Soul Searching

As any passersby of this blog well know, I have been under the influence of Ron Paul mania since May of this year. The reasons for this are simple. I have been an admirer of Dr. Paul's since I first saw him on a John Stossel ABC News special in early 2001. This was near the beginning of my discovery of the libertarian philosophy, and I was astounded to see that there was a congressman from Texas who advocated the same beautiful principles I had come to see as the truth and the way to a more just society. From that moment on I kept up with Congressman Paul's career via his articles and videos mainly by way of Lewrockwell.com.

Over the next few years my philosophy began to evolve into a more anarcho-capitalist, libertarian mixture, as is evident my choice of tagline for this blog. The most influential people that I give credit to for the evolution of my philosophy are the late Harry Browne and Lewellyn Rockwell Jr. Rockwell is the reason for my anarcho-capitalist leanings, while Browne is the reason I have still pursued change through politics.

Fast forward to May of 2007 when Ron Paul announced his candidacy for the presidency of the United States. I was as excited and hopeful as the next libertarian that finally one of "our guys" who had already broken inside the system would be invited to the nationally televised debates. Ron Paul would be able to exert his influence from within to "save us" from the fascist, statist barbarians who have enslaved humanity for the past several hundred years. This just seemed like the opportunity we had been waiting for. Some on the web have even likened Paul to Neo in the matrix. This is the idea that Paul is the manifestation of some sort of prophecy that will finally wake millions of Americans up to the state of slavery that they have come to live under largely without even realizing it.

It was especially interesting when the writers over at Lewrockwell.com seemed to be trumpeting Ron Paul's campaign as loudly as any other libertarian news outlet. The reason I thought this interesting was that I can remember a statement by Lew himself during an interview a few years ago that contradicts his current support of Paul. During this interview Lew had stated that he did not think that politics was the way to bring about change in the direction of liberty. Any follower of Lew's philosophy knows that he has advocated that you can not bring about change unless you win the battle in the marketplace of ideas, which is largely outside the political arena. Lewrockwell.com has even elected to change the tax exempt status of its organization in order that it may publish columns endorsing and opposing political candidates for office. So has Lew abandoned his philosophy for Ron Paul? Perhaps Lew feels, as many others including myself up to this point, that Paul is our last best hope for real political change.

As for the main point of my post today, I have to recognize that I have compromised some of my own principles in support of Ron Paul. The first thing that initially bothered me about his platform was his stand on border security. I understand that he has always taken the Constitutionalist point of view, which requires that he advocate enforcing the law in this area. My conflict is that I can not reconcile this point of view with the non-aggression principle. Illegal immigrants have not initiated the use of force against anyone simply by walking across an imaginary line drawn up by the state. They are guilty only of violating political law, not natural law. Nevertheless, I let this disagreement of philosophy slide, as I found it to be a nice selling tool when talking to Republicans about voting for Ron Paul in the primary. The disappointing affect was that even with this selling tool, border security, which as been dubbed a wedge issue by pundits in the media, I have seen less than optimal success when looking at the disappointing low percentage of Republican support for Paul.

So where does that leave my current position of support for the Ron Paul campaign? I would say it is now less enthusiastic than it was a few weeks ago. The money raised and the media attention has been great if not for the libertarian philosophy specifically, but definitely for the idea that it is well past time to put the brakes on government growth. But is this going to work? In the end, are we going to look back and see this as the tipping point for the real moral change of values in the populace? I keep telling myself that this is that time in our history when it may well happen, but there is another point of view out there that has given me my new found less than optomistic hope for the Ron Paul Revolution, at least so far as a catalyst for putting the brakes on government growth.

This person is Stefan Molyneux of Freedomainradio. In one of his recent podcasts, Molyneux put forth the argument that throughout America's political history, libertarians have been attempting to infiltrate the system and make changes. This has resulted in ever increasing government growth, no matter how promising it may have looked through the lens of the current period in history. I will not recite Molyneux's whole premise on this post, but readers who are interested are encouraged to visit his website and download his podcast number 927.

