Liberty Alone

Ron Paul, radical, anti-war liberal (or in US parlance libertarian) libertarian has shocked the US political establishment by raising a record (for a Republican) $4 million in one day (the biggest amount raised in one day was Kerry with $5.7 million the day after he accepted the Democrat nomination).

What’s even more astonishing is he’s done so whilst being shunned by the Republican establishment and the mainstream media (until recently). What’s behind his success? I’m not sure, but I’d hazard a guess that he appeals to those fed up with the political establishment, those who want the government out of their lives. Those who want freedom from the high taxes and social conservatism of the current mainstream Republican and Democrat parties. Perhaps there’s a vestige of the Jeffersonian and Jacksonian traditions left in some parts of the country. Its not that long since Barry Goldwater was a candidate and a senator. A Republican who made a principled defense of gay rights and attacked the power of central government.

I am hoping that miracles do happen and he will win the Republican nomination. A more likely scenario is that he will prompt the US political establishment to rediscover the liberalism which the Democrats abandoned in the early 20th Centurty and which the Republicans discovered a part of in the 20th Century. I hope this at least happens. The Democrats especially have a great opportunity to stake out this ground again. Unfortunately they, like the Republicans are dominated by anti-liberals at the top.

You may ask isn’t it somehow wrong for a LibDem to support a Republican? Ordinariliy perhaps, certainly a Bush-like candidate is anathema, but so should Hillary Clinton with her big state, authoritarian, bullying positions. Liberals in the US are really stuck for options and Ron Paul gives a voice to them.

He embodies many of the core principles of liberalism, personal freedom, limited government, the state out of your pocket and your bedroom. I don’t agree with him on all policies, but he really is a liberal - he says most of these are up to the state, or even county or town governments.
He’s against (rightly in my view) the schemes for universal healthcare, but if New York wishes to socialise health care it will be able to. As liberals surely this is music to our ears? Real localism. Trying different solutions to see what works best and produces the desired outcomes.

He would also end the ‘War on Drugs’, ending the suffering of many many people. Again if Texas wanted to make drugs illegal it could, but Californians would be able to use medical marujana without fear of the DEA raiding them and putting terminally ill people in prison for smoking a bit of weed.

Religious tolerance and freedom would once again be the name of the game. He’d seek to ensure religion and state would be firmly seperated.

In my more hopeful (or delusional) moments, I hope he’d be another Jackson, to be followed by another Van Buren, this time without slavery to divide the party and let the anti-liberal Lincoln successor in.

Not much chance of that, the vested interests in politics are probably too great, the political classes know they’re onto a good thing and won’t give up control easily. It is refreshing however to see a radical liberal actually getting support and the arguments being heard. It offers a glimmer of hope for liberalism. Those who aren’t so radical, or are radical in a different direction to Ron Paul (most of us I should think) should be glad that he will hopefully offer hope for the more moderate liberal views as well.

Former Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate and current Republican Representative has announced he’s running for President.

Its good to have a libertarian running - someone to put forward the small state, individual freedom and constitutional rule of law and liberal argument. I doubt very much that he’ll get very far, but its important to have such voices heard - perhaps it will influence a more liberal outlook in the Republican Party…

All the best to him.

I’m afraid that I simply cannot join the big Hilary Clinton love in. For the simple fact that she is not a liberal.
She’s far more akin to Tony Blair than a liberal and is a big fan of big government (She’s even confessed she’s addicted to government) wants to meddle in people’s lives (for their own good of course) - for example ‘There’s no such thing as other people’s children’.
As with most politicians she’s beholden to special interests (her call for 108% tariffs on chinese candles to protect NY candle makers is as far from liberal as you can get).

Whilst she may want the government out of your bedroom, she wants it well and truly in the rest of your life.

The Democrats are not liberal - they are a party which contains some liberals, just as the Republican party is - unfortunately the liberals in both parties are for the most part ignored by the rest of the party.

I shall be hoping that Ron Paul R-TX, a libertarian can do very well. A long shot perhaps, but he’d be a great breath of fresh air. He’s a liberal in the original US sense, in the tradition of Jefferson. He believes power should rest with the States. On issues like abortion and same sex marriage, he is against them, but wishes each state to decide, who is he to regulate people’s lives like that?
Whilst I do not agree with all his beliefs, he at least holds the fundamental tenets of liberalism at his heart - that individuals should be free to pursue their own destiny (not withstanding harm to others) and that state interference should be minimal.