ABOUT TOM WOODS

Thomas E. Woods, Jr., is the New York Times bestselling author of 11 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and Meltdown (on the financial crisis). A senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Woods has appeared on MSNBC, CNBC, FOX News, FOX Business, C-SPAN, Bloomberg Television, and hundreds of radio programs... (Read More)



The Tom Woods App


Smackdown of Salon Attack on Ron Paul

30th November 2011      by: Tom Woods     

My latest video. Once in a while a longer video is necessary. Hope this one gives you some good ammunition!

Unlearn the Propaganda!

  • Thomas Small

    Hi Tom, love your videos! Just wanted to check, though. Isn’t it true that Germany was the most technologically innovative country in the world throughout the last fifty years of the 19th century and well into the 20th?

  • Anonymous

    This is one of the many reasons Tom Woods is totally awesome. These smack-downs are epic. Keep up the good work!

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    Here’s Kealey, part of whose point is that the popular linkage of science funding with national prosperity is misplaced, on Germany:”The German government’s subsidy of research and development has often been adduced as a contributor to Germany’s economic miracle, but where is this miracle? Germany’s economic growth since 1870 has merely fitted the predictable curve, given its initial poverty. Because Germany overtook Britain, economically, during the 1960s, people often suppose that Germany’s superiority is of long standing, and they make the usual misleading comments. Consider this statement by Margaret Gowing, the Professor of the History of Science at Oxford University: ‘Britain, hithero industrially supreme, had been very obviously outclassed in the Paris international exhibition of 1972, most notably by Germany.’ And, being typical, it is a typically incorrect statement. As late as 1914, Germany only enjoyed 75 percent of the level of industrialization of Britain. In consequence, germany only enjoyed 75 percent of Britain’s wealth as determined by GDP per capita. This was one reason it lost the Great War.”

    He goes on to discuss German poverty and mass emigration in the ninetenth century, and writes: “The germans were so poor partly because they were taxed so crushingly to pay for their famous universities, technology, metallurgy and chemicals. germans actually and literally starved; the dirigiste economy frustrated agricultural development to foster industrialization, and a series of terrible harvests from 1845 precipitated mass malnutrition and death.”

    And then: “Most governemnts started to fund civil R&D in imitation of the Germans, and few governments seem to understand that (i) the rise in the German economy was unremarkable, and largely an exercise in catching up, and (ii) throughout the period of German militarism that so scared other governemnts into imitation, Germany was actually a poorish country — certainly poorer than thelaissez faire USA or the laissez faire UK of the day.”

  • SRG

    Here’s a link to the Salon article Woods is talking about in the video (in case you want to read it before you view the video):

    http://politics.salon.com/2011/11/29/ron_pauls_phony_populism/

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=725305302 Jake Barnett

    I really expect no less from Salon.  They have the same lack of imagination that make Pravda back issues such a hoot to read. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ken-MacMillan/683031628 Ken MacMillan

    Is this accurate?

    Obama Issues Ron Paul “Kill Order” As Russia Prepares For Warhttp://www.eutimes.net/2011/11/obama-issues-ron-paul-kill-order-as-russia-prepares-for-war/

  • Jinlv

    Helping others, builds compassion and empathy in people, it is  part of the human experience and letting the government do it for us, robs us of this growth and causes people to become more self centered and selfish. 

  • Jinlv

    No the source is Sorcha Faal

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ken-MacMillan/683031628 Ken MacMillan

    Never mind this post, Judge Napolitano shot this down in under a minute. It’s just propaganda but it shows what people around the world are saying.

  • Frank M

    This video is very useful as a primer for those who still know little about the Ron Paul Revolution. I’ve already sent the Youtube link to scores of people.

    The biggest obstacle I still face in enlightening people is the Ron Paul foreign policy. “But (enter neocon radio talk show host of you choice) says the evil Islamists will kill us all!”  

  • SRG

    The only way I can make sense of this is to assume the date “1972″ concerning the ‘Paris international exhibition of 1972′ is a typo and, given the context, I’m guessing it should be “1872″, is that right?

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    Fixed, and thank you.

  • Naterino

    Can someone direct me to the resource page that Tom is talking about?  Lots of interesting stuff covered in this video, thanks Dr. Woods!

  • http://twitter.com/Conservative_76 Bob

    People are resilient. They don’t need the federal government to solve all of their problems. When people are left alone to freely associate and trade, good things have and will continue to happen. Government should, for the most part, stay out of the people’s way. Ron Paul understands this better than most. He trusts the people over government to solve society’s ills. Call that populism if you want, I just call it common sense.

    As for the Salon piece, I thought it was unoriginal, weak and flat out wrong as Tom Woods articulates in the video above.

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    At the end of the video I give the url and it appears on the screen: http://tomwoods.com/salon

  • Naterino

    Excellent, thanks – I’m still watching the video and digesting bit by bit.

