Ron Paul Platform 2007, Where Is It Now?

[Brian4Liberty]

Ron Paul Platform 2007, Where Is It Now?
Brian4Liberty - July 22,2020

In a debate between podcaster Dave Smith and LP Chair Nick Sarwark, the platforms and candidate focus of both Ron Paul and recent Libertarian candidates were discussed. Smith spoke about how anti-war and end the Fed were so important in Ron Paul's runs in 2007 and 2012. Sarwark addresses what he thought were the important places where modern Libertarian candidates should focus, which included anti-war, free trade and open immigration, ratcheting back national debt.

Based purely on memory, here are the areas of emphasis for comparison. It should be noted that the Libertarian Party always has an extensive and detailed list of platform planks, and Ron Paul had positions on many issues, but this short list is based upon what is emphasized.

Ron Paul 2007 vs. LP 2020

Ron Paul 2007:

- Anti-war; Bring the Troops Home.
- Abolish the income tax and IRS.
- Abolish the Fed; Oppose Crony Corporatism.
- Champion of the Constitution; Limited Government; Bill of Rights.
- No Amnesty; Secure the Borders.
- Opposition to globalist organizations and deals.
- Individual liberty; Opposition to the war on drugs.

LP 2020:

- Anti-war; Bring the Troops Home.
- Open Borders, Open Immigration.
- Individual Liberty; Opposition to the war on drugs.
- Anti-racism; Black Lives Matter.

More importantly than a comparison, it is of interest to see where Ron Paul's planks eventually ended up, after evolving and morphing for a decade. Here is a take on what has happened:

Anti-war; Bring the Troops Home - Remains a plank of the LP. Still retained by liberty leaning members of the GOP, many in the Liberty Caucus. Lip service paid by both Trump and Bernie. Abandoned by the Democrats and establishment GOP.

Abolish the income tax and IRS - That would be exclusive to the LP and libertarians (including a very few elected libertarian Republicans).

Abolish the Fed - The rhetoric of criticism of the Federal Reserve was adopted by Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. In practice, both of them want to turn the Fed into a magical money printing machine. Otherwise abandoned except with some liberty leaning Republicans. Explicitly abandoned as unpopular by Nick Sarwark and some in the LP.

Opposition to Crony Corporatism and Corrupt Wall St. Bailouts - Adopted by the Occupy Wall Street movement, and then co-opted by Bernie Sanders, the new Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and Marxists like BLM and Antifa. It has now been co-opted and mutated into opposition to capitalism.

Champion of the Constitution; Limited Government; Bill of Rights - Abandoned almost by all, with once again the exception of a liberty-minded GOP minority and a few Democrat hold-outs on some of the Bill of Rights. Opposed by many, including neoconservatives and the new Marxists (Modern Democrats, DSA, BLM, Antifa, etc).

No amnesty; Secure the borders - Almost exclusively the territory of Trump.

Opposition to globalist organizations and deals - Also the territory of Trump, albeit mostly just lip-service. Trump is simply renegotiating the treaties.

Individual liberty - Almost exclusively the territory of the LP, with some adherents scattered about elsewhere (including in the liberty GOP and old Democrat Party). Noteworthy that individualism in many ways is opposed by the new Marxists (DSA, BLM, Antifa, etc).

Opposition to the war on drugs - Always a plank of the LP, and now a central plank of the new Marxists like BLM and Antifa. Some adherents scattered about elsewhere (including in the liberty faction of the GOP and old Democrat Party).

Anti-collectivism - Still a major plank of the LP. Some adherents scattered about elsewhere (including in the liberty GOP and old Democrat Party). Worth noting that the new Marxists (DSA, BLM, Antifa, etc) are vociferously and adamantly pro-collectivism, while claiming to be anti-racist.​

Many people have noticed that some Ron Paul supporters became Bernie Sanders supporters, and some became Donald Trump supporters. No doubt that has to do with the particular issues that resonated most with the individuals, and perhaps which issues they never agreed with Ron Paul about. And we can not forget that the political landscape has changed dramatically since then, with a Marxist revolution presently being attempted.

One thing we can take away is that many issues were borrowed from that original 2007 Ron Paul platform, albeit morphed and distorted, and they proved to be very popular on both the left and the right. So popular in fact, that one candidate became President using some of them.

 

[Sammy]

Anti-war; Bring the Troops Home.
I oppose mass murder & I supporting ending the wars

- Abolish the Fed; Oppose Crony Corporatism.
Abolish the FED & return to the Gold Standard

- Champion of the Constitution; Limited Government; Bill of Rights.
100%

- No Amnesty; Secure the Borders.
I'm moved to the right on that issue. No Amnesty. Secure the borders & reduce legal immigration

- Opposition to globalist organizations and deals.
I'm Anti Gobalist. We should get out of the UN & NATO


- Individual liberty; Opposition to the war on drugs.
I'm still against the drug war but its not a Top Issue for me

I'm going to vote for Trump.
Jo Jorgensen is a cultural marxist.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I'm going to vote for Trump.
Jo Jorgensen is a cultural marxist.

