All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 31, 2022 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
16:46
Eliminate The Alphabet Agencies? Shrink The State? ... Ask Ron Paul!

You asked. Ron Paul answered! We hope you enjoy the latest edition of Ask Ron Paul!

|

Time Text
Failure Of The System 00:15:06
Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Dr. Paul, how are you today?
I'm doing fine.
I understand that I'm in the hot seat today.
And we've done this before, and it seems to be very popular.
And I think we should keep thinking about it, and maybe we'll get some suggestions.
But this is a time where we try to get a precise question from somebody in the audience and get to ask them through you reading it to us.
So what do you have for me?
Yeah, we haven't done this in a while, the Ask Ron Paul, and we're actually going to do it now that we're on Rumble.
We're going to start doing it more on locals on a more regular basis for our locals followers.
And we'll get into that when we get back from the conference.
We're actually prepping for the conference, and that's why we're doing this before we go because there's not a lot of time.
But Ask Ron Paul is a fun feature, and we got a lot of great questions, but we had to narrow it down to three.
And let's put up the first one.
This is from Charles DeMello, and I understand his point.
He says, how would the process go to eliminate the alphabet agencies?
You know, that's a good way to ask because a lot of people say we've got to get rid of the CI, got rid of the, and we all say it.
How would you go about doing it?
Say you became president tomorrow, they gave you a call, Kamala gave you a call and said, look, I don't want to do this, Biden's out, you're in.
It wouldn't be easy because there's so many special interests and so much money involved and so much power involved.
You could do it by gradualism.
You know, if you had the votes there, you could do it.
I don't think that too much.
This subject comes up under the Fed, too.
How do you get rid of the Fed?
And it's not likely to happen through voting.
But I think if some of these agencies, they're going to self-destruct.
Don't you think right now, like the FBI, they're not stronger than they used to be.
They were a fake agency for a long time because they were held in much higher esteem than they deserved, and they were getting away with what they've been doing to it.
But if they lose credibility, you know, they lose effectiveness.
And then sometimes what happens then will be a serious conference, you know, to look it over and make it more sensible.
But that's tinkering as far as I'm concerned, that we have to define what the relationship ought to be between the people and an agency like a police force, the FBI, and even the CIA.
And that's when the Constitution comes into play.
Because if we do have that crisis, which we anticipate, at least I do, that it's going to be major, and there is going to be a revamping.
They will have to revamp the monetary system.
It shouldn't be just tinkering around.
They're talking about Bretton Woods 2, you know, and this or that.
That's not going to solve the problem.
They need real reform.
And that's what we have to have.
But people say, well, how do you do it?
How do you do it?
We could start by reading the Constitution.
You know, the 9th and 10th Amendment are pretty clear-cut.
If it's not there, if it's not written in there, agencies of government can't write into it.
Courts can't do this and create these monstrosities because it's the creation of these things that was so bad.
And getting rid of them is a real chore because there's so many people dependent on it.
They're dependent on it, you know, financially because somebody's benefiting.
And psychologically, they think there would be no law enforcement if you didn't have an FBI.
What would happen?
They'll ask me, what would happen if you didn't have the FBI to help take care of our criminals?
Well, maybe we'd restore confidence in the Second Amendment.
You know, isn't it, to me, it's so sad that we're so dependent on national policing and the streets are just total chaos.
They run chaos because we shouldn't be there.
We should not even have them in existence.
I had one person that I highly respected many, many years ago, and we had a conversation about the CIA.
He said, and he had been involved in that type of activity.
And he said, the CIA people have to come to understand that if you want a republic, you can't have a CIA, which is secret government.
It's terrible because you really, you know, we were allowed when they were spending money, there would be a budget, and you could go and look at a big book in a secret area, but you really didn't have access to it.
When we were voting on that, nobody knew exactly because you couldn't audit the CIA anymore than you could audit the Federal Reserve.
So you don't know where all the troops are and where the dangers are.
