The rumors are true: this afternoon, Ron Paul will announce that he’s running for president.
I think most AltRight readers would agree that Ron Paul and his platform are hardly The Answer to our problems . . . Moreover, for his 2008 run, Paul hired a bumbling, tone-deaf, and strategically inept staff, and there’s no reason to believe that they learned anything from their mistakes. (Paul would be wise to simply allow his talented and energetic grassroots to do everything for his campaign: ads, macro-strategy, fundraising (which they did last time anyway), and even the writing of talking points for debates and such. His hired staff will be busy enough getting him on the primary ballots.)
All this being said, Ron Paul’s candidacy is a good thing. And though I can’t endorse him in my institutional capacities, as an individual, I will be rooting him on over the next year or so.
Put frankly, Paul is one of the few political “representatives” who’s not a lying sociopath. Paul means what he says and says what he means. Most Republicans simply talk about their devotion to limited government. If president, Paul would actually attempt to bring the troops home, abolish non-Constitutional departments, and return to the gold standard. Paul also appears to buck the unfortunate libertarian consensus on open immigration.
Paul is a true liberal, in the older sense of the word. He’s what Wilmot Robertson called an “Old Believer” . . . in an Old America that hasn’t existed for at least a century. Paul sincerely wants to leave the citizenry well enough alone, trusting in the goodness of their intentions and their willingness to cooperate. On this and other matters, it’s hard to separate Paul’s great virtues and personal charm from his blind spots and naiveté.
More important, unlike every other candidate—though Trump is a wildcard—Ron Paul actually threatens what I’ll call, for brevity’s sake, “the Establishment.”
Though there’s no room to go into this here, suffice it to say, the egalitarian welfare state, unending foreign wars, bailouts and endless credit for the financial sector—and much else—is predicated on the Federal Reserve System. Without the Fed, what the government is currently doing would be significantly more difficult; to do it all simultaneous and on such a grandiose scale, would simply be impossible.
Paul’s central issue is “End the Fed.” This quest is, of course, quixotic—I think it’s more likely that the current system will implode than it will be rationally reformed. Nevertheless, the Establishment does not want thinking minds to contemplate the source of its power.
Whatever his limitations might be, a Paul presidency would truly amount to a Revolution.