Readers may be thinking that this is not anything new and profound, and I will be the first one to admit that. The fundamental question is whether or not expending so much time and energy campaigning for Ron Paul is the most valuable use our time in advancing libertarian moral philosophy. Molyneux proposes that there is an easier way to achieve personal freedom in ones own life, and that it can be found with the use of two words. These words are "against me." When conversing with friends and discussing government subsidies, redistributions of wealth, and so forth, libertarians need to stop speaking of the use of the initiation of force in the abstracts and start talking personally. That is, it is a lot easier for people to say that they support certain government subsidies for certain purposes and certain groups, but it is much harder for them to look you in the eye and say that you should be shot if you disagree. The question that you must ask your friends is, "do you support the use of force against me." If they can look you in the eye and answer yes to this question, then you ought to have no problem knowing what to do with them in terms of your relationship. Once you have figured out who your real friends are via this fundamental question, you will have real personal freedom in your life no matter what state is doing. The further implication of this idea is that if every libertarian lived by this philosophy, that is to say if every libertarian practiced what he preached, our society would be free very quickly. As of this point in time not enough libertarians are willing to practice what they preach according to Molyneux.

So I am now a cross roads with myself in both my personal life and my involvement in the Ron Paul campaign. I have always understood the concept put forth by Molyneux in the preceding paragraph, but I have never applied to my own life and friendships. I have never truly practiced what I preach.

Is the Ron Paul Campaign Dangerous?

I have just finished reading J.B. Williams article, "Why The Ron Paul Campaign is Dangerous" over at gopusa.com, and I have a few comments.

I find his claim that there are virtually no real Conservatives supporting Paul to be way out of touch with reality. I come from a very Conservative upbringing, but sadly I have been politically homeless for the past several years due to reckless spending and what I have come to view as a dangerous foreign policy out of step with that advocated by the founders of our country. I have studied the history of the Republican party, and I have observed an abandonment of most of the core principles over the past 8 years. Ron Paul has brought me back into the Republican party, as he has done with countless others here in my own city who are now working with me to get Mr. Paul elected.

I concede Mr. Williams' point that many Democrats and Independents are jumping parties to support Paul, but shouldn't the Republican party be celebrating this. I thought that when large numbers of people switched parties for any reason that it was called growth, something the GOP has sadly seen little of recently. Paul represents a unique opportunity in our history to return to the true Conservative Republican values of self reliance and true self government. Not the kind of self government that Pres. Bush speaks about when he speaks of "liberating" third world countries and subsequently imposing his idea of self government on them by occupying them for seemingly the rest of time. When I see the now small remaining base of the Republican party refusing to embrace a candidate who has managed to persuade millions of of Americans of all political and social backgrounds that our current direction of more and bigger government is the wrong direction, I remember why I ceased supporting the GOP back in 2001.

Victory Delayed is Victory (and Honor) Denied

Victory Delayed is Victory (and Honor) Denied

by Brady Wright

In a recent debate in New Hampshire, former Governor Mike Huckabee told Congressman Ron Paul that bringing the troops home from Iraq now would be a dishonorable homecoming. But Gov. Huckabee did not explain when exactly our troops will have the honor of victory they so deserve.

Regardless of one's opinion of the Iraq War, the truth is that our brave men and women have completed every objective they have been given. Let us recall all they have done and then consider whether they have earned an honorable homecoming.

● They quickly and decisively defeated the military of Iraq in one of our nation's largest and fastest military victories. Yet we are told they cannot come home with honor.

● They were asked to depose the brutal despot Saddam and they achieved that objective within days. Yet they cannot come home with honor?

● They were then asked to track down Saddam and his flunkies so that they could be brought to justice. Done.

● They were then told that we needed only to set up an Iraqi government to take the place of the one we had toppled. Mission accomplished.

● They were told that they needed to stay until democratic elections could be held in Iraq. Objective achieved.

All of these goals were met some time ago, and still our brave men and women are told they cannot come home with the honor they have most assuredly earned for themselves. It is an egregious affront to the service and valor of our fighting men and women that they are told that after all they have fought for, after all they have achieved, after all the battles they have won, that their coming home would be dishonorable.

Yes, there are still some who oppose us in and around Iraq, but this is a fact that is not likely to change no matter how long or hard we fight in the region. For example, Israel has been established for almost sixty years and has not yet exhausted the region of those who oppose her.

The war in Iraq has long since been won and it has been our mistake not to declare this victory. It is therefore time for us to openly declare the victory that our troops have won time and again. Every day we let go by without this declaration cheats them of their hard-won victory. Let us stop moving the goal posts, because victory delayed is victory – and honor – denied

Ron Paul Donation Pledge

Someone has started a nice little pledge that gives everyone a chance to give Ron Paul a nice birthday gift this August. The pledger states, "I will donate $500 to the Ron Paul presidential campaign fund, but only if 200 liberty loving people will donate at least $20 to the Ron Paul presidential campaign." If this pledge is successfull then we will have raised at least $4,500 for Dr. Paul's campaign.

