A response to the Ronulans
by DaToolGuy
However, tonight I just have to respond to a few things.
Yesterday I wrote a piece explaining my serious misgivings with one Dr. Ron Paul.
Predictably the Ronulans came out of the woodwork to savage me for daring to utter the truth about their candidate.
First, to those who told me I’m not really a libertarian. I suppose you may be right, if you mean “capital L, really an anarchist, all government is bad” libertarian.
No, I’m not that guy. Nor do I think we should legalize all drugs tomorrow. And while I dislike interventionism, neither do I think a robust foreign policy is a bad thing.
No, I’m a civil libertarian. I believe strongly in the constitution and it’s protections. I am a federalist as well. Most things should be left to the states.
I’m not a fan of the National Defense Authorization Act. I don’t like this president, or any other, having the power to detain Americans indefinitely without trial, unless of course they’re taken in arms against the United States. This is known as treason and all bets are off at that point.
So far as the Fed goes, you’re right, I’m not for auditing it — I think it should be eliminated. Along with the Department of Education, Health and Human Services and I could probably come up with a dozen more without having to think very hard.
I’m on record, repeatedly, saying the problem isn’t revenue, it’s spending.
And yes, Virginia, Ron Paul is a truther and an anti-semite and even should his assertions that he didn’t know what was in the newsletters, which were published under his name, be true it would still disqualify him — or any other candidate in the same position — in my mind, because it shows an appalling incompetence to allow such things to be printed in your name without your permission.
To Andrew, specifically. Your statistics on defense are accurate enough, however you pull exactly the wrong conclusions from them.
First, yes those bases are their for offense. The military plans for what it needs to counter attack in the event of war in those regions. One does not win wars simply defending territory. Sorry, we have to be able to respond to threats globally. That means bases in other places besides our territory.
Moreover, we find ourselves in a position I generally wish we were not — that of empire, hegemony, whatever you wish to call it — we are the preeminent power in the world. To back away from that and withdraw into isolationism — which is what Paul proposes — is a sure route to national suicide and to world destabilization as Russia and China fight to fill the power vacuum created.
So, no, I suppose by the lights of Ron Paul supporters, I’m not a libertarian. Their form of libertarianism is far too close to anarchy for my tastes. A classic libertarian however, the kind which believes we should have no more government than necessary, but no less either – that I am.
DaToolGuy in another incarnation is nationally-known blogger Patrick Richardson, contributor to PJMedia and editor at the Otherwhere Gazette. He’s also a world-champion pragmatist who tries to look at the world from the standpoint of what actually works.
Maybe you can back up your claims with fact. How many pages were published in Ron Paul’s newsletters? How many of those pages contained racist statements? I’m guessing something like 10/5000. Do you think he’s going to check every single page being printed while he’s doing medical work 40-80 hours a week giving patients free treatment?
You can only push this whole newsletter thing so far. Just because some people are willing to look the other way, shouldn’t enrage you into automatically being devil’s advocate. You seem to fixate on the idea he actually said it, believed it, and lives by it, leaving no room for alternatives.
This is where I think you take it as a matter of personal opinion, rather than understanding it’s something that we can’t know. The only way we can look at it is… Does he make those remarks in his life? Does he encourage anything outside of those writings to back this up? No. If he did, you would’ve heard it by now.
Just know, while you’re still thinking about those Newsletters, he’ll be working hard to free thousands of non-violent drug offenders from prisons of all races, and also give more regional authority and voice to minorities and their religions as well. While intending fully to do it. Meanwhile, you’ll still be talking about the newsletters. Get with the times. Ron Paul is about the future, not the past. Maybe that’s where you truly both disagree.
Reply
If Paul’s foreign policy is one of isolationism then so is Canada’s, Mexico’s, Italy’s, Japan’s, etc. I fail to see how dealing with foreign problems with diplomacy and trade can be on par with sticking one’s head in the sand and pretending that everything will just magically go right. Under Paul’s foreign policy the US would have it’s military budget cut down to….wait for it…. STILL the largest in the entire world. University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape has studied the reasons for suicide terrorism and has concluded that since 1980, the motivation behind such attacks is over 95% due to foreign occupation. Even if this number was only 50%, I would ask any other candidate how their plan would deal with half the problem if none have offered to withdraw any of our occupying forces.
Reply
If you are a “civil libertarian” and your not voting for Paul, then who you voting for? Paul nails pretty much every thing you stated on the head. You a Romney guy huh? No? How bought Santorum? BTW a real journalist did a little investigating…you know the most important part of a journalist’s jobs, and he found who wrote those articles, and Paul wasn’t the editor either. Still, he has to take the responisibility for not looking at them before they went out, but I forgive him. Things were different back then, no computers. Anyway, google “ben swann Reality Check Ron Paul” and you will find who wrote them. Also, it is pretty lame when you throw around “anti-semite.” An anti semite hates jewish people. Paul doesn’t hate anyone. I don’t know how any “civil libertarian” could be bashing Paul like you. Leaves me at the conclusion that you are a neo-conservative who likes the idea of libertarianism. Good Luck with Romney.
Reply
DaToolGuy, fear not. 99% of these people claiming you are “not a libertarian,” are total newbies to our libertarian movement. They came on board in maybe 2007/08, mostly from the left. They think they’re “libertarians,” cause they dig Ron Paul and watch Jon Stewart’s Daily Show, and smoke a lot of Pot.
I’ve been in the libertarian movement since the early to mid-1980s. Served on the Libertarian National Committee way back in 1985/86. Back then our movement was much more pro-defense, and Reaganite on foreign policy. We weren’t dominated by isolationist, girlie-manish pacifists, fight now war ever leftists like we are now.
As a longtime libertarian I hereby christen thee a LIBERTARIAN. Welcome to our movement. You’re far more libertarian than these Paul-bots will ever be.
Eric Dondero, Publisher
LibertarianRepublican.net
Reply
Patrick Richardson Reply:
January 7th, 2012 at 14:20
Thank you Eric, like you I’ve been a libertarian for a long, long time. Was, in fact, a registered libertarian for about 10 years back in the 90s before breaking with the party over drug policy and foreign policy.
It has been my experience that most people calling themselves libertarians are merely anarchists who want to be allowed to smoke as much pot as they can.
Few of them truly understand the implications of Classical, Constitutional, Libertarianism. Very few understand realpolitik either. We have to let a little hard-headed pragmatism in our thinking or we’ll get no where.
Reply
[...] DBKP: A response to the Ronulans [...]
Thanks for the article. For info on people using voluntary Libertarian tools on similar and other issues, please see http://?www.LibertarianInternation?al.org , the non-partisan Libertarian International Organization
Reply