Forbes writer, Ralph Benko, has a nice piece up on Ron Paul:
Paul represents the re-emergence of a great American tradition. That tradition reawakens in the person of Ron Paul, who has a fair claim to be our era’s Thomas Jefferson. As Jefferson’s heir he commands deep respect if not always (as in the case of this Supply Side, Hamiltonian, writer) complete fealty.
… Jefferson was a courageous radical. His anti-(federal)-government convictions often are indistinguishable from those of Dr. Paul. Dr. Paul unabashedly went to bat for secession after Gov. Perry came under fire for rhetorically toying with that. Jefferson’s anonymous co-authorship of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions is in many ways the charter text on the primacy of states rights.
Jefferson envisaged America becoming the world’s great “empire of liberty. ” On departing the presidency he wrote:
“ Trusted with the destinies of this solitary republic of the world, the only monument of human rights, and the sole depository of the sacred fire of freedom and self-government, from hence it is to be lighted up in other regions of the earth, if other regions of the earth shall ever become susceptible of its benign influence.”
…There are principled reasons to dispute with some of Dr. Paul’s positions.
It is always interesting when a comparison is made between two people and their circumstances – especially when the differences lead to disputes of principle. In the case of Jefferson, his unconstitutional moments as president do not lend themselves to principles as they do pragmatics. It is an error to believe that justification can be found for such acts other than a lack of patience, if not faith, in free systems.
Politicians endeavor to put out small fires for fear of conflagrations. The fear justifies immediate force. Because freedom requires considerations of agreement as opposed to force, it warrants understanding and sanctions patience toward anticipated remedies that only stalwarts of liberty are willing to believe will appear. Too often, the present emotional din reaches the extreme, as action is demanded and political plans are implemented, rectifying the latest problematic event or societal injustice.
Over time, we expect instant gratification from a government that grows itself in preparation for every contingency. It is in this fashion, as Edmund Burke foresaw, that “liberty is nibbled away, for expedients.” The only question remaining leaves us to wonder exactly how much is left to eat.
