Out of curiosity what's the view from Kucinich followers on Ron Paul, who has opposite views but maintains the same plan-spoken, unrehearsed style of oration? Even though I abhor Kucinich's views (he borders on socialism) I do appreciate his honesty and passion, especially in the debates.

Out of curiosity what's the view from Kucinich followers on Ron Paul, who has opposite views but maintains the same plan-spoken, unrehearsed style of oration?

Even though I abhor Kucinich's views (he borders on socialism) I do appreciate his honesty and passion, especially in the debates.

sure I appreciate Ron Paul's honesty in debate/conversation. But I would recommend you check out the book "the shock doctrine".. it clearly outlines the global experiments with implementing Chicago School neo-liberal economic systems and their success/failure. Ron Paul as I understand is a supporter implementing "pure" capitalism in which state assets are auctioned off and the magic of the market transforms society into a collection of self-interested self-serving self-owning individuals that need only worry about maximizing their own wealth for the implicit betterment of society as a whole? This philosophy is seriously flawed while this will lead to "huge profits" for some it leads to exacerbated resource discrepancies, lower wages, a destruction of the general welfare for huge sectors of the population. The society enters a non-altruistic view of humanity and idealizes self-interest, this both transforms the social structure but also re-frames how we view others such as sectors of population that have not "earned" the right to prosper. Friedman's economic experiments have already been conducted on a global scale with dismal results. Developmentism polices with mixed-economies have proven hugely more successful in building a larger middle class and improving social welfare for a much larger percentage of the population, in the US and else ware. Latin American countries implemented these development/keynesian models, and where doing well until corporate elites branded the same developmentism polices the US was using (market controls on commodities such as food, free education for all, public water, energy polices, import tariffs etc) as sudo Stalin communism. And so the CIA helped force remove these democracies in Chile, Argentina, Guatemala etc. Being a dictatorship there was now no need to worry about voter approval so the Chicago school economic model could be nearly fully deployed. The results where dismal, devastating to huge sectors of the populations and required full scale violent fascism to maintain the new economic order. Supporters of social welfare, union leaders, academics & student organizers where the first to be rounded up into the stadiums, tortured and or disappeared. so yea I guess I worry about Ron Paul's proposed trajectory, as I cant think of a single case where the market has worked for the people the way he is proposing it. Every case I can think of has resulted in a failed state or fascism. Perhapses Ron has some modifications to the Chicago school model that I am unaware of? Kucinich is often labeled as border line socialist... but should much more appropriately be labeled a Keynesian. But that would discredit the millions spent on "free-market" think-tanks in the past 50 years ;P

sure I appreciate Ron Paul's honesty in debate/conversation. But I would recommend you check out the book "the shock doctrine".. it clearly outlines the global experiments with implementing Chicago School neo-liberal economic systems and their success/failure. Ron Paul as I understand is a supporter implementing "pure" capitalism in which state assets are auctioned off and the magic of the market transforms society into a collection of self-interested self-serving self-owning individuals that need only worry about maximizing their own wealth for the implicit betterment of society as a whole?

This philosophy is seriously flawed while this will lead to "huge profits" for some it leads to exacerbated resource discrepancies, lower wages, a destruction of the general welfare for huge sectors of the population. The society enters a non-altruistic view of humanity and idealizes self-interest, this both transforms the social structure but also re-frames how we view others such as sectors of population that have not "earned" the right to prosper.

Friedman's economic experiments have already been conducted on a global scale with dismal results. Developmentism polices with mixed-economies have proven hugely more successful in building a larger middle class and improving social welfare for a much larger percentage of the population, in the US and else ware. Latin American countries implemented these development/keynesian models, and where doing well until corporate elites branded the same developmentism polices the US was using (market controls on commodities such as food, free education for all, public water, energy polices, import tariffs etc) as sudo Stalin communism. And so the CIA helped force remove these democracies in Chile, Argentina, Guatemala etc. Being a dictatorship there was now no need to worry about voter approval so the Chicago school economic model could be nearly fully deployed. The results where dismal, devastating to huge sectors of the populations and required full scale violent fascism to maintain the new economic order. Supporters of social welfare, union leaders, academics & student organizers where the first to be rounded up into the stadiums, tortured and or disappeared.

so yea I guess I worry about Ron Paul's proposed trajectory, as I cant think of a single case where the market has worked for the people the way he is proposing it. Every case I can think of has resulted in a failed state or fascism. Perhapses Ron has some modifications to the Chicago school model that I am unaware of? Kucinich is often labeled as border line socialist... but should much more appropriately be labeled a Keynesian. But that would discredit the millions spent on "free-market" think-tanks in the past 50 years ;P