08/07/2024 lewrockwell.com  7min 🇬🇧 #252120

We Need Ron Paul---Not the Lesser of Two Evils

By  Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

July 8, 2024

After the presidential "debate," some people argued like this: We can't support Biden. He is obviously brain dead. Besides, we couldn't support this dangerous left-winger anyway. We're stuck with Trump, like him or not. At least, he's better on some issues. But we shouldn't think like this. Both Trump and Biden are bad, but there is one person who has all the right policies, from a libertarian point of view. This person is our greatest living American, Dr. Ron Paul. In what follows, I'll explain why Biden and Trump are both deficient and why Ron Paul is stellar.

First, let's look at the obvious. Biden is indeed "cognitively impaired," to say the least. This stumblebum is unfit to be dogcatcher, let alone president. But Trump also made many absurd remarks that show his mental acuity to be in serious question. For example, he said that Putin would never have taken action against Ukraine if he had been president. Does he think that Putin is afraid of him? He is suffering from delusions of grandeur, if he does. There can be no doubt, though, about Ron Paul. He is scintillatingly acute mentally. You have only to listen to his weekly podcast to know this.

Now, let's look at some of the issues. How do the candidates propose to deal with inflation and our flawed monetary system? Trump boasts about the low rate of inflation when he was president, even though it was rising. He has criticized the Fed but just because it isn't under his direct control. He wants interest rates to be low and is unware of the way that expansion of bank credit inevitably causes hyperinflation or depression. Biden wants to keep the Fed the way it is but also likes artificially low interest rates.

Of course, "End the Fed" is Ron Paul's signature issue. He galvanized American youth with this slogan years ago, and it has continued to resonate with them. He follows the economic theory of the great Murray Rothbard, his guide in all matters economic.

Of course, it's not enough just to get rid of the Fed, essential as that is. We need sound money, and for Ron, following Mises and Rothbard, this means the gold standard. Once, when our Ron was invited on the other Ron's Air Force One for a flight to Houston, Ron Paul commented on Reagan's watch, which was made from a $20 gold piece. "I wish we still had that monetary system," said Ron Paul. "You know, no nation that abandoned the gold standard has remained great," said Reagan. Don Regan told the president to drop the subject.

In 1982, Ron Paul served on the U.S. Gold Commission to evaluate the role of gold in the monetary system. In fact, the Commission was his idea. It was carrying forth a promise made in the Republican platform.

Ron couldn't pick the members, so from the beginning, the deck was stacked. The majority was dominated by monetarists, who saw gold as too scarce and paper as just fine. Ron Paul's team was ready, however, with this marvelous minority report.

Rarely has a dissent on a government commission done so much good!

The result was  The Case for Gold, and it was the greatest result of the commission. It covers the history of gold in the United States, explains that its breakdown was caused by governments, and explains the merit of having sound money: prices reflect market realities, government stays in check, and the people retain their freedom.

The scholarship and rigor impressed even the critics of the minority. Ron and Lewis Lehrman worked with a team of economists that included Murray Rothbard, who was the main author, so it is hardly surprising that such a book would result.

One of the most thrilling memories of the 2012 campaign was the sight of those huge crowds who came out to see Ron. His competitors, meanwhile, couldn't fill half a Starbucks. When I worked as Ron's chief of staff in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I could only dream of such a day.

Let's look at one more economic issue. Both Biden and Trump favor high tariffs. Only Ron Paul believes in free trade. Of course he is against so-called "free trade" agreements that put trade under the control of international cabals like the WTO. These "agreements" are really anti-free trade pacts.

Trump's biggest talking point is "border control." But he is all bluster. He promised to control the border in 2016 and had four years to do it, but he sat on his hands and did little or nothing. Biden wants to bring to America as many alien hordes as he can. With Ron, you know he means what he says. Elect him and we will have secure borders. You can be sure of it!

Let's not forget covid tyranny. After some initial skepticism, Trump caved in to "Dr." Antony Fauci and urged people to get "vaccines", whether the wanted to or not. He still urges people to get vaccinated, even though the effects of these deadly 'vaccines" in causing cancer and heart disease is well-known. Biden was an enthusiastic Fauci supporter from the start. He favored compulsory vaccinations for everybody. Ron Paul was against these fake "vaccines" from the start and remains so.  Liberty Defined: 50 Es... Best Price: $1.27 (as of 07:10 UTC - Details)

Ron is also sound on the "global warming" hoax, He recognizes that this is a propaganda slogan by socialists who want to destroy our industrial society. They want to "green the economy," even though doing so will bring humanity to an end. For many of them, "even though" should be replaced by "because." To his credit, Trump exited from the Paris Accords and will do so again if elected. But his main concern is that the United States should not have to impose more restrictions on its economy than other countries. He hasn't repudiated the concept of "global warming." Biden is an enthusiastic proponent on "greening the economy" in order to combat "climate change."

Now, let's turn to foreign policy. For Murray Rothbard, war and peace was always the key issue.  Ron Paul agrees. He favors a consistent policy of non-intervention abroad. No foreign aid. No military alliances. No more shipments of billions of dollars in arms to the Middle East! He aptly remarks: "As we move into the US presidential election cycle one thing is clear: we desperately need a peace president to do for us what JFK did for the US during the Cuba crisis. Hopefully it won't be too late!"

Both Trump and Biden want to continue our massive intervention in the Middle East. Trump is more alive to the danger of war with Ukraine than Biden, but he is gearing for war with China. Should our choice be between a candidate who risks war with China and one who risks war with Russia? Or should be demand a candidate who doesn't want war at all?

We should not think "within the box" by accepting the existing "choices." We must never let the enemy define our space of possibilities.  As Murray Rothbard explained, our tactical goals must be guided by our long-term objective of liberty and should never be inconsistent with it. He said: "The libertarian goals - including immediate abolition of invasions of liberty - are 'realistic' in the sense that they could be achieved if enough people agreed on them, and that, if achieved, the resulting libertarian system would be viable. The goal of immediate liberty is not unrealistic or 'Utopian' because - in contrast to such goals as the 'elimination of poverty' - its achievement is entirely dependent on man's will. If, for example, everyone suddenly and immediately agreed on the overriding desirability of liberty, then total liberty would be immediately achieved. The strategic estimate of how the path toward liberty is likely to be achieved is, of course, an entirely separate question."

Let's do everything we can to reject the false "choice" between two bad candidates. Let's insist on the best-Dr. Ron Paul. I know this is what Murray would want, if he were here to guide us today.

 The Best of Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

 lewrockwell.com

 Commenter