Progressives and the Ron Paul Fallacies

January 1st, 2012

Via: Salon:

The thing I loathe most about election season is reflected in the central fallacy that drives progressive discussion the minute “Ron Paul” is mentioned. As soon as his candidacy is discussed, progressives will reflexively point to a slew of positions he holds that are anathema to liberalism and odious in their own right and then say: how can you support someone who holds this awful, destructive position? The premise here — the game that’s being played — is that if you can identify some heinous views that a certain candidate holds, then it means they are beyond the pale, that no Decent Person should even consider praising any part of their candidacy.

The fallacy in this reasoning is glaring. The candidate supported by progressives — President Obama — himself holds heinous views on a slew of critical issues and himself has done heinous things with the power he has been vested. He has slaughtered civilians — Muslim children by the dozens — not once or twice, but continuously in numerous nations with drones, cluster bombs and other forms of attack. He has sought to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs. He has institutionalized the power of Presidents — in secret and with no checks — to target American citizens for assassination-by-CIA, far from any battlefield. He has waged an unprecedented war against whistleblowers, the protection of which was once a liberal shibboleth. He rendered permanently irrelevant the War Powers Resolution, a crown jewel in the list of post-Vietnam liberal accomplishments, and thus enshrined the power of Presidents to wage war even in the face of a Congressional vote against it. His obsession with secrecy is so extreme that it has become darkly laughable in its manifestations, and he even worked to amend the Freedom of Information Act (another crown jewel of liberal legislative successes) when compliance became inconvenient.

He has entrenched for a generation the once-reviled, once-radical Bush/Cheney Terrorism powers of indefinite detention, military commissions, and the state secret privilege as a weapon to immunize political leaders from the rule of law. He has shielded Bush era criminals from every last form of accountability. He has vigorously prosecuted the cruel and supremely racist War on Drugs, including those parts he vowed during the campaign to relinquish — a war which devastates minority communities and encages and converts into felons huge numbers of minority youth for no good reason. He has empowered thieving bankers through the Wall Street bailout, Fed secrecy, efforts to shield mortgage defrauders from prosecution, and the appointment of an endless roster of former Goldman, Sachs executives and lobbyists. He’s brought the nation to a full-on Cold War and a covert hot war with Iran, on the brink of far greater hostilities. He has made the U.S. as subservient as ever to the destructive agenda of the right-wing Israeli government. His support for some of the Arab world’s most repressive regimes is as strong as ever.

Most of all, America’s National Security State, its Surveillance State, and its posture of endless war is more robust than ever before. The nation suffers from what National Journal‘s Michael Hirsh just christened “Obama’s Romance with the CIA.” He has created what The Washington Post just dubbed “a vast drone/killing operation,” all behind an impenetrable wall of secrecy and without a shred of oversight. Obama’s steadfast devotion to what Dana Priest and William Arkin called “Top Secret America” has severe domestic repercussions as well, building up vast debt and deficits in the name of militarism that create the pretext for the “austerity” measures which the Washington class (including Obama) is plotting to impose on America’s middle and lower classes.

The simple fact is that progressives are supporting a candidate for President who has done all of that — things liberalism has long held to be pernicious. I know it’s annoying and miserable to hear. Progressives like to think of themselves as the faction that stands for peace, opposes wars, believes in due process and civil liberties, distrusts the military-industrial complex, supports candidates who are devoted to individual rights, transparency and economic equality. All of these facts — like the history laid out by Stoller in that essay — negate that desired self-perception. These facts demonstrate that the leader progressives have empowered and will empower again has worked in direct opposition to those values and engaged in conduct that is nothing short of horrific. So there is an eagerness to avoid hearing about them, to pretend they don’t exist. And there’s a corresponding hostility toward those who point them out, who insist that they not be ignored.

The parallel reality — the undeniable fact — is that all of these listed heinous views and actions from Barack Obama have been vehemently opposed and condemned by Ron Paul: and among the major GOP candidates, only by Ron Paul. For that reason, Paul’s candidacy forces progressives to face the hideous positions and actions of their candidate, of the person they want to empower for another four years. If Paul were not in the race or were not receiving attention, none of these issues would receive any attention because all the other major GOP candidates either agree with Obama on these matters or hold even worse views.

