Thread: Ron Paul roundup

Ron Paul roundup
10 Jan 2008

Glen Whitman highlights a problem that was part of what I was trying to get at when I declined to cast a protest vote for Ron Paul:

Given the relative rarity of libertarians, both in the public eye and in general, most people’s judgment of libertarianism will be based on a very small sample – often a sample size of one. If the first libertarian someone meets is a smart, reasonable, decent person, they will come away with a positive impression and possibly a willingness to explore further. If the first libertarian someone meets is a wild-eyed lunatic, on the other hand, they could easily write off libertarianism as the ideology of wild-eyed lunatics.
The Paul candidacy presents a special case of the small-sample problem. For many people, Ron Paul is the first and only libertarian-identified candidate they’ve ever seen receive any serious media attention. As a result, they may assume other libertarians share all of his views. Many libertarians, including Kling, are wary of supporting Paul – even though they probably agree more with Paul than anyone else in the field – because they fear the public will assume that all libertarians are anti-immigrant gold-bug conspiracy theorists (and possible closet racists).

Meanwhile, Ross Douthat sums up roughly my suspicions about Ron Paul's racial attitudes:

You know, I half-believe Ron Paul when he says that he is not a bigot or a racist or an anti-Semite. I half-believe him in when he says the inflammatory material that James Kirchick has uncovered in years and years of newsletters and pamphlets with his name on them was written by others without his supervision or direct permission. But what I'm nearly sure of is that he doesn't really care that much if some of the people around him are racists - not because he shares their opinions, but because he thinks those opinions aren't all that important in the grand scheme of things.
This doesn't make Ron Paul a terrible person; it just makes him human. He believes in a constellation of ideas - some of them nutty, but some of them not - that have been shunted to the fringe of American political life. And people who find themselves in that position tend to be far, far more forgiving of their allies' various tics and idiosyncracies and yes, bigotries than would otherwise be the case. It's unfortunate, but it's also human nature: If someone agrees with you and supports you when the whole world seems to be against you, of course you'll be more likely to look past their tendency to suggest that Mossad was behind the 1993 WTC bombing, or their fondness for pre-apartheid South Africa. When you're way out there on the fringe, without any obvious way to reach the mainstream, it's very easy to tell yourself that your dubious friends aren't really all that bad - and that besides, if you ever start finding your way back to the mainstream, it won't be all that hard to jettison them along the way. It's easy, as well, to start making excuses for them: If the mainstream accuses you of anti-Semitism, unfairly, because you're a principled non-interventionist who wants the U.S. to pull out of the Middle East, it's easy to find yourself making excuses for other people who get tarred (more justly) with the label. And then time goes by, the mainstream never gets any closer, you're spending all your time in a cramped and crankish and resentful world, and you hear yourself thinking hey, if these neo-Confederate guys are right about states' rights and the Constitution, then maybe they're right about race too ...

It's the most natural thing in the world. Just ask Sam Francis.

It kind of doesn't matter what he actually believes. A number of libertarians have argued that Dr. Paul is obviously not a racist because he has so many other crazy ideas that if he did hold repulsive racial views, he would have aired those too. I find this pretty unconvincing. Since my blog brought me out of the closet, pretty much everyone I know is aware that I think we should privatize Social Security, eliminate most forms of government spending, get rid of the corporate income tax, legalize heroin, etc. etc. Almost all of them think I am crazy. But they still associate with me. I myself am friends with at least one person who claims to be an actual communist, and doesn't suffer socially for it. However, if either of us started saying "You know, the real problem with America is race-mixing" that would clearly put us in an entirely different category of crazy loon: the kind you shun. Ron Paul doesn't have Tourette's syndrome; I presume he is able to discern these find distinctions as well.

But regardless of whether he believes the things he wrote, we punish people (socially) for enabling racism. Dr. Paul should be abandoned because that is how American society, and the libertarian movement, says: "Helping racists publish their nastygrams is totally legal, but it's not ok."

Incidentally, I apologize if yesterday's Ron Paul post came off as "I told you so". I'm not surprised that Ron Paul's newsletter occasionally plunged into the fever swamp to wallow in the muck, but it's not as if I knew this was coming.

