Paul's liberty isn't - Updated


Who is really libertarian?
A couple of weeks ago, I was commenting on global warming misinformation on a popular Pagan site. Take a real close look at some of the comments. Now this isn't the first, the fiftieth, or the five hundredth time I've been told that I am not a "real Pagan" (read True Believer™) because I don't think humans are dooming the Earth through global warming.

Any time someone trots out their choice as The Only Acceptable Choice, I get nervous. Too many bad memories of some of my more enthusiastic evangelical Christian relatives. What's worse is when they "tolerate" you, but ONLY if you keep quiet and don't dissent from the Unquestioned Dogma.

I've seen this behavior my whole life, and I have been fighting it for most of my adulthood.

And that brings us to Ron Paul.

Paul himself is populist, not libertarian. When his positions coincide with liberty, it's more accident than commitment. Even then, he wants "his crowd" to be first in line. I've particular issues with his assumption that Christians are responsible for liberty and the rest of us only "get to sit at the big table" because of the tolerance of those selfsame and oh-so-humble Christians. We're supposed to do what we are told, be on our best behavior, and never, EVER put our bare feet in the mashed potatoes.

This is codswallop. The United States is not a Christian nation. "Christian" principles were only part of the founding. And don't get me started about the origin of those "Christian" ideas.

The point is, I have a place at the table no matter what Ron Paul deigns to grant me. It's not his table. He can't kick me out. If he doesn't like it, tough. I don't need his permission. Too much of what Paul says and writes reminds me of Orwell's Animal Farm. "All animals are equal, some are more equal than others."

That's why it bothers me when Paul's followers take it on themselves to declare who is and who is not a real libertarian. It's a pattern that's all too familiar. I may not be the target this time, that doesn't mean I can ignore it.

As Sunni pointed out, we don't need a hero sanctified by this or that group. What the libertarian movement REALLY needs is a bunch of pissed off individualists who demand to be left alone and who are willing to fight for that.

After all, that is how it all started.

The only reason I indulge my passion for politics is because I really want to be left alone. I don't want someone telling me who are the right people to associate with, what the right foods are to eat, and if I can put my dirty feet in my mashed potatoes.

Now we might have a problem if I put my feet in YOUR mashed potatoes, but as long as it is mine. it's my choice.

KYFHO, now and forever.

UPDATE: A reader sent me some email criticism.

By calling Ron Paul a populist, am I doing the same thing that I accuse the True Believers™ of doing?

You see, individuals have rights.

Groups have membership.

If you look at Ron Paul's writings, he almost always defines rights as something that his particular group doesn't have.

He's not talking about individual liberty, he's pushing group preferences. His entire campaign has been about attacking the "bad" groups while praising the "good" groups. That's populism, pure and simple.

It's also why I am not surprised about the racist writings, no matter who the author is.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Tue - January 15, 2008 at 05:25 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved