So, my last post talking about this was kind of angry, so I thought I would come back and write something a little bit more articulate about my feelings of Ron Paul. When I observe culturally and politically aware people, they generally fall into two categories – liberal or libertarian. I have a lot of problems with the Libertarian model of society. It is fool-hardly. The free market has never existed in the industrialized world. If you look back through history, the only time you could find a truly free market was during the fuedalism cultures. So yeah, their beliefs are, for most of what I’ve seen, lining up with Ayn Randian objectivism, which is a joke, both philosophically and economically. And this brings us to Ron Paul.
My problems with Ron Paul are as follows -
1. He wants to bring back the Gold Standard.
History can tell us why this was such a bad idea. Winston Churchill brought back the Gold Standard to Britain in 1925. He commented as follows -
We have had no reality, no stability. The price of gold has risen since then by more than 70 per cent. That is as if a 12-inch foot rule had been stretched to 19 or 20 inches, as if the pound avoirdupois had suddenly become 23 or 24 ounces instead of 16. Look at what this has meant to everybody who has been compelled to execute their contracts upon this irrationally enhanced scale. Look at the gross unfairness of such distortion to all producers of new wealth, and to all that labour and science and enterprise can give us.
That was from a testimony in front of the House of Commons in 1932. It was a disaster for Britain’s economy, and Ron Paul is championing this. This is a major problem. All of these ‘experts’ that Paul so cavalierly brings up backing him up aren’t looking at the historical facts.
2. He wants to repeal Roe v. Wade
A lot of the supporters of this guy will come out of the woodwork and say that Ron Paul’s religious beliefs won’t affect his policy making. That’s a lie. And outright lie. Case and point – he wants to get rid of a woman’s right to have an abortion, to have control over her own body. He has said, many times, about how life begins at conception. He backed up legal efforts in this regard. He sponsored the Sanctity of Life Act, which defined life as beginning at conception, and therefore made abortion illegal. He is all for small government, apparently, but believes that the government should have the rights over a woman’s body. He wants to make a woman’s uterus public property. How’s that for liberty?
3. He does not believe in the seperation of church and state
Here’s another point where the Paulites seem to not understand where their icon is coming from. This guy basically believes that our government should have a state-endorsed religion. This is not something that a person who believes in “liberty” (whatever the fuck that actually means to these Libertarians) pursues. He wants to get rid of that clause from the First Amendment. This ties into my fourth issue with this man -
4. He doesn’t believe in the incorporation of the Bill of Rights
So, in other words, Ron Paul believes that the rights that a person has should be allocated on a state-to-state basis. What rights you have as a human being should be in the hands of each of the states. Never mind that that would destroy our system of government, becuase that would turn America into a confederacy, but more importantly, it shows that he believes if a state should mandate that women shouldn’t have the right to vote, that should be their call. Civil rights for minorities, depending on the state, gone. Gay rights, depending on the state, gone. Any rights the state sees fit, gone. This would be a disaster to our country, an absolute disaster.
5. He does not believe the theory of evolution
I just think this should be a requisite of somebody who is in charge of this entire country. I mean, he basically says, “to hell all the scientific data, to hell with all the mountains of evidence, that’s just a theory. But my theory is, Jesus.” I can’t respect a political figure who can’t realize that evolution is a scientific fact. A lot of the people who say, “but it’s just a theory” don’t seem to understand the fact that they confuse theory with hypothesis. A hypothesis is something that there is no evidence for, but people are questioning. A theory, on the other hand, is something that has been more or less proven, but the scientific community is still open to being proved wrong about. And Ron Paul’s theory, Jesus, has NO scientific evidence to back it up, none. That’s why over 90% of scientists in the National Academy of Sciences are agnostic or atheists. Jesus has no evidence. Evolution, on the other hand, has a mountain of it.
6. Ron Paul’s economic plan is a complete disaster that would destroy our contry’s economy
One of the biggest points is that he wants to get rid of the tax code, get rid of personal income tax, the whole shebang. You know, as much as people don’t want to admit it, there are these things that taxes fund, like our police, firefighters, ambulences, the lights in our homes, the water that we drink from the city water systems, the universities, the schools, the infrastructure on any level. To get rid of all taxes would mean that we couldn’t fund any of them. That would be a disaster. I already talked about the Gold Standard and how bringing that back would be a disaster.
Ron Paul also wants to leave the WTO and basically have an isolationist policy. Bad idea! Very bad idea! The global economy has taken away all the ability to be economically isolated. It has simply robbed us of our ability to keep things to ourselves. Also, the trade barriers that we have with the WTO are one of the main reasons for the prosperity that we have. Our economy isn’t good, but Ron Paul’s economic ideas would plunge this nation into fuedalism.
Okay, I’ve listed my reasons, and I have links to each of them, so you can learn more. Now let me say this – A lot of people seem to like this guy for a couple of reasons – he is big on getting out of the Middle East, big on ending the drug war, and big on privacy and people not having to pay money into taxes. The first two are good things to be for. However, while he has some good ideas, it is pretty clear that he has some absolutely TERRIBLE ideas!
Another big thing that gets me is this – why, if he is so against the mainstream, and so focused on being third-party, why is he with the Republicans? Don’t you find that a little bit strange how this guy talks about how he is so down with not being a part of this system that he believes is beaten and broken, but then chooses to be with one of the two major parties, both of which have proven themselves to be utterly and completely incompetant? It is worth looking into because this shows that the heroic Messiah character that the Libertarians have gotten may not be the hero that they all believe him to be.
But if you want to vote for him, you have to accept that along with a couple of good ideas, he has some absolutely terrible ones. That’s the fact. You make your choice. But this is how I view Ron Paul.
Until next time, a quote,
“There are people out there who don’t agree with this guy on a lot of really important stuff, and yet still decide that they’re gonna support him based on the few things that they do agree with, and they’ll put everything he says that they don’t agree with just out of their mind, or they’ll pretend that when he says it it has some kind of silver lining.” -TJ Kincaid, CULT of Ron Paul