But I think the principle is the most important thing.
If it isn't authorized in the Constitution, the position is we should abolish it, and that's where we should start.
And they say, well, even if you're in the politics of that, sometimes maybe you won't get everything you want, but you call attention to it.
We didn't get rid of the Federal Reserve, but hopefully over the last decade or so, that we have stirred up enough interest where a lot more people, I noticed that with the young people, have an intense interest in monetary policy.
And I thought, whether it's the monetary policy or the runaway CIA FBI, that young people seem to be more open-minded about doing away with these.
So I think it's that decision to make, they aren't constitutional, they cause more harm than good, and we ought to get rid of them.
Let's go to that second one.
This is from Justin Smith, and it's also an interesting question.
Debt versus culture wars.
Given that the debt is $30 trillion, not counting unfunded liabilities, do you think it's more important to step away from most culture war issues?
If the dollar fails, most culture war issues will be of no importance anyway.
So do we worry about the economy or do we worry about cancel culture and cultural marginism and etc.?
Well, first thing, you know, it's hard to find culture wars.
They're all over the place and they could involve all kinds of things.
The way our government has been set up is the federal government shouldn't be involved.
The courts shouldn't be announcing things.
If there's a matter of regulation of maybe a cultural belief, for instance, on the abortion issue, the abortion, you know, the founders couldn't conceive them, didn't write about that in the Constitution.
But what they did, though, they provided an option for that, and that is what was followed just recently because the court, for the first time since 1972, 73, with Roe v. Wade, they said it's not the way it's done.
You don't have the authority to be the policeman, and it should be a state issue.
But I think cultural issues, if nobody's getting hurt and there's no government money, if it's cultural behavior, you know, it just should be ignored.
But they're talking about silliness, you know, this polygenderism, you know, and put that into law.
They don't say, well, we shouldn't have these laws.
They say, well, we're going to define them.
So now, well, we're up to 52 different genders that we have to deal with.
That's insanity.
And it's mainly designed to disrupt things, cause chaos.
That's the thing, if you're going to deal with a cultural war, you have to realize, and the economic wars too, is that the goal is to have chaos and disrupt the society and get people upset and angry and people lose trust.
And they're doing a pretty good job on this.
But I think basically, whether you're dealing with debt and spending money, you have to deal with the monetary system.
And on cultural wars, the same thing.
You have to look at the limitation of the limitation of the people's efforts and the power of the government.
But no, we have no restraints.
This whole thing about modern monetary theory, let's do that, and maybe we can print more, even more money.
Of course, they've been using money.
I think the day that modern monetary theory really started was when Bretton Woods declared that we were bankrupt and there would be no definition for the unit of account.
That was a big deal.
So for some of these things, things have to be redefined.
And we have to challenge the people who just want to destroy the value of words like science.
How did it come to a point where Fauci had so much influence?
He said, oh, that's not scientific.
And we decide, I'm science.
Anything I say is science.
You know, that reflects a big issue.
And that reflects the understanding of the people.
And it takes a long time to break loose from the indoctrination.
And unfortunately, the indoctrination starts at K through 12.
And they get that built into their system.
So the solution has to come from that.
So I think people have to realize the failure of the system.
So when you can point out the failure when we talk so much about COVID, the one thing that caught attention for what we were saying is when the authoritarians are out there writing these crazy laws and all the stuff that we were supposed to do, and they themselves weren't obeying it.
People don't like that.
So we need to make sure people are educated.
I do think that with a proper education that they would change their mind.
That means that we have to challenge the government school system.
And that also means there's no authority for a government school system.
And that's why there's a few of us that are very much involved.
Homeschooling and private schooling and self-education and all these other things.
But this is a major, major problem.
And fortunately, we still live in an age where we can, to some degree, speak out and try to change people's minds.
Because that's really what we have left.
And I don't think they can ever squelch that completely.
