Very Clear History about the Federal Government | The Revolution: A Manifesto

Read it - and weep | The Revolution: A Manifesto | Ron Paul

books:


	• The Revolution: A Manifesto Ron Paul Grand Central Publishing, 2008 - 192 pages average customer review:based on 709 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

highly recommended

A Good Read for Those Getting into Politics

This year will be my first time to be able to vote. I have just started to research politics, and I found that I agreed on a lot of what Ron Paul believes in. I purchased this book in an effort to learn more about what this country needs. I was shocked by a lot of subjects in this book (particularly the abortion segment), and it has given me a clear view of the problems in this country.

Very Clear History about the Federal Government

Very well written with a clear history about the U.S. Federal government. From inception to our modern day dilemma. A great read for those wanting to learn about the original conservatism and what rights the federal government has under the U.S. Constitution.

for more information click here

Read it - and weep

Paul writes clearly and seems to believe what he says, a rather refreshing departure for a politician. I am in any event naturally biased in his favor, as I agree with a great deal of his program, including no intervention in other nations, no sanctions on Iran or Cuba, no foreign aid, no sugar quotas, no draft or compulsory "national service," no executive orders except for administrative matters, no signing statements, no federal drug war, no NEA or Dept of Education, no Patriot Act or limitations on habeas corpus, no FISA violations.

My one problem, but it is major, is Paul's failure to even address, in the context of abolishing most federal programs and regulations, such issues as child labor, minimum wage, OSHA, FDA, food labeling, anti-trust, &c. None of these issues is mentioned in the Constitution, so under Paul's philosophy, none should be addressed by federal law. But are we really upset that a 14-year-old child may not work for more than a specified number of hours, or a 10-year-old child work in a factory, or a 6-year-old child work at all? Yes, the states can provide for child labor laws and all the rest, but states, especially small ones, can more easily be corrupted than can the federal government, so a state with, say, one significant industry might be persuaded - that is, bribed and intimidated - into allowing child labor and abolishing workplace safety regulations. As for, e.g., food labeling, who but the federal government could order and administer it? I suspect Paul would allow the federal government to deal with some of these problems, but his book is so anti-regulation that he should have at least discussed the subject and specified which regulations are appropriate and even necessary.

As for abandoning the incorporation doctrine (where the Supreme Court applied the Bill of Rights to the states) and returning civil rights issues to the states, which Paul strongly supports, I don't think most Americans really want to allow Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire or South Carolina to create a state church (all of these states had established churches at the time the Constitution was adopted - the only thing that prevents them having them now is the First Amendment, which Paul would argue only applies to the federal government, and it does indeed start "Congress shall make no law ... "), or tortured confessions (Fifth Amendment), or a single state-controlled newspaper (First Amendment), &c. Original intent sounds good, it's easy to make fun of a "living" constitution, but some things have been settled over the years which might best be left settled.

Of course there is no chance that any part of Paul's program will ever become law. As he himself says, repeatedly, the governmental policies which have led to our most serious troubles, especially regarding the economy, are pursued by both parties. Since there is no viable third party, and none in prospect, there would appear to be no hope at all of realizing any of his major policies - we will not return to the gold standard much less abolish paper money, we will not abolish the Fed or limit its power to create money "out of thin air," we will not bring our troops home from all or even most of the 130 countries they are now in, we will not abandon the possibility of a draft, we will not cancel foreign aid, the incorporation doctrine will not be reversed. Paul has often been the sole dissenting vote in the House, unable to persuade a single member of his own party to vote with him - an admirable adherence to principle, no doubt, but not a harbinger of change.

What, then, is the message of this book? Realistically, it is that the American political scene is a hopeless mess, and that our economic future, even hope for the retention (or return) of our freedoms, is grim. We simply have no way of returning to the constitutional scheme which held us in such good stead for so long - after all, as Paul notes, our Founding Fathers warned us that if we ever lose the protections they put in place for us, we will never get them back. Well, we have manifestly lost many of them - that is the central theme of this book - so ... so, what? Get used to it? Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow the dollar collapses and the federal government starts rounding up dissidents?

I'm too old to be worried for myself, but I surely am worried for my children, but Paul has no useful advice for them. You can't keep people who want to be free down? Of course you can. Plenty of people in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Soviet Russia, Communist China, Wahabbi Saudi Arabia and many other despotisms wanted (want) to be free but were (are being) destroyed by the system - arrested without cause, tortured, starved, murdered. The Founding Fathers were surely right - a republic, they said, if you can keep it. We have for a long time been negligent about keeping our government under control. The Bush Administration, led by Cheney, believed we would not take any effective steps to protect our freedoms no matter how egregiously they were violated; so it violated them, egregiously, and we proved Cheney right. Will McCain put a stop to these violations of our freedoms? I doubt it. Will Obama? I hope so, but I won't hold my breath; after all, a Democratically controlled Congress has utterly failed to do so.

So, a fine book, a good man, but not, I fear, a prophet.

for more information click here

Statesman Ron Paul's 2008 work.

Clearly written and concise description on the problems of the US federal government's theft of power. Also clear on the economic problems created by our federal government, and the required remedies to prevent economic disaster.

Why didn't I vote for him?

I should have, after reading this book.

I had already voted for Dr. Ron Paul, a pro-life and -liberty candidate...in 1988.

Friends and family castigated me for it, but I remain convinced that this first voting endeavor was my best one.

But over the years I've been inculcated in the belief that I "can't throw my vote away." I want mine back!

The book surprised me by its clarity and vigor of thought. Coming off the heels of the banking mess, which the book predicted was amazing accuracy--the FED printing easy money, providing for easy credit--makes our paper money system unsound.

Sound money, limited (constitutional!) government, rights given by God and not bequeathed to us at the behest of some government bureaucrat who live like parasites off the body politic, non intervention in foreign policy, and letting states decide on abortion are some of the highlights of this political apology that will live on long after the election.

Some of us sentient Americans who haven't been too addled by the government schools or who aren't sucking furiously off a gov't teat, realize that our liberties have been far too eroded away. Ron Paul filled the vacuum, taking a principled stand for freedom, which is after all truly the American way.

Dr. Paul, a Congressman from Houston, Texas, reminds us we are far better off trusting markets and people than government.

I just wish I had voted for him, and not listened so carefully to others. The Revolution was a wake-up call.

for more information click here