Unless Jo Jorgensen has been lying for decades, she is not a cultural Marxist. But she has attempted to appeal to cultural Marxists, which is what politicians do. It's tricky when the slogan you are attempting to co-opt is the slogan (BLM) of the people most opposed to libertarian ideas, and does not really represent what they claim it represents. They are Marxist racists.

On the subject of Ron Paul, he has always stated that he is anti-collectivist. It was never his featured issue like "I am the champion of the Constitution" was, so you had to get more in depth to know about it. But "anti-racism", as Jo Jorgensen has used, is simply a subset of anti-collectivism, thus, it is a concept that Ron Paul would probably approve of.

That said, a Libertarian will not win, thus voting has to be strategic.

 

[trey4sports]

Unless Jo Jorgensen has been lying for decades, she is not a cultural Marxist. But she has attempted to appeal to cultural Marxists, which is what politicians do. It's tricky when the slogan you are attempting to co-opt is the slogan (BLM) of the people most opposed to libertarian ideas, and does not really represent what they claim it represents. They are Marxist racists.

On the subject of Ron Paul, he has always stated that he is anti-collectivist. It was never his featured issue like "I am the champion of the Constitution" was, so you had to get more in depth to know about it. But "anti-racism", as Jo Jorgensen has used, is simply a subset of anti-collectivism, thus, it is a concept that Ron Paul would probably approve of.

That said, a Libertarian will not win, thus voting has to be strategic.

I just don't think Jo is an inspiring candidate. I can handle her virtue signaling but she doesn't speak with passion and she seems to get flustered when talking about real solutions when moving outside of the abstract. In fact, that seemed to be a theme with all the candidates in the LP nomination this cycle (excluding Amash.)

FWIW I do think there is some value in voting Jo just to try to get her to 5% in an election and ensure 50 state ballot access for the next presidential cycle. The LP has to spend a lot of money just getting on the ballot year after year. Even if fundraising remained steady in the future they would have more dollars available to put towards garnering votes rather than collecting signatures with automatic ballot access.

 

[tfurrh]

I think Swordy has a thread somewhere about Ron's immigration from 2007. It hasn't ever been bumped either.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Anti-war; Bring the Troops Home.
I oppose mass murder & I supporting ending the wars

- Abolish the Fed; Oppose Crony Corporatism.
Abolish the FED & return to the Gold Standard

- Champion of the Constitution; Limited Government; Bill of Rights.
100%

- No Amnesty; Secure the Borders.
I'm moved to the right on that issue. No Amnesty. Secure the borders & reduce legal immigration

- Opposition to globalist organizations and deals.
I'm Anti Gobalist. We should get out of the UN & NATO


- Individual liberty; Opposition to the war on drugs.
I'm still against the drug war but its not a Top Issue for me

I'm going to vote for Trump.
Jo Jorgensen is a cultural marxist.

+Rep

 

[Swordsmyth]

I think Swordy has a thread somewhere about Ron's immigration from 2007. It hasn't ever been bumped either.

Ask and ye shall receive:

[h=1]Ron Paul's immigration position from 2007[/h]

 

[Swordsmyth]

Unless Jo Jorgensen has been lying for decades

That's what cultural marxists do.

But "anti-racism", as Jo Jorgensen has used, is simply a subset of anti-collectivism, thus, it is a concept that Ron Paul would probably approve of.

Nope, that's being not racist, anti-racism has a specific meaning defined by the cultural marxists who invented it and just to make sure we know that's what she means she said not being racist wasn't good enough.

 

[emazur]

I haven't watched that particular debate but I think a better comparison would be Ron Paul's platform vs. Jo Jorgensen's platform and what she is emphasizing. Not mentioned so far is the environment which Jo says she is making one of her top issues since young people care a lot about it. Open borders - I know it's on her platform but certainly not an emphasis - in several long interviews I've never even heard her bring it up. And BLM - she attended some vigil and yeah there was that stupid tweet but otherwise I don't really hear her talking about it much. On the other hand - the troops and the drug war are very frequently brought up, audit/end the Fed is somewhere in the middle, and just yesterday she tweeted Taxation is theft (could be wrong but I don't think I ever heard Ron say that but I know he wanted to end the IRS). Her most recent produced ad was released just 4 days ago about ending the wars and bringing home the troops. It was very well done - Ron could have used video production talent like this but his fans filled in the gap
https://vimeo.com/439639305/b348954018
(tried to embed that link as video but didn't work)

 

[Brian4Liberty]

...
Nope, that being not racist, anti-racism has a specific meaning defined by the cultural marxists who invented it and just to make sure we know that's what she means she said not being racist wasn't good enough.