  • jen

    tom,

    great replies.  myths that wise wrote are wide-spread.  i think these myths will continue until a detailed alterior plan versus high-level message is presented and the core reasons researched on why people say these things about paul in the first place:

    a.  what is wrong w/ departments and fed, etc… is something that the paul revolution has succeeding in.  however, what they want to hear is a Transition Plan and Solutions for Replacement.  and, people who use rp’s work like romney do not give him credit for it and run off with it and hence gain votes away from paul.  that will continue to happen until we put our foot down and stop the “theft” so to speak and take credit for the age of ron paul.  that way, people better know the difference b/w libertarianism and establishment/status quo. 

    educating the masses w/ specifics will help get votes versus sticking to broad message only as that message is already out and not much sense in rehashing the same words, but refreshing that message and adding in specifics that will answer questions without leaving holes for myths.

    for example, the concept of churches and local governments and whoeverelse at the local level doing whatever they want sounds freaky all at once and invokes the thought of anarchy.  hence, the myth that libertarianism will result in somalia like anarchy with people running around wild and writing their own rules. 
    this is also where the myth that paul is radical comes from – the idea that all this cutting will happen all at once and shock the system.  this myth is from how paul presents his plan by just saying he will cut 5 departments.  instead, he should state that corp subsidies and crony capitalism will be removed and it is nonproductive jobs that will be cut which will be absorbed by private sector jobs and necessary functions will be consolidated into other dept.

    b.  these 5 dept, etc.. have both good and bad elements.  by saying cut, it appears paul is saying the few positive elements will be eliminated as well and people have to deal with it on their own.  this is where the transition plan and replacement solutions come into play to put an end to myths.  paul has a great restore america plan, but it has not been marketed and explained well and hence not gained more rp votes.

    c.  rp supporters trust paul will transition programs out well, but rp needs to have a revised marketing and strategy to gain that trust in other voters.  perhaps this is where non-official campaigns like revolutionpac comes into play verus being more about spreading pauls’ message rather than explaining it in a different way so that it seeps into the masses.

    d.  being opposed to tarp has not gained too many votes.  first of all, voters are almost as hypocritical as the politicians they repeatedly vote into office.  so, voter mentality is difficult to change and educating voters on how to vote and how to discern is necessary.  as voters focus on which politicians have soundbites that cater to their short-term emotions, paul’s appeal is not as widespread as it should be.

    if a group of rp supporters could personally hand RP these soundbites and tell him why and how to use it, i am certain that paul would use it and his polls would rise quickly.

    tell voters that if they are against tarp, why vote for a politician who will disappoint again with doing more tarps.  of course, they will do more bailouts and much of it in secrecy as the world financial system is weaker than 3 yrs ago and hence these politicians will be bailouts again and again as their track records prove.  voters do not understand the future ramfications on them and the economy if they elect politicians who are in favor for tarp.  hence, romney/newt/cain gained traction even while favoring tarp.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ken-MacMillan/683031628 Ken MacMillan

    I fell for it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Zebram-Zee/100002539017006 Zebram Zee

    this is all good stuff, but how come none of our popular speakers ever mention any of these kinds of things?  like, whenever i listen to ron paul or judge napolitano, i never hear them mention any of these historical data and analysis like i hear you and dilorenzo say. 

  • Lou Bjostad

    Because Tom Woods is a historian.  You get good at what you do.

  • Lou Bjostad

    Andrew Napolitano reported recently that the Fed secretly transfered $7.7 trillion to banks late in 2008, making the $700 billion dollar TARP bailout look puny by comparison:
    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1301578958001/bringing-the-war-of-terror-home/?playlist_id=158146

    I have to add, Jen, that I personally think there is nothing good at all that will be lost by eliminating the 5 departments Ron Paul has on his laundry list.  As Bastiat and Hazlitt both taught us, we need to pay attention to what is not seen just as intently as we pay attention to what is seen.  Those 5 departments survive entirely on malinvestments, the diversion of resources that would otherwise have been used far more wisely by the capitalist-entrepreneurs who were compelled to give them up to the government sector.  Those lost resources lead straight to our 9.0% unemployment rate (that’s the BLS U3 number — Bill Barnett reminds us that the U6 number is 18%, and John Williams at Shadow Stats estimates closer to 20%).

  • jen

    True that these 5 departments cause more harm than good.  However:

    1.   i know dept of commerce puts out statistics like GDP data, etc.. that most businesses and economists use.  so, some of these departments do a bit of good that should be kept in-house.
    a high-level transition and replacement plan is still needed.  for example, states and local governments and churches need time to ramp up if they are to be responsible for education.  they need their plans and goals and individual state agendas, etc…  also, i do believe there is some good in having a couple of functions of educations at the federal level.  for example, what is a  local government goes bankrupt or its credit downgraded such that their politicians cut education, etc…  what about islam charter schools that have been proven to teach hate?  how would universities view education from a church versus an islam charter school (it could be a madrassas) versus a rural school versus a military school, etc…  the idea behind competition for school is a needed one as students have become indoctrined with what the centralization of washington and executive branch wants them to learn.  instead of cutting all right away, there needs to be a well-managed and planned transition to ensure things go smoothly.  as paul said of the federal reserve this year that ending it immediately would be just as volatile as keeping it in place, so he would “transiton the fed out”.
    what would america’s educational system look like w/out dept of education?  even as a rp supporter, i can’t envision the new educational system.  having hundreds of different groups may result in chaos.  a better education has great potential by eliminating the overreach of dept of education, but it can also cause greater chaos if managed poorly.
    a transition plan would first eliminate the areas of overreach first within  1 to 3 years and then one by one other programs  under education would be reviewed and either consolidated or removed or put with other departments – that is how i would roughly phrase it if i were a politician.
    2.  research needs to be done on why people are opposed to removal of department of education and those fears should be addressed.  other than some conservatives, anti-war left wingers would move away from paul if they do not understand this elimination or are comfortable with its replacement.  i don’t know what their qualms are, but it should be looked into prior to further marketing of the restore america plan.
    3.  other than revealing parts of the restore america plan, its marketing needs to compare his plan to what romney offers in terms of his plan and track record for coming thru as a small government advocate.  voters do not have the ability to discern, so ads needs to do that for them, otherwise a plan to them is no different from any other plan.

