1. Adam Kokesh was banned from the Ron Paul Festival. That’s the REAL Ron Paul festival. Even though Paul has endorsed Kokesh. Maybe it was the video Kokesh circulated (I posted it) speculating that Benton was under the dire influence of Trygve Olson and that Ron Paul (maybe) also approved.
Kokesh always struck me as an odd libertarian hero, or titan, or whatever they’re calling them these days. But he was popular and brought some passion to all those deadly dull hair-splittings between the faithful interspersed between shrieks of “evil statist war-monger” emerging from the primal jungle around Auburn.
2. EPJ posted a video of Peter Schiff reading a Benton text advising him to stay away from the P.A.U.L festival That’s the one run by Paul supporters, for Paul, although Paul didn’t endorse it. Apparently, this is a low self-esteem fan club that doesn’t mind their hero dissing them left and right, so long as they can take darshan from a distance.
Inexplicable cult-worship among so called free-thinkers (see also Rothbardianism….opposite but equal to Randianism, file under COLLECTIVIST ANTHROPOLOGY AMONG FREE THINKING EURO-AMERICAN TRIBALS
3. Schiff asks EPJ to remove it and Wenzel refuses, claiming it’s public domain. Actually, as a pro-IP guy, he should rethink that. Schiff didn’t authorize anyone to take the picture or circulate it. It’s his image, it was a private conversation, and the photographer was boorish, even if, under current law, not acting illegally. It would be great, if, as in more progressive countries on privacy, you needed someone’s permission to create imagery from their body or face. It should be. Your body and face are yours. They are not public domain just because you walked outside. But that’s how barbaric people are.
Not only that, Schiff explicitly asked for the video not to be posted. He’s also a colleague and friend. But what does Wenzel do? Go ahead and post it.
Libertarians are nice people. But don’t tell me they’re clever. They’re not. Not one has a consistent logically tight philosophy, even though they all claim to be the most rigorous minds on the planet. It’s all emotion. Just read the comments.
All abuse and name-calling and knee-jerk reactions. Must be the testosterone.
The left is a good deal smarter. Just more evil. The campaign proved it. It was one of the most inept I’ve seen.
4. All this making Jesse Benton out as the villain is highly disingenuous. It’s true that Paul didn’t explicitly endorse Romney himself. But listen closely to his words. There is some ambiguity, at least in the videos I have seen. In any case, you don’t get to run a campaign where your staffers are always doing things that oppose your positions, without either firing them or taking part of the blame for the fall out. Or else, the obvious conclusion is that you’re just playing a deep game to keep yourself above the fray, but are quite hip to what’s going on.
5. If this doesn’t once and for all prove the worthlessness of time and money spent on politics to you, you are hopeless. Any of those kids following the campaign could have built a small business with the energy spent on Paul. The whole thing was a bad example.
6. I was disappointed that LRC spun all the way, instead of being honest about what happened.
It’s all very well to say you can fill a stadium. But with all the stadiums you filled, you could not accomplish one political goal. Not one. Not a single solitary goal.
If it’s that difficult, then why did you even bother? And why keep at it, with P.A.U.L.?
It sounds desperate.
Personally, I’m waiting for the Non-Paul Libertarians to open doors.
There’ll be a chance for change when that happens. True religion is inside you. That’s what Jesus said. True religion is shown in deeds, not dogmas.
Same goes for freedom lovers. True freedom isn’t what libertarian cult you espouse or which rally you’re attending. It’s economic freedom. It’s good personal networks that support your actions. It’s knowledge.
I’d rather spend my time that way, than interacting with thousands of people who aren’t even on the same page about what they want or how to get it.
This is my first time posting here. I remember reading your articles on lewrockwell.com many years ago, and I found your blog through the Economic Policy Journal when reading the comments. I like reading your perspective on libertarianism.
I have kept up with Ron Paul since 2006 and voted for him in the 2008 and 2012 Republican primaries as well as in the 2008 presidential election as a write-in candidate (he was an official write-in candidate in California). While I still have a lot of respect for Ron Paul for his dissenting voice in Congress and for his evangelism of the message of liberty in both of his presidential campaigns, I am very disappointed in how he ran his 2012 presidential campaign. While I am upset with Jesse Benton and also with Rand Paul, I believe that Ron Paul is definitely aware of their actions and has condoned them through being silent.