And ending on a "hmmmmm" note, has anyone else noticed that the Paul supporters have completely disappeared? I have one left in my comments who was a regular reader before I ever posted on Paul. But the locust hordes are no longer descending on my comment section every time I mention the good doctor's name.



http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/arc ... oundup.php




This ALIPAC member has posted this entity be it editorial opinion, news article, column, or web creation as information for the General Population (public) only. It is not intended as an endorsement for this candidate by this poster. Its use here has not been anticipated to be used as, or used to discredit any candidate mentioned herewith.

GREGAGREATAMERICAN says:

You know, I half-believe Ron Paul when he says that he is not a bigot or a racist or an anti-Semite. I half-believe him in when he says the inflammatory material that James Kirchick has uncovered in years and years of newsletters and pamphlets with his name on them was written by others without his supervision or direct permission. But what I'm nearly sure of is that he doesn't really care that much if some of the people around him are racists - not because he shares their opinions, but because he thinks those opinions aren't all that important in the grand scheme of things.

This is an example of Ron Paul's belief. He believes everyone should be entitled to freedom of thought and speech, not being told how they're supposed to think. It doesn't mean he thinks that way. I think people would really be surprised how some of their own friends really think about things.

Personally I think articles like this are trash and do nothing but incite others into arguements. If your going do some digging on Ron Paul, I might suggest you come up with something concrete. This is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, and not very convincing at that.

Ron Paul is not a wild eyed lunatic - he is what Americans were a short time ago. It may have been before some on here were born, but it isn't ancient history.

As to the racist and anti-semite thing - that is just despicable.

Anyone who would promote that, forward, give it any space, are just playing into the hands of those who have used that threat for decades to silence any objection to what the 'powers that be' want to do.

That is one of the weapons, the tactics the people have used to destroy so many of the rights of the American people. I simply cannot understand why people can't see it.

Some many be so wound up in 'winning' for their 'guy', and winning some battle - they are willing to give strength or legitmacy to the oppostion to help them win the war.

Remember, people when you give even the slightest credence to this racist, anti-semite garbage - you are giving strength to the ones who are using it to promote illegal immigration. The very same people calling us bigots are the same ones calling Paul a bigot - remember that.

This 'I don't really think he is a racist - but' and 'I don't half believe, but'
you are giving aid and comfort to the ones who will use that same weapon against you and me.

This isn't a game - it is even bigger than who wins this presidential campaign -

I can assure people that RON PAUL supporters are alive and well AND ARE NOT GOING AWAY. This is NOT about Ron Paul. This is about the message of Freedom and Liberty. These racist attacks are nothing more than LIES and SMEARS in an attempt to derail his candidacy and stop the movement in its tracks. You know how dirty it gets in politics. When people feel threatened they get desperate.

But whatever happens, the genie is out of the bottle. Americans are waking up and demanding a return to our constitutional principles. There will be more "Ron Pauls" to follow. They can't stop us all.

______________________________________

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:

“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed.Â* I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.

“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin.Â* As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999:Â* ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’

“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade.Â* It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.

“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit.Â* Several writers contributed to the product.Â*Â* For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.â€

Personally. I think these accusations, and articles hinting of Ron Paul being racist is a sign of desperation because some cannot come up with anything of substance that would disqualify him to run this country. It's making it clearer to me that some would rather keep voting in the same old losers instead of taking a hard look at a true patriot who would start putting this country back on its feet. Unfortunately, these people are cheating themselves by doing this.

YOu know I guess I am most surprised that anyone on this site would even give it the time of day.

We, those against illegal immigration, are the 'racists of the day' this time around. This nastiness is being thrown at us at every turn. Why in the world would any of us do anything but denounce those tactics.

It may suits someone's agenda to try to destroy one candidate - but what is being destroyed is our country - if this kind of thing gets traction, once again. It can help destroy our chances of making changes in the illegal immigration problem.

This country has slowly make some strides in this and to breathe life back into the witch hunt of the pointed finger and charge of 'racist' is destructive.

Well, nntrixie, maybe some have been conditioned for so long to what the media tells them to think that they can't see the truth.

Maybe, also of not thinking of the long term or the big picture.

The throwing away of the war in order to win a minor skirmish -