First I’ve heard this: Ron Paul says he “signed legally binding agreements not [to] run third-party in 2008 if I failed to win the G.O.P. primary. That was the cost for ballot access in several states, 11 total I believe.”
About Roderick T. Long
The Empirical Me
I’m Roderick T. Long, Professor of Philosophy at Auburn University. I’m an Aristotelean/Wittgensteinian in philosophy and a left-libertarian market anarchist in social theory. (More about me here.) This blog, Austro-Athenian Empire, is a continuation of my earlier blog, archived here.
Upcoming Events
Yet another strike against libertarian activism in the electoral arena. The deck is stacked, guys! The sooner more libertarians recognize that and focus on non-electoral activism, the better.
Hey, I hate to go off-topic, but your RSS and Atom feeds all seem to be down for the count. I was going to subscribe with Fastladder, but the feed links are giving me blank pages.
your RSS and Atom feeds all seem to be down for the count
See this post.
I knew about this a long time ago. The thing is that I am not sure I wanted Ron Paul to run as a libertarian anyway. He spent far too much money during the primaries running anti-immigration ads and things like that for my tastes.
Thanks very much.
It would have been really, really nice if Paul had been upfront about that from the get-go.
While Roderick brings up a great quote, this is my favorite:
Q: Do you think people who relate more to the libertarian ideals of the Republican Party have a role to play in the Republican Party of the moment, and do you see a role for them in the coming (hopeful) rebuilding of the Republican Party?
A: I certainly hope so. The Republican Party has traditionally been the party of liberty and limited government. Republicans like Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater, and Ronald Reagan had very libertarian qualities. If the G.O.P. gets back to its roots, they can appeal once again to liberty-minded Americans.
Reagan as libertarian leaning? I’ve never understood how people get away with this claim. From the union busting to his less than modest foreign policy. . .the guy was an interventionist.
This interview is more proof that Paul is a conservative, not a libertarian.