Ron Paul: a Means to an End

Let me be clear: Ron Paul is the only viable peace candidate in the presidential race. He has the money, he has the organization on the ground in the early primary states, he has the buzz, the press coverage, and the momentum to win the Republican nomination. Most importantly, he has the platform to unite perceived enemies behind the same message of peace, liberty, and prosperity. . . But in order to do that, he's going to need some help from some unlikely places, namely us, the liberal/progressive end of the democratic party.

Why should we support him?

Because he has the message that we have been waiting for. Ron Paul has done more to convince conservatives that the war is an immoral failure than 5 years of 'raising consciousness' has been able to achieve. Ron Paul's stance on the war, on the military-industiral complex, and on American foreign-policy in general is a peace activist's wet dream. And yet he still has the Republican credentials to reach across the aisle and pick up a large contingent of support from hardcore conservaties. He has the right blend of positions to make him palatable--though not totally acceptalbe--to people from across the entire band of the political spectrum. What excites me most about his candidacy, though, is not only his ability to draw from both sides, but his principled and fearless stance on War as an instrument of policy and his advocacy for the protection of civil liberties.

He publicly says that we need to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible. . . and Afghanistan, and Korea, and Japan, and Europe. He publicly says that the military-industrial complex has too much sway in American politics and foreign policy. He publicly says that preemptive war is not just bad, but morally abhorrent. In fact, he said at a Republican debate that the number one moral problem facing America in the 21st century is our society's acceptance of aggressive war as a just and reasonable instrument of foreign policy. Not teenage sex. Not abortion. Not homosexual marriage. This man is not your average Republican.

But it doesn't stop there. Ron Paul is also concerned about our growing surveillance/police state. He was willing to say on Meet the Press last Sunday that America is on the verge of Fascism. He wants to repeal the Real ID act, the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions act, and the Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. He consistently rails agains the excessive secrecy of the Bush Administration and against their blatant attacks on our civil liberties through wiretapping, suspension of habeus corpus, torture, rendition, and the implementation of a national ID card. Don't you wish Obama would start talking about those issues?

On Iraq, foreign policy in general, and the erosion of civil liberties Ron Paul is far to the left of the major democratic contenders. Only Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel match him on these ardent stances, and they have been marginalized to the point of extinction.

But a curious thing happened with Ron Paul. The media played its normal game and tried to marginalize him, but try as they might they couldn't get rid of him. He kept working his way into news by his fundraising, and the audacity and ingenuity of his followers. His donor base is 250,000 wide for the fourth quarter alone meaning that even though he has managed to raise almost $19 million (an astounding amount for a 'second-tier' candidate with 'crackpot' ideas) his average donation size is still only $76, showing that his money is not funneled from corporate interests but amassed in small increments by people excited by his message.

Ron Paul is single-handedly bringing into the national discussion issues about aggressive war, preemption, surveillance, civil liberties, and America's stance in the world that liberal activists have been trying to get into the public consciousness for years. Even if he doesn't win, it's worthwhile to support him just so that he can continue to speak on national television about the CIA overthrow of Iran in 1953, the Real ID act, and the fact that America has become an empire, plain and simple.

In short, Ron Paul has the message on war and on civil liberties that all but the most centrist democrats long for, and yet he has still managed to break through into the mainstream. Next to Ron Paul, Clinton, Obama and Edwards look like Neocons willing to suppress domestic dissent in order to wage aggressive wars to secure foreign oil. In my view, this is the first time that such an ardent anti-war candidate has risen to prominence since Bobby Kennedy.

This is the moment we have been waiting for. This is the man we have been waiting for. Ron Paul has the potential to dismantle the military-industrial complex and all the attendent lobbyist corruption that comes with it, end foreign wars, and restore the Bill of Rights to relevance in one fell swoop. But he's not going to do it on his own. He's going to need our help.