A Choice, Not An Echo
by
Justin Raimondo
by Justin Raimondo
DIGG THIS
Here is the text of a speech I just gave at a Ron Paul for President
rally in Mountain View, California.
It’s interesting how history is repeating itself, these days,
but with a twist: a candidate
emerges from the Republican grassroots, straight from the conservative
base that has been the bedrock of the party’s support since
the dark
days of the New
Deal. He faces a Republican
Establishment that is dedicated to the three overriding principles
of Washington politics, no matter which party we’re talking about:
big money, big government, and big subsides for the biggest, most
powerful interest groups. We have a candidate who offers
a
choice, not an echo, who calls conservatives – and independent
Americans – back to the founding principles of this country: the
concept of constitutionally limited government and a foreign policy
based on peace and the wisdom of minding our own business. We have,
in short, an authentic conservative, one who harkens back to such
Republican stalwarts as Robert
A. Taft and even Dwight
David Eisenhower, whose prescient warning against the power
of the military-industrial complex went unheeded by his fellow Republicans.
And we have a “mainstream” media that is hopelessly biased against
anyone who doesn’t fit into their predetermined categories, who
is authentic, and lives by the principles he espouses – indeed,
who is motivated by those principles and cares about little else.
The last time such a candidate appeared on the Republican scene,
he rose from relative obscurity to become a
conservative hero and symbol, and snatched the nomination from
Nelson
Rockefeller and a gaggle of pale imitation “moderates,” and
mounted a campaign that basically set the stage for the modern conservative
movement and the Reagan
Revolution of the 1980s. His name was Barry
Goldwater.
Almost half a century later, the Establishment
is once again facing a challenge from a maverick,
an upstart
who dares to point to the party’s betrayal of its principles, and
seeks to revive a movement that has turned into the exact opposite
of what it used to be: a crusade for limited government that, somehow,
got sidetracked into becoming an all-out assault on the Constitution
and what is left of our civil liberties. Like Goldwater, he is a
red-state Republican, a staunch conservative – perhaps the most
conservative member of Congress. He has stood like
a rock against the temper of the times, and swum against the
current of his own party in upholding his deep skepticism of government
“solutions,” and has justly earned the sobriquet “Dr. No” because
he has no trouble voting against most of the nonsense that passes
for legislation at the federal level.
His name is Ron
Paul.
He is the rightful heir
of Goldwater, of Taft, of a party that once stood for individual
rights, and a peaceful, prudent foreign policy based on the pursuit
of American interests. A party that has since lost its way.
It’s sad, really, to see the decline
of a once
great party:
a party that has presided over the biggest expansion
of government since the Great
Society of Lyndon Johnson, the biggest explosion
of federal spending in modern times, and the most
serious assault
on our constitutional liberties since the imposition of the Alien
and Sedition Acts in 1798. Here is a party that once stood for
decentralized government asserting the theory of presidential supremacy,
in which the power of the executive is exaggerated
and mystified until it becomes a monstrous growth of precisely the
same sort feared by the Founders, who warned against the return
of royalism to America – and wrote a Constitution in which the authority
of the other two branches of government served as vital checks and
balances against the tendency of the executive to usurp power and
throw off restraints.

How did this happen? How is it that the conservatives of today
advocate precisely the
opposite of what they advocated yesterday? How has the dream
of a free America turned into the nightmare of the Homeland
Security State, where government can search our homes, read
our email, spy on our legal and constitutionally protected activities,
all without a warrant or even a nod to anything remotely resembling
a legal procedure?
Ron Paul clearly sees the key to all this, and that is why he
has staked out a position as the foremost opponent
of militarism in the US Congress. Our interventionist foreign
policy is the motor that drives the engine of Big Government, and
its fuel is the sort of war hysteria that has permeated political
life since the 9/11 terrorist attacks and led to our present predicament
in Iraq. Ron Paul stands
alone among the Republican candidates for president in opposing
our immoral
and horribly counterproductive
invasion of Iraq. The idea that we can or should go into a foreign
country, and “transform” it according to some grand
design, to fit some preconceived made-in-Washington formula
– to impose “democracy,” or what passes for it these days, at gunpoint
on the people of the Middle East – is an idea that one might expect
from a liberal Democrat, who, after all, has an abiding faith in
the power of government to do … well, practically anything! One
would think that Republicans, and especially those who fancy themselves
conservative Republicans, would know better.
Unfortunately, these days, one would be very wrong to assume any
such thing.
The Republican party has been hijacked, and transformed into its
Bizarro
World equivalent: the party of Barry Goldwater has become the party
of Big Brother.
In reminding Republicans of their lost heritage, in reviving the
spirit of 1964, in offering a choice not an echo of the big government
conservative cant that has dominated the party for the past eight
years, Ron Paul is the conscience of the GOP. Will the party listen
to its conscience, or will it continue to sin against its own traditions?
Only time will tell. But I’ll tell you this:
The pundits are saying that Ron Paul hasn’t got a chance. He’s
an outsider, a maverick, a second-tier nobody – how could he possibly
win the party’s nomination for the highest office in the land? Well,
I don’t know the precise answer to that question, and I won’t pretend
that I do, but I do know this: once before, the know-it-all columnists
and the party kingmakers, decided that a representative of true
conservatism couldn’t possibly get the nomination. In 1964, Rockefeller
– and, yes, another
Romney, by the name of George – were the frontrunners, deemed
so by the mainstream media and the political mavens. Yet Goldwater
came from behind, his support welling up from the grassroots:
he inspired thousands of activists, who were brought into the freedom
movement by his passionate rhetoric and obvious authenticity.
Is history repeating itself? There are many indications that Ron
Paul’s campaign has the potential to change the face of American
politics – and this rally is one such indication. We have much work
to do to bring Dr. Paul’s message to the American people: so let’s
roll up our sleeves and get to work.
This originally appeared on Taki's
Top Drawer.
July
18, 2007
Justin
Raimondo [send him mail]
is editorial director of Antiwar.com and is the author of An
Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard and Reclaiming
the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement.
Copyright
© 2007 Taki's Top Drawer
|