PERSPECTIVES: Why Libertarians Need to Get Behind Rand Paul

Kevin J. Bissett II // Waking Up Wisconsin

When the 2012 presidential race rolled around, I discovered the candidate I had been hoping for:Ron Paul. He was honest, clear on his beliefs, unwavering, and most importantly spoke the truth. He raised needed questions and provided brilliant solutions in regards to the economy, liberty, foreign wars, conspiracies, and more. To many of us, he was the ideal candidate for presidency.

However, over and over again I heard the same phrases from people all around me, “He says some good things, but he just sounds like a crackpot.” “He’s too old to be president.” “He’s too crazy, not a right fit for president.” Interestingly, it was a rare occasion that one could precisely articulate an actual disagreement he had with Paul’s policies. In fact, most that I had conversed with generally agreed with the libertarian beliefs that I explained to them, but they still claimed Ron Paul was “just crazy.”

What is causing people to see this imaginary gap between ideals and agreeability? Why was the man I deemed to be head and shoulders more intelligent and understandable than the rest of the candidates being put off like a senile old coot? A large part of the answer is conditioning. The government and its media puppets have been subtly manipulating people to buy into their rhetoric, even if it is plainly illogical, distasteful, or simply unhelpful. This is what many thinkers need to remember: we are operating in a society where most people have not fully thought out their political beliefs, and they are navigating in a fog with an onslaught of different opinions being fired at them constantly.

Ron Paul’s now-popular son, Rand, is much along the same lines as his father in political philosophy. He raves against government spying, taxes, excessive spending, and participates in many more admirable fights.

Still, to many libertarians, he is not quite as clear as his father on his positions, seems to flip-flop a little, and simply may not seem trustworthy because of it. A few of his policy votes here and there are disagreeable, and he seems to fit in too well in some ways with the “machine” he rails against. So far, this is what I have heard from many Ron supporters, and I get it. I even agree to some extent.

However (and this is a huge “however”), most of the citizenry see things a little differently. They don’t have a clear philosophy to follow when choosing candidates. They buy into what the media deems as “realistic”, (It is amazing what becomes unrealistic solely by virtue of everyone saying so), and, remarkably, those that said “Ron’s crazy” are saying “Rand is a good choice.” The very quality that bothers us about Rand is that same quality that is allowing him to be appealing to the majority of the populace. He plays the game that we hate, but it’s the game that has allowed him to do extraordinary things that would have been unavailable otherwise. In this instance, I would urge people to remember that silly phrase, “Don’t hate the player; hate the game.” And we do. I would bet Rand does, as well.

Where does this leave us? Are we so hardheaded as to abandon the very real possibility of a good president because he isn’t as ideal as the last option? In 2012, I didn’t vote for Romney, because I didn’t believe that he would truly lead our country in a better direction. It has been decades since we had a candidate that this could be said about. For once, a presidential candidate has enormous potential to at least get us started in the direction that this country needs to go.

It is a mistake to think of a vote as “I agree with this person one hundred percent.” If that were the case, you would only ever vote for yourself. Rather, a vote is a show of support for a candidate that you believe maintains the correct underlying philosophy of how to make things better and the ability to carry it through. To this extent, I can excitedly get behind Rand. His presidency would open otherwise inaccessible doors of opportunity for change (wreck the two party system, anyone?)
So maybe before America is willing to embrace a “Ron,” they must first elect a “Rand.” The people will get a dip in the puddle of freedom, and then they will long for the ocean.

______________________________________________________________________________

LEARN MORE ABOUT RAND PAUL HERE

OFFICIAL SITE

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

______________________________________________________

For more stories like this, check out Waking Up Wisconsin