown who they support as well. Cain, in all honesty doesn’t sound like he knows anything in the monetary policy, foreign policy, and economic policy relm (even though oddly enough he was a Kansas City Fed governor).
You could throw a Mc in front of Cain’s name and you would have no change in McCain policies of 2008 or Mitt Romney’s policies.
Jacob – “I have nothing against the black man- i just think they’re taught a lot of nonsense (by the government and politicians), and they get wrapped up in it.” I would argue this is a very prejudiced and bigoted statement. It makes an implied assumption that black people are incapable or less capable of rationally making political decisions.
i think you may like ron paul even better if you understood how the free market would help blacks. what blacks have right now is a system of intervention and a social safety net. what has happened is that blacks are now more disadvantaged (i believe) than they ever were before. yes, drugs have played a part, but i think the larger reason is because we’ve attempted to legislate morality, and when we do- there’s unintended consequences.
As an example (lol :)):
It’s extremely easy to sue your employer for racist conduct. Let’s say a white employer is sued by his black employee. The employee says that he was fired because he was black, but the employer says that he did the firing because the black man never showed up for work on time. Regardless, the boss either needs to go to court to fight his case (which would cost him a day of business, and possibly money) or he needs to just settle (which does cost money). Even if the employee’s case was totally bogus, there’s an opportunity cost for the boss. What does the boss do after this event? Even if he’s not racist at all- he may never hire another minority again. Simply because he doesn’t want to get sued. Now, even though there are black people who can do the job very well, they won’t have an opportunity because the laws make it risky for the boss to hire people. Usually, you can take a chance on someone, and if it doesn’t work out, you can fire them. But with certain groups, there are laws that can be called into play that make it scary for you to hire someone.
In general, having the system classify blacks, or anyone else, as a “minority” or someone who needs assistance simply because they are a certain way, creates a response in the market. In fact, we teach blacks that they are going to have a harder time, no matter what, just because they’re black. And that’s not true.
The idea of the civil rights act of 1964 was to get people to integrate and respect one another. In large part, that’s pretty much happened. But people are still racist. Many whites think that the blacks are just living off the system. Now, instead of seeing them work hard and become proficient on basis of their merit, whites (or others) see them as taking advantage of a system, and being incapable of taking care of themselves. So even if a black man does well, people may be suspicious or think less of it because he had so much help. So all of these programs intended to help the black man- i think- may be hurting him.
If hispanic people entering the US illegally didn’t get so much aid from the government, they’re hard work and merit would probably pay off. In fact, i think the idea of “citizenship” is kind of an interesting one, because all it really means here anymore is that you get benefits. Some people also like to think that the law should treat you differently (no habeus corpus, etc), but- i don’t know if that’s really what we want.
Anyway, point of all of this is… In all of the years since civil rights legislation, and all of the entitlement programs, etc, etc… How much better off is the black man? In the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s, there was racism (yes)- but the number of crack dealers and babies out of wedlock? Not high at all i’m pretty sure, lol. It used to be a disgrace for a black woman to have a child out of wedlock. And the number of black men in jail? There’s nothing about being black that makes a person have a predilection for jail-time. When there’s no jobs? When people are afraid to hire you because they don’t want to get sued? When you’re hired simply because you have to fulfill some quota? I think that may play into things. Not to mention all of the programs that blacks become dependent on because they’re given for free with no strings attached. Then- blacks are taught that they’re “entitled” to it, but they’re not- nobody is. They may be entitled to charity, sure- but- charity is different from government redistribution of wealth. One comes from the heart, the other at the end of a gun.
I have nothing against the black man- i just think they’re taught a lot of nonsense (by the government and politicians), and they get wrapped up in it. I don’t even like the idea of classifying “blacks” into a group. “Racism is just an ugly form of collectivism.” – Ron Paul. You should vote for Ron Paul because he understands that blacks are not a sub-genre of the human race: they’re just people with different back grounds. And we all have different backgrounds. He wants to treat blacks the same way you treat whites and latinos and asians, etc. To him, there’s no difference. Liberty belongs to everyone, because God gave us free will. I think this is a fairly good article, but i think the author may benefit (as well as his readers) from a wider understanding of the free market (and how government interference and regulation has probably hurt the black man more than it has helped).
Thanks for a fair article. Ron Paul also has an army of grassroots support that is unrivaled. Every supporter needs to join in at http://www.blackthisout.com to help in the largest one day fundraiser this year.
As long as we have fiat money and fractional reserve banking, we are all ultimately screwed. Dr. Paul is the only one willing to address this issue of unsustainable debt growth. He is the only one who would end the war on drugs and the war abroad. Who can beat that?
The Libertarian message is not the same as capitalism and it is important that they are not confused. If you study the philosophies of the different political parties, you will see that Libertarianism is the only one which does not believe in slavery, which protects individual rights, and which provides the foundation for a moral and free society. I argue that blacks would prosper the most under these conditions, we all would. If you are not Libertarian, you are pro slavery (to some degree) by definition.
Our active military troops support Ron Paul. Want to support our troops? Then support our troops’ candidate, Ron Paul. Troops have contributed more to Ron Paul’s campaign than to all other candidates of BOTH parties COMBINED.
As far as I am concerned all these Republican candidates (with the exception of Paul) seem like wack-job empty-promise, special-interest, establishment puppets. Paul actually has a vision, and from his voting record, has principles. And I voted Obama in ’08. I have never been so pissed off at myself that I am now. I was fooled!
But it made me look back at history, and it’s been the same for a long time, getting continually worse. I hope people actually listen and fact-check what Paul says, because he seems to be right about a lot of things, including the erosion of our civil liberties under the guise of ‘safety’ from terrorists, etc.
Ron Paul 2012, because if he doesn’t get elected, we all lose.
I feel this is a bit slighted to favor Paul, and as much as I want to see Paul win I want it to be because America changes direction some not slight of hand. Unfair depiction in the some of the wording used for Cain’s examples. However, generally a decent assessment. You failed to mention that HC was the head of the Fed in Kansas. Ron Paul has Railed against the FED reserve his entire time in congress. In addition, that Ron Paul has a different economic perspective than any of the other candidates (except perhaps Gary Johnson).
Thank you for this follow up. thyblackman.com has my deep respect, and I am continually impressed by its perpetual attempt at unbiased journalism. Even in for a blog where opinions are actually allowed, you continue to present facts strait up and then offer opinion. I appreciate it deeply.
One other difference I would point to between Paul and Cain. Paul would likely benefit black communities in more ways than just preventing the large amounts of arrests. One of the things I consider to be the most damaging to black people in general is generational welfare. No one is empowered by generational subsistence on the government. It may be an easy life, but it’s not living. Many great black people have been kept down by this system for decades. Currently 47 million Americans are receiving welfare. The percentage of those people who are black and minority is huge. There is something inherently wrong with a system that perpetually integrates people into a lifestyle of comfortable complacency in a lower economic class. It is time to break free.
I believe Ron Paul would fix this.
I for one support Paul and will do so even in a national election. I consider myself a libertarian/ conservative leaning independent. I have voted for more than 3 parties in previous elections. I give my support to whomever I consider the best man. Ron Paul is that man to me.
You covered most things pretty fairly.It has come down to We the people vs the Corporate machine.Cain being the ex chairman for the Kansas City Fed scares me.
Ron Paul 2012
Great article, obamas’s failure to do something about the racist oppressive war on drugs will be his downfall, he promised change and we got more of the same, time to try something different Ron Paul all the way!