    ________________________________
    From: Disqus
    To: t.sha55@yahoo.com
    Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 7:44 PM
    Subject: [tomwoods] Re: Smackdown of Salon Attack on Ron Paul

    Disqus generic email template

    Lou Bjostad (unregistered) wrote, in response to jen: Andrew Napolitano reported recently that the Fed secretly transfered $7.7 trillion to banks late in 2008, making the $700 billion dollar TARP bailout look puny by comparison:
    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1301578958001/bringing-the-war-of-terror-home/?playlist_id=158146

    I have to add, Jen, that I personally think there is nothing good at all that will be lost by eliminating the 5 departments Ron Paul has on his laundry list.  As Bastiat and Hazlitt both taught us, we need to pay attention to what is not seen just as intently as we pay attention to what is seen.  Those 5 departments survive entirely on malinvestments, the diversion of resources that would otherwise have been used far more wisely by the capitalist-entrepreneurs who were compelled to give them up to the government sector.  Those lost resources lead straight to our 9.0% unemployment rate (that’s the BLS U3 number — Bill Barnett reminds us that the U6 number is 18%, and John Williams at Shadow Stats estimates closer to 20%). Link to comment

  • http://twitter.com/shoregrassnorm Norman Shafer

    So much to learn from Tom Woods. I even learned more about Ron Paul.

  • johnl

    Tom is there a text version if this presentation? I’ve been friends with Gary for years. He does great writing on corporate governance. The Paul piece was awful. I suspect the Rand bio was awful too but i haven’t read it yet. I’ll send your points back to him, if I can read them. 

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    John, thank you. Unfortunately not. I made the video because I didn’t have time to write an article.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tim-Malone/100002475802402 Tim Malone

    Tom, you may already do it and I’m unaware of it, but is the audio of these videos on itunes so I can download it as a podcast? 

  • NJDave

    How can we get Tom on the Daily Show? He’s like kryptonite for intellectually lazy progressives.

  • johnl

    I have no time for videos. My ears are for dealing with my family, my boss, or listening to music. Mostly, pretty girls who play guitar. So if you can’t bother to make a text version of your presentation, or hire Nouvelle Vague to make a sonic version, then I’ll talk to Gary about my own points without any input from you. 

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    That seems like a sensible tone to take with a guy who has four little children and a crushing load of professional obligations. I can’t “bother” to transcribe my YouTube because I am focused on those trivial things. I do have 11 books and hundreds of articles, so it’s not as if one needs to hire a private detective to uncover my views.

  • SRG

    Hi, JohnL

    Seriously, can you please link to some of Gary’s writings on corporate governance that you find ‘great?’  I’d like to read something else from this author out of curiosity.

    Maybe Gary had a bad day but, frankly, it’s hard to believe Gary regularly produces “great” work on any topic after reading this drivel.

    In sum, Gary can’t figure out Ron Paul.  He might as well have written,  “On some issues he agrees with me and on some issues he doesn’t.  What’s going on?”   What’s going on is, once again, obvious to me:  Gary fails to understand that Ron Paul’s positions are ALL based on his reading of the Constitution.  

    If you’re going to write a piece about RP, you have to do SOME research before you put paper to pen, at least if you’re going to crank out a decent (let alone “great”) work.  He may be your friend and he may be a great guy but this article is a childish POS.  Ask your friend to reconsider RP in light of this thesis:

    Ron Paul’s policies are based on his reading of all the words of the Constitution and his attempt to give meaning to the Constitution as it was intended when it was ratified.  

    Tell your friend the only way to write a “great” article that is critical of Ron Paul’s policies is to take one or more of his policies, do your research and show how RP’s policy is contrary to the words or the Constitution.  Good luck with that one…

  • jon thompson

    Just saw this video… Tom, you are a shining light. Thank you. Are you on Google+?

  • Brownsanta3

    Excellent & well spoken information, Mr. Woods. Thanks you

  • Javier

    Excellent video as usual. Just one question. I guess Im not as computer savvy as others. But each time you create a resource page how do you get to it from within the site?

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    No, the fault is mine. I don’t have a central location for the resource pages. People have been asking for that, though.



Find me on Google