As of this writing, 41 more pledges are still needed to hit our target goal of 200 people. The pledge closes on August 20th, so I strongly encourage all patriots reading this blog to contribute to the pledge if you can. The cause of more freedom and less government is within our grasp, but Ron Paul needs to be able to get his message out. The crucial Iowa straw poll is coming up this weekend, and it would be nice if we could keep Ron's campaign going strong throughout.

Viva La Resistance!

The arrogance of some

So I recently received an email from someone who I usually respect for her strong opinions and stimulating conversation. The message I received today just about made my head explode. Here is a copy of the email message I received in response to an email I had sent in reference to the recent Ron Paul NPR inteveiw.

You know, this guy (Ron Paul) is a big time loser!! Popular on the Internet? Who cares? A Democrat, a Libertarian, a Republican, then a Libertarian, and now a republican again...Yikes, too many stripes for one suit to wear. Can you envision this guy in 1943 with any voice at all? " No Hitler is fine, let's just leave him alone, he won't invade more than 5 or 6 countries." It's people like this that wouldn't care if you spoke German or Japanese today, just so long as we don't "rock the boat".

He needs to wake up and realize that America is the greatest country on earth for all times. We are the envy of the entire world and we have a moral responsibility to the rest of the world not to let Hitler, Aminadinajad,
Hussein, or any other nut case enslave any part of the planet. We are not the aggressor in any sense of the word, in the past or now. We need someone who can lead this nation with courage, and if Ron Paul has any courage in him I just don't see it. I think he talks big, but would don a sheik robe and a turban to keep from upsetting the world. It's time for us to stop making excuses and say we are not the problem, we are the answer that the world is seeking...And I will never apologize for this great nation. I hope he get's some balls, (pardon me) if only for your sake.
Love U,

Of-course I had to respond to this nonsense as it can not be allowed to linger un-answered. The following is what I had to say. I wonder what my readers would have said differently?

Ron Paul was never a democrat. He ran for the libertarian nomination for president over 20 years ago, but he has always served in congress as a Republican. One really can't accuse him of any flip flopping on the issues like one can with the other candidate such as Rudy like he has on gun control. Ron Paul's position on foreign policy and any other issue has been more consistent over the past 30 years than any other candidate's position. He is as principled as they come, and he does not spew vicious rhetoric and make exagerated claims like most politicians do just to get votes.

As for his foreign policy positions, he is of the old right's belief that we should stay out of the internal affairs of other nations and not attack unless we are first attacked. Americans today are waking up to this notion as they have seen the problems when we violate the Christian doctrine of a just war. I'm speaking of the neocons plans for more Iraq style invasions of pre-emptive wars that arguably make us less safe from terrorism as they provide the fuel for al-qaeda recruiters around the world. The 911 commission report supports this argument. Ron Paul is not suggesting that we apologize for being who we are, but he is suggesting that there are consequences to our actions. A notion of personal responsibility that most in Washington would not recognize if it bit them in the behind. I might add that Ron Paul is the only candidate advocating a strict defense of our borders here at home. I saw on the news the other day that President Bush recently removed many of our National Guard troops from the Mexican border. Why would he do that? Why would anyone vote for someone who is going to get into office and give us more of the that kind of nonesense. Do you know about the FTAA, or any other number of groups seeking to unite the U.S., Mexico, and Canada like the European Union. They want us to have one currency and call it the Amero. I believe that Bush would not stand in the way of that from happening as is evidenced by his stance on our borders. I signed a petition several years ago asking Bush to add the phrase, "sovereign and independent" to our pledge of allegiance, and we got no support from him. If there ever was a candidate who believed in protecting the sovereignty of our great nation, that candidate is Ron Paul. He would protect our borders as the president should. A Ron Paul adminstration would end the flow of illegal tresspassers over our border with Mexico.

Ron Paul has said that we have a lot of goodness in this country and we need to promote it around the world, but not with the barrel of a gun. It seems that there is an element within the Republican party these days that has managed to convince many good people that as long as we are fighting terrorism abroad that is is perfectly fine for the government to run roughshod over our economic and personal liberties here at home. This really must stop!

