Shortly after Harrogate posted the first entry of his now heavily acclaimed "Why Some People Like Ron Paul" series, the GOP candidates had their second South Carolina debate, with Paul once again waxing combative on behalf of his principles.What Harrogate finds most fascinating about Paul is the passion he inspires in his supporters. He was cheered heartily by glassy eyed white men who somehow made it into the debate: the cheers accompanied him as he accused McCain, Guiliani, Romney, and the rest of betraying the Party with their war posturings. He sparred with Fox News sycophants all night, and you could tell he was especially pissing off Brit Hume. At the end, when Fox News ran its online viewers' poll asking who won, Hannity and Colmes reported a heavy victory for Ron Paul. Aghast, the green-blooded Sean Hannity intoned, "Paul didn't win, he lost." Among other things, this response vividly illustrates Hannity's intellectual reach in the field of debate.
Now, lately it has become very evident that Paul's supporters include white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and other groups historically invested in pushing their agendas of hate from behind the ersatz veneer of States' Rights. But do not be fooled into believing that the passion Paul has inspired is limited to those repugnant quarters. Indeed, Ron Paul is the only candidate in the race whose supporters are inspired by love of liberty (as opposed, for example, to being inspired for the sake of being inspired, as is the case with Obama).
Readers of this blog know that Harrogate could never support Ron Paul or any other hard-core libertarian. Still, he was moved by the video below. Note the devotional, even elegaic celebration offered on Paul's behalf. Nobody could make a comparable video on any of the major candidates, at least not with a straight face.
3 comments:
Are you suggesting that we follow the "guilt by association" argument to its logical conclusion and reject Congressman Paul becuase some of his supporters hold racist ideas?
Paul denounced those views but argued he could not be responsible for what others believed.
Should we hold the "guilt by association" argument for every candidate. Who would you vote for n the end?
(Off point-- in the South Carolina debate, Ron Paul's first question was on whether or not he would denounce the Truth Seekers for 9.11, which was a slap in the face since the other candidates were asked questions on the Reagan legacy and that was what he received.)
Hmmmm. First off, Harrogate was disgusted by the 9/11 "Truthers" question. It was the first question Paul got, whereas the other candidates had all been geting policy-oriented questions. Sad.
In the case of the supremacists and other hate groups, however, it gets a little hairier.
Of course Harrogate gives Congressman Paul the benefit of the doubt that he does not share those noxious views. But at the same time, his appeal to those supporters testifies in part to the extreme erroneousness of pure libertarianism.
Paul disavows the propriety of the federal government ensuring, through force if necessary, civil liberties for all. Harrogate disavows that frightening disavowal. There are reasons why hard-core libertarianism attracts Hate Nation.
If you want normal libertarians, then check out the Volokh Conspiracy: http://www.volokh.com.
I am not sure if I would agree with your last comment. You would have to cite an example.
Post a Comment