I mean, I think even in the Soviet Union, there was the Sosonitsins and others who retained and maintained some truth.
And that's why the remnant of society has answers to some of these very big problems that we're facing.
Well, the third one we're going to do, the last one we're going to do, is from someone we know, a friend of ours, Eric Brakey, up in Maine.
And he's got a good question out there.
Let's put that one up if we can.
What does Ron Paul think of the growing wave of liberty legislators elected to state capitals advancing issues like constitutional carry, school choice, and defend the guard?
And to add one, the state legislature has been involved in the money issue.
Yeah.
Because the Constitution doesn't talk about the Federal Reserve or anything else, but it says no state shall use anything other than gold and silver for legal tender.
And they've been working on that, and we encourage that a whole lot.
That to me is a wonderful point because, you know, for politics to work, they have to be in a way realistic.
You have to know why people are in there.
If they're in there to be a politician and, you know, become chairman of committees and all this, it's a lot of wasted time.
But if you're in there to present something with a cause, it's not only a political action, it's an educational activity.
And I think that's very, very good.
I think in a way, this could almost be what's happening now in the state legislature is almost a more direct answer to Soros.
Soros spends millions and millions of dollars going into these races for minor seats in the justice system.
And every once in a while you say, oh, there's a prosecutor.
He's a Soros guy.
But of course, he had the money to do that.
But in a way, I think running, especially if you took a state like New Hampshire, because of its expansive legislature, it's like running for city council, but they still have a voice.
And more people can do that.
There are some states where it might be futile, you know, in trying to get even a state rep seat, or a state senate seat.
But I think the activity, as far as I was concerned, gave me, I wasn't looking for a position as much as I was looking for an opportunity to express myself.
I told my wife, Carol, this is therapy for me, to be able to talk about what I think is right and let the chips fall where they're made.
And quite frankly, if people do that, you might be more surprised than you think it could be because I was certainly surprised because I never thought I was going to get elected, let alone find out that the college kids actually listen and they were excited about it.
So I think that move is something that's open to everybody.
And you don't have to have somebody dedication because he's going to be a state rep because he's going to be the governor in a couple years.
That's not the right way to go.
It gives us an opportunity still, in spite of all the things going on with social media and people being canceled and you end up talking about science and COVID treatment, this sort of thing.
Even with all that, there's still opportunity, more than we might realize.
You've got to test it.
I'll bet you the parents that finally got disgusted and started going to the school board.
I bet they didn't know they had the clout that they did, and that's still ongoing.
They expressed themselves because they, holy man, what have they done to us?
And I think they also means the parents, because the parents have been neglectful.
But now, bad things can happen.
Maybe that will wake up a lot of people.
And people should get enthusiastic.
They should know what they believe in.
They should know how to present it.
So it's self-education that is so important.
And that was one message I learned from Leonard Reed, who started the Foundation for Economic Education.
Believe And Participate 00:01:28
He says, if you really believe in liberty and you grasp it, do your best to learn about it and express yourself and continue to try to improve that trait.
And that, I think, is so important that you can present the case for liberty.
And this is the way things change.
It's changed by ideas.
And all of a sudden, you know, there's going to be a day when they say, the idea today is to get rid of the Federal Reserve, and it won't be so difficult because the Federal Reserve will be defunct and we will no longer have this artificial power through the reserve currency of the world.
So participating, exactly how to participate depends on whatever you want to do.
Just know what you're talking about and know what the position is and then people will, you know, want to have your opinion.
And fortunately, those messages will spread because a good message cannot be stopped by armies, as we have been told.
They can, armies won't do it.
Ideas are too powerful to be stopped so easily.
So we all have a responsibility and fortunately we still have enough freedom left to participate in that great debate.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today.
We'll have a closing there conversation.
No, no, go ahead.
No, I want to thank everybody.
Matter of fact, I enjoy doing this.
Maybe we can do this again.
I thank all the viewers today for tuning in.
Export Selection