Why We Hope Ron Paul Wins The Nomination
Posted on: 2012-01-02 04:08:50
A Ron Paul presidency, while not perfect, would nevertheless bring to our Folk an implicitly valuable environment in which European Americans could begin to sense their identity anew and strive toward its preservation and improvement.
by Frank Roman
EAU was the first European-American advocacy organization ever to endorse a candidate for President of the United States (2008, 2012); and the reason we did so has a great deal to do with the underpinnings of our political advocacy, as well as the candidate we chose.
One of the biggest problems that has plagued pro-European-American advocacy for the past sixty years is the way it has become associated with totalitarian ideologies. This has caused two problems. First, it has confounded their ethno-cultural message with advocacy for ideologies that are fundamentally incompatible with the folk-soul of our people; and second, it has effectively removed these organizations from the political sphere because philosophical consistency requires them to disregard the democratic process.
EAU, on the other hand, supports the fundamental notion of the constitutional republic that America's European founding fathers advocated. In the political realm, then, we can most accurately be described as constitutionalists who are heavily influenced by the original intent of Madison, Jefferson, Washington and others. Of course, what we are talking about here is mainly a mechanism rather than content; though our founders generously included considerable content as well. Because we support the core structure of our constitutional republic, we have no philosophical problems with actively engaging the political system as an agent of incremental beneficial change for our people.
As we've mentioned before, the time-tested and traditional cultural memes of a people create a beneficial environment in which that people can thrive. From the very beginning of our people's nation, the governmental system of the United States was intended to perpetuate an environment that worked uniquely well for European-Americans by perpetuating important ideals and traditions (Here). In fact, our Constitution and legal systems are a continuation of many ideas and forms that already existed in Europe -- particularly England.
The point I am making here is very simple: while activist judges and political traitors have obscured our Constitution in a radical departure from our Folk's tradition; it was and is, in fact, thoroughly grounded in European culture, history and tradition; and was specifically intended to perpetuate the traditions and cultures of our people, white Americans (Here). The fact that our Constitution has since been twisted beyond all recognition and ignored whenever expedient in order to soothe the hurt feelings of yet another "minority" special interest group, subjecting us to social experimentation, is what brings us to Ron Paul.
Dr. Paul's most important views support the idea of sovereignty of the nation-state, States' rights combined with a strict interpretation of the limits of the power of Congress, and monetary policy. No one else can claim to hold those views for the past thirty years of his or her political and personal life. Of course to no one's surprise the manipulators of public perception have mangled his positions to lie anywhere between justification of 60's style hedonism and open anarchy; when, in fact, they are anything but.
Right now, in 2012, there is only one candidate for President belonging to a major party who specifically articulates the importance and benefit of maintaining America's status as a sovereign nation, as it was intended to be, and that is Ron Paul. The only other major party candidate in the past several decades who has espoused views anywhere close to Dr. Paul's in this regard is Pat Buchanan. Thus, he is the only candidate who explicitly stands against globalism; and EAU has identified globalism as public enemy #1 (Here).
This is a powerful reason why we support Ron Paul. Because he believes our national sovereignty is a pre-condition for liberty, unlike the other stooges running for high office, he opposes corporate backed NAFTA, GATT and similar globalist trade schemes (Here). This shouldn't be construed to say he is a protectionist, because he has clearly stated he believes in the free trade of nations that otherwise mind their own business. Which is to say, he believes in free trade in the absence of organizations like the World Trade Organization that compromise American sovereignty and freedom. EAU believes in incremental political change, though; and we are happy to at least have a candidate who supports American sovereignty unambiguously, even if he wouldn't implement the protectionist tariffs we'd prefer.
Moreover, If Dr. Paul or any other true patriot were to stand up tomorrow and say "if I am elected President, I will end all of this “racist” nonsense such as Affirmative Action and shut down race specific advocacy groups like La Raza, I will close and defend our southern borders, I will repatriate all illegal aliens, I will put a moratorium on all immigration for at least 10 years, I will end hate crimes laws, I will End the Fed (Here) etc", he would be elected in the biggest landslide we've ever seen in the history of our Nation. Obama and the rest of the Republicrats would be left wondering whether they should squat or go blind. Indeed America's people are more than ready for someone with guts to say and do what has needed to be said and done since at least the end of the 1960's.
Unfortunately those who advise politicians during presidential campaigns are nearly all of the opinion that groveling and pandering to minorities is the way to a successful run at POTUS. Why is this? Blacks especially are not going to vote for anyone who is not afraid to attack the giveaway, politically correct status quo in any significant numbers anyway. Can someone tell us here at EAU why otherwise rational people cannot seem to grasp this reality?
However, let us reason together. We've read what Ron Paul has to say, and he doesn't have an explicitly pro-European-American bone in his body that we can tell. In fact his recent tirade against the war on drugs and its disproportionate effect on inner city blacks tells us so. His reasoning regarding the border, however, though his positions are similar to those of Pat Buchanan, is radically different. Whereas Buchanan's thoughts are based on the necessity of a vital European-derived ethno-cultural core (Here) in order to hold America together; Ron Paul's immigration views stem, just like his views on NAFTA and other international trade agreements, from his belief that liberty can only be secured by a sovereign nation-state free of global bureaucracy. Both Pat Buchanan's views on the necessity of an ethno-cultural core AND Ron Paul's views of the dependence of liberty on a sovereign nation state are correct. We would prefer that Ron Paul articulate both views, but he only has the latter. Nevertheless, even this latter view, especially combined with his specific policy proposals, would be an enormous step forward -- for our people in particular (Here).
Let's be honest. When is the last time ANY American President referred to the United States as a republic? The answer is John F. Kennedy, before many people listening to me were even born (Listen). What was the party of the last President (R) to grant amnesty to illegal aliens? What was the party of the President (R) who invoked the New World Order? What was the party of the President (R) who brought us the largest budget and trade deficits in history? It's time to wake up and smell the coffee. Republicans are just a political party. They are just one gang seeking to gain access to a spoils system in competition against another gang. The Republican and Democratic parties are just giant corporations that seek power, nothing more. And they do and say whatever they must to attain it.
In fact if you look at the way Dr. Paul is being attacked from within the neo-conned Republican Party that should tell us all he's doing something right.
For more detailed information on why EAU endorses Dr. Pauls' political beliefs, such as his foreign policy, de-centralized federal power, states rights and so forth take a look at his webpage (Here). And then ask yourself whether or not anyone else has a message that would unanimously benefit our people, that would literally, and truly, level the playing field where our people could actually thrive in a grass roots cycle of freedom and improvement; to implicitly nurture the continuation of America's founding race -- like Dr. Ron Paul's presidency would (Here).
Indeed if the social engineers don’t like the idea of whites organizing to defend their interests, even implicitly, maybe some of them should have thought of that before driving us into a looming minority through immigration policies, political correctness, and the kind of state backed hypocrisy (Here) Vladimir Lenin himself would have approved of.
Thanks again for listening.