I wish Ron Paul were more radical throughout his campaign. This was America’s last chance to elect a true statesman as president before the impending economic collapse. Ron Paul should have ran a no-holds-barrel campaign with massive media advertising that relentlessly attacked the government’s foreign policy, the Federal Reserve, the government’s reckless spending and debt accumulation, and the erosion of civil liberties in the past decade. The advertising should have educated voters on these matters and also signified (in an honest way) that America may collapse and possibly descend into totalitarianism if these issues weren’t resolved, and that Ron Paul was the only major party candidate running who would address these issues. Is this over the top? Perhaps, but sadly it is a very likely possibility given historical example.
Did Ron Paul do this? Not really. While he did a great job at the debates, his advertising didn’t really discuss libertarian principles at all. Instead, his advertisements focused on attacking the “flavor-of-the-week” Republican candidates. Interestingly, Romney was never really attacked. I didn’t think that much of it at first. Next was the May announcement of Ron Paul’s suspension of campaigning. This was a terrible blow to the campaign. Imagine had Ron Paul campaigned in California and won a much larger percentage of the vote, quite possibly winning some delegates there. The campaign should have worked harder initially at winning primaries in order for the “we must get rid of Obama” crowd to consider Ron Paul more. Finally was Rand Paul’s endorsement of Romney, and suddenly the campaign was over.
While this campaign was very disappointing, I learned about how politics really works. There is no hope to promote libertarianism via the political process. Libertarians are either shut up or co-opted. I agree with you that the best way to promote a free society is through education and by living a lifestyle that is as close to libertarian principles as possible. Sadly there won’t be a stop to the upcoming economic collapse. However, if more people believe in the principles of liberty, then perhaps America won’t descend into totalitarianism.
Hi,
Well, not argument with any of that,
My point is that the Paul campaign cannot sit around giving itself bouquets for “educating people.”
People (like me) were educated by millions of blogs written by all sorts of people, from conservative Christians and Jews to far left loonies to racists to true blue military patriots.
It had nothing to do with Paul.
Paul and his supporters ((Rockwell and Block etc) simply picked up the steam from all that, because they had a marketing network based on Mises’ name, although a lot of the stuff they promote isn’t Mises, but Rothbard, a fairly idiosyncratic person, who was a kind of rightwing Leninist.
Their opportunism is why they failed. Unless, they really succeeded (ie they really wanted Romney in there, so Obama could win. Block prefers Obama.
Paul had TONS of money and couldn’t do a thing with it except REINFORCE the propaganda.
Their only response is well people can read more about our ideas of liberty.
People everywhere have a sense of liberty and they each have their own sense of how economics can be conducted in their countries.
I myself learned about the Fed and other things from Christian sites, not from Austrians, although the Christian sites pointed to the Austrians.
I also learned from a lot of radical left sites.
I’m not sure, after I see the degree of manipulation, that the Austrians were right after all. The whole market is colossally manipulated. I picked up on that early on, but those insights didn’t come from Austrianism, they came from following the financial press and recognizing propaganda.
The notion that PAUL is some messiah TURNS OFF RATIONAL PEOPLE.
But then maybe they don’t want rational people.
They want a market to sell to and for that you have to flatter people all the time.
More consumerism, in other words.
The last thing the population needs.
That is why libertarianism fails politically.
I can\’t join the speculations about Paul\’s motives. I don\’t know. I admit to being somewhat flummoxed, but I\’ve also been around long enough to know that things (and persons) are not always what they seem.
However, I think I can say the campaign wasn\’t a waste. It was, undeniably, an educational opportunity, as all campaigns are — perhaps that is the greatest use of a political campaign. And that education comes both through the official campaign and through all the efforts of the supporters via social media, word of mouth, etc.
In every movement there will be personality cultists, just as in every religion there are idolaters. That is human nature. The young are especially prone to it, because they are casting about for identity and a tribe to belong to.
I don\’t know what the truth is, but let\’s say your worst-case scenario is true. It seems to me that with all the communication and interconnectedness we enjoy today, the collective brain is finally maturing to the point that further efforts at deception will only result in faster disillusionment and re-education in reality. I think that in today\’s environment, which I regard to be a more normal situation than the preceding several decades of media and education mono/oligopoly, the truth has much better chances.
<i>There’ll be a chance for change when that happens. True religion is inside you. That’s what Jesus said. True religion is shown in deeds, not dogmas.</i>
I will agree with true religion being inside you, while disagreeing with the idea that deeds and dogmas are mutually exclusive, or that one cannot aid the other. \"All men are created equal\" is a pretty useful dogma, I would say. Most of us today would also hold it to be self-evident.
