Libertas

Dr. Ron Paul

Over and over I hear, “I like what Ron Paul has to say about the economy, the Federal Reserve, and even monetary policy, but I can’t support his foreign policy.”

DID YOU EVEN BOTHER TO KNOW IT?!

Did you take the time to read his speeches or his books, such as A Foreign Policy of Freedom? Did you take the time to listen to a complete speech or interview that was NOT the typical mainstream media sound byte?

Before I’m too hard on you, I admit I didn’t either. For most of the last election I was blindly against him because of my understanding of his foreign policy. However, I eventually took the time to read and understand him. It is not the typical anti-americanism from the Left that the neo-conservatives like to accuse him of, even though at first, it may sound like it, especially if one hears only a sentence or phrase from him.

The Left and Right argue about tactics, not policy. They agree on foreign policy; it’s interventionism.  When his criticism become too annoying they fall back and accuse him of isolationism. He is the least isolationist of our politicians. The Left and Right isolate, bully, threaten, bribe, attack, blockade, and go to war. He, however, wants to use diplomacy and trade.

Is that naïve?

The most isolated communist countries are still communist. How have sanctions hurt the regimes of Castro and Kim Jong Il? Under international law a blockade is an act of war, but somehow we have come to believe that sanctions are peaceful means to solve problems. No, it is still an act of war. Innocent people are more likely to die and suffer because of sanctions than in a military attack. How many children died in Iraq under sanctions in the 1990s?

Sophie Scholl, Member of the White Rose

How many Americans know? How many Americans want to know? But we must know, because we are responsible for the government and it’s actions. All we have to do is stop our support and it would come to a halt. Instead, we pay our taxes, obey and look away. So did the Germans. Sophie Scholl‘s sister said she was not a hero. She did what any person should have done. The Germans were just cowards.

So, I ask you this?

How is it that most conservatives understand that government interventionism is destructive to the economy and is a danger to domestic liberty, but somehow think that government interventionism abroad is not only acceptable but possible? For a government to intervene in the economy it must have power and control. When it fails it wants more information and power. Yet, with all the power and control the Soviets had, they failed. It is impossible to know everything to control the economy. It is playing God and ends in failure.

Conservatives should know this. They know it is impossible to have a controlled economy but somehow believe it’s possible for an American president, especially if it’s a Republican president and administration, to not only have all the intelligence, but also the cultural sensitivity, wisdom, and foresight to make sound decisions.

The fact is, that for a president to make those types of decisions and do it correctly, a president must be omniscient and omnipotent: playing God again. That is impossible, and especially dangerous if the president believes it is possible. Foreign and economic interventionism requires information and power, the more the better from the government’s view point, but it ultimately leads to tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson in France

Being against foreign interventionism is not being isolationist. It’s common sense. It’s choosing freedom over security, choosing courage over fear, wisdom over cynicism; it’s the Foreign Policy of the Founding Fathers. It is the same Foreign Policy as Jefferson. Would anyone call Jefferson an isolationist? To reject economic and domestic interventionism yet support foreign interventionism is naive, inconsistent and hypocritical.

Recommended:

A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship by Ron Paul