Transcript Of What Ron Paul Hater Barry Germansky Said – Refuted
Barry Germansky is one of those young “liberals” who has an idea, an original one, no less, of how society should be ordered. He will deny it, probably because he has no ideas what these terms describe, but he is a technocrat, a legal positivist, a utopian, a totalitarian, a nihilist, a Canadian, and a socialist. I do not make these charges lightly, as I have had many conversations with him and am familiar with the terms. He is also a self-appointed film critic and philosopher. He posted a video on youtube that was some fifteen or twenty minutes long. I only transcribed and refuted the first three or four minutes, which, in addition to other information, are below. In my next, hopefully, nine posts, I will press my refutations of the transcriptions.
The title of the video:
“Ron and Rand Paul are Wrong.”
The description of the video:
“The Pauls use free market libertarianism in totalitarian fashion.”
What he said in the first three minutes and forty-four seconds of the video:
“They need to be navigated using their own rhetoric and their own sector specific terminology.
















An Open Challenge to Barry Germansky
“He is a technocrat, a legal positivist, a utopian, a totalitarian, a nihilist, a Canadian, and a socialist.”
I stand by those words.
He’s denied the label technocrat already, and I suppose that’s not what he “is”, its just a likely outcome of some of his ideas. It is worth noting that experts should certainly govern their own fields and fields have their own terminology and their own rules. It does not follow, however that their is a strict separation from the other sectors, spheres, and fields, nor that the rules and terminologies by which they are governed are wholly, or even mostly unrelated to those that govern other sectors, spheres, and fields.
Legal Positivism is the best description and the easiest to prove besides Canadian.
Utopianism and Totalitarianism are not really a subjective terms, but I suppose there are nuances.
Nihilism is the hardest charge to make stick, so I am willing to modify it to moral relativism, but that aspect of things is not my primary focus.
Canadian was sort of a nationalistic dig on my part, but I don’t harbor any ill-will towards my brethren to the North, I just like to give them a hard time.
And Socialist, much like technocrat, is not necessarily what he portends to be, but just another outcome of his political philosophy.
I’ve noticed an uptick in the hits on this piece, as well as related posts, and have been paying attention to the search terms. I really hope Barry drops by one of these days and attempts to refute an attempted refutation. I do always enjoy picking his brain and honing my skills. Barry has been one of my better whetstones. It’s nothing personal of course, he has just been one of the most willing to engage and I welcome and encourage that. So if it Barry himself stopping by, I ask him to stay a while and unload his thoughts. Or if it is someone who knows Barry, I ask you to pass this challenge along. We could discuss a few things. It doesn’t have to be Ron Paul, the election is over.
Regardless of whether he accepts this challenge or not, and I won’t judge his actions one way or the other, I want him to know I still have a few more things to say to him, as promised. Look for them in the coming days and weeks.
WHOA! WHAT! LOL! Is this guy actually a respected political commentator?! They don’t want you to read the Constitution? LOLOLOLOL WHAT!!! Ron Paul’s the reason I ever even opened mine!
Economics are definitely important to the Pauls but I would hardly call it a one and only interest. Is that why Rand is the one and only floor contestor of the NDAA now, because of its -economic- impact? Their issues are with overstep of Federal government, abuse of power, violation of State’s rights, violation of individual liberty. They may attack it from the point of view of economics but saying a window-cleaner who uses 409 is just a 409 salesman misses the elbow grease and motivation to see clearly.
Man I wouldn’t even bother your prowess on that guy, whoever he is. I seriously have yet to see any successful anti-Paulian arguments, is this the best they’ve got? :P
As far as ever engaging him, I think its a waste. I mean the guy blocks people on youtube for saying his videos suck (the one’s I’ve seen certainly do), he takes down videos he posted that come to embarrass him, etc.
But as far as refuting his arguments, which are nothing if not common across the anti-Paul left and right, I feel it is worthwhile.
Besides, he requested that I post something of his, which I did, and I also promised that I would address his arguments. I must be true to my word. It doesn’t hurt that its is fun smashing his arguments to oblivion.
But cut him some slack. Being a Canadian (I love Canadians, so nothing to see here), he’s not as attuned to American politics as you and I are.