<i>It’s economic freedom. It’s good personal networks that support your actions. It’s knowledge.
I’d rather spend my time that way, than interacting with thousands of people who aren’t even on the same page about what they want or how to get it.</i>
Perhaps political campaigning is one effective way to recruit, educate, and inspire a sufficient number of people to build such networks. Perhaps the experience many of these young people gained in a political campaign can be put to use in other ways.
Two observations about the Ron Paul movement:
1. Ron Paul, his staff and those marketing his cause have profited.
What has the monetary investment in Ron Paul resulted in?
2. An illusion called the ‘liberty movement,’ which has drawn no small number of people in to believing that change can come from working within the system. The State by its very nature will not be reshaped into something which promotes and safeguards the individual freedom of people. As a result of the Ron Paul movement, more profiteers will reap monetary gain and more people will fritter away resources chasing something that can never be achieved through the political process.
I have always thought it ironic that LRC contains the words ‘anti-state’ on its site while so ardently promoting a person whose entire career is one of promoting the concept of freedom via the state.
If they were really promoting ideas, they would not have been beating up on anyone who diverged in the slightest way or didn’t support the Paul campaign.
They’ve changed about that recently, but they can’t undo what Paul did by beating up the competition for Romney.
I’d done the research and it is not a false charge.
And I don’t think Gordon or Rockwell are chumps. I think they are shrewd, very partisan, and very political.
They do make money out of all this, don’t forget.
Rockwell was making 175 K a year when the place was non-profit. Tucker was making the same I believe.
After turning “for profit,” they must have doubled their salaries, I would think.
[Added: Not sure.]
At least 300-400,000. Maybe even more.
Now Agora has bought Tucker’s services and put him in charge of Laissez Faire Books.
They must have paid Tucker at least 400,000 dollars to pull him away from Mises? Likely more?
He was trying to rehabilitate Wikipedia, last I looked. Big Assange fan, etc.
It is not just promoting Paul.
I have no problem with anyone who wants to use the system to bring about change.
I have a problem with people posing as PURE anarchists while actually being minarchists (accepting government enforced contracts, the political process, corporatist entities etc.)
And I have a problem with embracing Assange, praising Google and Walmart and BP and a bunch of other things I’d prefer not to get into publicly.
@jaylib
I think one shouldn’t speculate idly about a person. But I think one can draw responsible conclusions after repeated disappointments.
No problem with people learning from campaigns.
But the Paulistas didn’t say, hey, join us, we’re not in it to win; we’re building up a war chest to run Rand Paul, who isn’t one of you, but you can still pay for it, because you’ll learn something.
Did they say that?
I didn’t hear.
It’s called lying from where I stand.
I’m Ron Paul girl, and even I am not a Ron Paul Libertarian! I love the man cause he lead me to be the Anarchist I am today. Anarchy-capitalism, is just Libertarianism followed through.
All I know is that if you want to weed out a massive group of people into a small group of fun loving mature non-idiots, then just ask who know “Ron Paul” whoever raises there hands is usually an awesome person. Just my experience. Have a Ron Paul sign in your front yard, people stop by to talk Liberty…
And I was just here in case Obama girl came back, to kick her ass.
Libertarian Ann,
Thank you for stopping by, if you are a real person and not just one of my enemies disguised trying to dilute what I’m saying.
Anyone who boils down the political discourse to
“Ron Paul girl” versus “Obama girl” is part of the problem.
A big part.
What, appeal to male sexual instincts by setting up a cat fight and then add “kick their asses” to it?
Can’t you see that’s exactly why we are involved all over the world in wars?
I don’t want to kick anyone’s ass. When I’m in the right, I hope to persuade my opponents. When I’m in the wrong, I hope they’ll correct me.
Your “us versus them” attitude is EXACTLY the problem. Your “winner take all,” zero-sum attitude is what has poisoned government and capitalism (as much as we have it).
That is how sociopathy has become the norm.
Ideology is the problem not the answer.
Truth is the answer.
From no matter where it comes.
If we can’t get on with people living and workiing with us and breathing the same air, how on earth is someone else going to bring us peace? That attitude is not libertarian at all, even if the word libertarian has been attached to it.
It’s the attitude of the corporate state.
You can build a huge following with it and make a lot of money and you will not change a thing.
And that is precisely what has happened.
If you want freedom, BE FREE, GIRL. Don’t buy someone’s silly t-shirt and stand in a crowd shouting slogans like every other group.