I guess I'm not up on the culture wars terminology. So "anti-racist" is a loaded term just like BLM. Guess we can't take it at it's plain meaning. Either she was pandering, or she was unaware of the implications of using that word (I was).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-racism

 

[emazur]

Jo Jorgensen is a cultural marxist.

Saying Jo Jorgensen is a cultural marxist is like saying Ron Paul 'blames America' by pointing out the the terrorists' motivations. You can disagree with her about supporting the BLM movement (she already stated not supporting the organization) just like one could disagree (I don't) with Ron about what motivates the terrorists but disagreement need not turn into despise. I've pointed out before that what Jo said:

"#BlackLivesMatter means standing in solidarity with a mourning black community as we fight together to end qualified immunity, police brutality, sentencing disparities, and the war on drugs, not support of any “organization”

is nothing Ron would disagree with:

I support the black lives matter movement. I have long advocated an end to the drug war, police militarization, and other threats to liberty that disproportionately victimize African-Americans. However, I wish some of the black lives matter movement’s passion and energy was directed to ending abortion. Unborn black lives also matter.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I guess I'm not up on the culture wars terminology. So "anti-racist" is a loaded term just like BLM. Guess we can't take it at it's plain meaning. Either she was pandering, or she was unaware of the implications of using that word (I was).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-racism

Yes, anti-racism means being a "white-ally" and promoting the progressive policies that the left wants like Affirmative Action.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I haven't watched that particular debate but I think a better comparison would be Ron Paul's platform vs. Jo Jorgensen's platform and what she is emphasizing. Not mentioned so far is the environment which Jo says she is making one of her top issues since young people care a lot about it. Open borders - I know it's on her platform but certainly not an emphasis - in several long interviews I've never even heard her bring it up. And BLM - she attended some vigil and yeah there was that stupid tweet but otherwise I don't really hear her talking about it much. On the other hand - the troops and the drug war are very frequently brought up, audit/end the Fed is somewhere in the middle, and just yesterday she tweeted Taxation is theft (could be wrong but I don't think I ever heard Ron say that but I know he wanted to end the IRS). Her most recent produced ad was released just 4 days ago about ending the wars and bringing home the troops. It was very well done - Ron could have used video production talent like this but his fans filled in the gap
https://vimeo.com/439639305/b348954018
(tried to embed that link as video but didn't work)

Ugh! How could I forget Ron's Abolish the IRS plank!

And of course, Ron has said "taxation is theft". That's an old libertarian saying.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGWNg-pCiSE

 

[emazur]

Ugh! How could I forget Ron's Abolish the IRS plank!

And of course, Ron has said "taxation is theft". That's an old libertarian saying.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGWNg-pCiSE

 

[Swordsmyth]

I guess I'm not up on the culture wars terminology. So "anti-racist" is a loaded term just like BLM. Guess we can't take it at it's plain meaning. Either she was pandering, or she was unaware of the implications of using that word (I was).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-racism

America’s colleges, media, and cultural institutions are being swept by the ideology of “anti-racism.” It openly advocates racial discrimination against white people, and promotes bigoted, lower expectations for black people.
“Rationality” and “hard work” are vestiges of racism, declared the “anti-racism” web site of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture. It claimed that virtues like “hard work,” “self-reliance,” being “polite,” and being on time are all a product of the “white dominant culture.” So, too, are normal grammar, the scientific method, and its emphasis on “objective, rational linear thinking,” according to a chart the Smithsonian posted.
“The ‘anti-racism’ sweeping institutions still ends up rendering black people as somehow different, other, unable to meet even basic standards,” notes Thomas Chatterton Williams, a black writer for the New York Times magazine and Harpers. He points to a recent set of “anti-racist” directives from the English Department at Rutgers University, which deemphasize grammar rules that conflict with black slang.
Being an “anti-racist” means advocating discrimination to transform society. The bible of “anti-racism” is “How to Be an Antiracist,” by Boston University’s Ibram X. Kendi. The “key concept” from How to Be an Antiracist is that to remedy the underrepresentation of minority groups, you need to engage in discrimination in the opposite direction — i.e., discriminate against whites. As the book explains,

“The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”
​

Kendi’s tenets are now an article of faith on America’s college campuses. For example, Cornell’s president told her university to read “‘How to Be an Antiracist,’ by National Book Award winner Ibram X. Kendi.”
Dr. Kendi’s views are celebrated by the Washington Post and the New York Times. The Times touts Kendi’s axiom that “When I see racial disparities, I see racism.”
Kendi’s claim ignores the fact that many racial disparities are not caused by racism. For example, Latinos live three years longer than whites, on average, even though doctors don’t discriminate in their favor. Asians make more money than whites, on average. And while blacks make less money than whites, on average, immigrants from African countries like Nigeria actually make more money than whites do.

More at: https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/07/22/anti-racism-is-racism-in-disguise/