If the only difference between republicans and democrats is the war on terror, which is a small difference in fact, then where will we be in ten our twenty years? We can keep on believing that we are free while we work until mid July, and beyond as the years go by, just to pay taxes to fund government so that it can continue intruding on our liberties. Ron Paul wants real freedom here at home, and this can only be achieved when we decide what the role of govenment ought to be. If you think the government should support us from cradle to grave, while taxing us to no end to pay for it, then go ahead keep supporting the establishment Republicans who will not change a thing in Washington. Just make sure that you do it with a clear conscience.

Brewrunner

I sit here wondering how many others are up against this arrogant point of view from their own close friends and family members.

Ron Paul on Real Time

One week after calling Ron Paul his new hero, Bill Maher invites Ron Paul back on Real Time to discuss his growing popularity for his non-interventionist position on foreign policy. The audience seemed to go crazy for Ron, causing Bill Maher to comment that that was the most applause his audience has ever given to a Republican. The icing came towards the end of the interview when Ron threw in a nice little jab back at Rudy for his lack of understanding of the unintended consequences of decades of intervening in the foreign affairs of other nations.

Bill Maher on Ron Paul: "He is my New Hero"

So I just finished watching last Fridays rerun of Real Time on HBO, and was pleasantly surprised to hear Bill Maher defending Ron Paul's comments at the last Republican debate on Fox.

Maher was interviewing Chris Dodd (D-CT) at the beginning of the show when he made his comments about a man running for the Republican nomination named Ron Paul who has no chance of winning and can therefore speak the truth. He posed Paul's argument about America's foreign policy of interventionism that has served to drastically irritate much of the mid-east to a point where a 9-11 type attack became imminent. Dodd first disagreed on the grounds that he did not believe that 9-11 was a provoked attack, but host Maher quickly interjected by not allowing Dodd to in Maher's words, "do what the Republican's did to Paul." Maher told Dodd that Paul's words had been twisted. He explained that Paul's point was not to say that we were asking for the attack, but that we intervened to a point where someone was eventually going to respond.

Towards the end of the show Maher put together a stringed clip of the candidate's statements on the war on terror. Each candidate from Romney and Giuliani to McCain and on down the line repeatedly called for more use of torture to fight the war on terror. Romney actually suggested doubling the size of Guantanamo Bay. The clip ended with Ron Paul speaking of the Republican Party's tradition of being anti-war in the past. This was followed by the sound of crickets and dumb "dear in the headlights" looks on all of the other candidates faces.

After I finished writing this post, I noticed that Titanium Girl has posted the video clip from Real Time on her blog Titanium Thoughts. Check it out.

I'm Back

After a long hiatus from this blog, I have finally come back to this space where I can enjoy advocating my random anti-state pontifications.

So much has happened over the past few months that I don't know where to begin. I suppose the most exciting news of the past few weeks has been Ron Paul's recent frenzy of media publicity. I haven't been this excited about someone running for a political party nomination since, wait - never have I been this excited about anything happening within the realm of politics.

Ron Paul's presence at the GOP debate was absolutely remarkable. I could not believe I was watching someone of Paul's consistent, hard hitting libertarian ideology actually espousing his views upon the stage at the Reagan library on a nationally televised debate. Good times.

Ron Paul has been able to capitalize off of the internet in a big way in 2007. He must have mobilized and army of hardcore activists, as is evidenced by his placing first or second in most of the major media "Who won the GOP debate" polls. I was stunned by the results of many of those polls.

I only wish like the editors of Reason magazine do that it would be nice to live in a world where Ron Paul could actually win. I believe that for now, candidates like Ron Paul mainly serve as a stabilizing factor to keep the other Republican candidates from falling too far to away from small government libertarian principles. One of my favorite parts from the debate happened when host Chris Matthews asked the panel if they supported or opposed a national ID card for Americans. Almost all of them said that they supported it, until Ron Paul explained that a national ID card was inconsistent with a free society. He went on to place the proper role of government to protecting the privacy of the people, not protecting the privacy of government. At this point McCain and Giuliani had to backtrack and stumble around explaining that they only supported if for foreigners, not Americans. I loved it.

To those few who actually read my blog, I'm sorry to have fallen off the face of the earth for so long. I look forward to continuing this blog and interacting with others once again.