Should We Back Ron Paul?
by Robert Russo
A party that has not yet elected to national office at least has purity to pride in before their day in the sun, and the corruption that accompanies all successful platforms and candidates. All revolutionaries that come close to success are forced into the same catch-22, i.e. Northern Ireland could never decide as a nation to split from its parent country or not, one group will always make the tough choices to gain office while the other objects violently. We as a party have not yet had to face this situation. Dr. Paul did what he had to do to get libertarian values voiced in congress and the presidential debates, and no force on earth will make our party as a whole support or oppose a "stealth Republican" candidate. The more successful he is the bigger the split will be, so perhaps it's best that he is not among the frontrunners and has the option of running as a Lib after the primaries and truly lead the party.
Dr. Paul represents libertarianism in the House and in his party, he says the things no other congressman is willing to say, and for this he is treated the way we would expect congress to treat a libertarian. For this he certainly deserves our support. Would-be 2008 candidate Michael Badnarik relinquished his own bid in favor of Paul, an act of unprecedented political grace.* The trouble is a Libertarian-Republican alliance to beat the Democrats at any cost (after 8 years of Republican incumbency that put our nation into an imperial age Rep. Paul himself opposes?) will not only hurt the nation but our party won't get a fair deal out of it. It was out of necessity that Dr. Paul chose his political identity, not to pull all of us in with him. Our party will give up its ticket. On the one hand how can he ask this of us, and on the other how can we refuse? It is a lot to ask, trusting him as a libertarian to use whatever he gains to reciprocate as soon as he can. If you or I were in his shoes we would face the same gauntlet.
Besides being a libertarian what "Dr. No" has against him is face value. He is an older White congressman in his 10th term, which only puts him on even ground with perhaps Dick Gephardt or Joe Biden, not heavyweights like Clinton and Guiliani. Then there is the argument that he only represents the right and the erroneous equation of libertarians and republicans. His platform (albeit full of libertarian wisdom and conscience) is ultra-conservative and devoted to economic reform, as opposed to liberal/cultural leadership that doesn't seek fulfillment in the business world. Left-leaning libertarians have a slew of grievances with him such as his lack of foreign policy, considering him our most "marginal revolution" yet.
But being a lib is also his greatest strength. He is the voice for change in this year's election and has accomplished much for our cause already that no candidate on our own ticket has ever managed. There is certainly something to be said for infiltrating a major party with our ideas by any name, and as Badnarik says "vote for Ron Paul the person".* For more info on Dr. Paul's candidacy go to www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/ron-paul.html or www.ronpaul2008.com.
*http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/02/23/libertarian-badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/
Question of the Week: Do you agree that if Rep. Paul does not win the Republican nomination, he should run as a Libertarian so we will have a ticket? If he doesn't should we still support him? Send your thoughts to henrico@richmondliberty.org.
If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input!