Research Credit: roaches

7 Responses to “Progressives and the Ron Paul Fallacies”

  1. Bigelow says:

    Even if Paul became president nothing says he would be allowed to stop any of the obscenities cited above. Lots of folks look on him as some sort of last hope …but there is little chance of protecting him from the real rulers of the United States so he would become just another in a long line of “change” executives.

  2. mangrove says:

    Greenwald makes valid points regarding the gullibility, blindness, and hypocrisy of progressives. I tried to warn people about how Obama was going to be worse than Bush, long before he became president.

    Now here’s Ron Paul saying what a lot of desperate people want to hear, especially on the big issues of war and the economy. And somehow he’s trustworthy. Talk is cheap.

    And, I’ll never be able to look the other way regarding the stink of his associations with the John Birch Society et al, regardless of the fact that the mainstream media is manipulating voters by bringing to light his long and consistent ties with overt racists and homophobes, who he’s now trying to distance himself from. Trouble is, regardless of whatever the messenger’s agenda might be, it’s the horrible truth.

    So just pull the lever for Paul and HOPE he’ll keep his bigotry at bay, whilst bringing back “sound money” and ending the wars. As if he’s a man of the people. Sound vaguely familiar?

    Then someone else can write an essay, after a few years of a Paul presidency, during The Civil War II, that it was just unconscionable that all those people believed in Paul and refused to take responsibility for their hypocrisy.

    This is really getting old. What’s the definition of insanity again?

  3. erth2karin says:

    Sadly true, and truly sad.

  4. ENERGYMAN says:

    One concrete thing he could do is veto EVERY appropriation bill used to fund this criminal system. Also he would act as Commander in Chief and stop all the militarism and bullshit “national security” actions that TPTB rely on the POTUS to enable and institute.

    Even though the trend seems to be utter disregard for the law, if Ron Paul simply withheld pen from paper time and time again, the highway of allowance for this satanic machine would find itself replete with roadblocks and destroyed bridges that would have many positive ripple effects. And that would at least throw a wrench into the gears and slow it down and just maybe give us enough time to see enough people wake up, and maybe change the course this world is on.

    This isn’t directed towards you Bigelow, this is just a rant that needs to be made…..

    IT’S THE LAW THAT THEY ARE AFTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    IT’S THE FUCKING LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW
    IT’S THE LAW

    IT’S THE FUCKING LAW THAT DEFINES AND RESTRAINS THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT.

    IT’S THE FUCKING LAW THAT AUTHORIZES THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS.

    IT’S THE LAW THAT PROTECTS US FROM THEM.

    IT’S THE LAW THAT WE MUST FIRST BREAK IN ORDER TO FALL INTO THEIR JURISDICTION.

    IT’S THE LAW THAT IS THE GAS IN THEIR FUEL TANKS.

    IT’S THE LAW THAT IS THE FOOD THAT GIVES THIS BEAST IT’S LIFE AND ENERGY AND STRENGTH.

    In order for them to get their way, they must change the law.

    In order for a law to come into existence, the POTUS must SIGN THE BILL, or congress will have to jump thru many more hoops and draw much more attention to itself and the legislation at hand.
    And that invites PUBLIC SCRUTINY, something that these type of proposed laws hopefully will not be able to afford. And Paul has, as an ace in his pocket, his son that will serve as a megaphone to shine the light.

    This is probably our last chance at an attempt for a peaceful revolution.

  5. After thirty years I think I can trust RP to retain his DR NO alias towards unlawful “bills”.

  6. prov6yahoo says:

    Yes, in spite of any and all negatives you can possibly think of about the man, Ron Paul is probably our best and maybe our last hope at this point in time. Good God people, take what you can get! Think of the water this man is carrying for us. I use to play on softball teams, and would hear all the whining from other players about the how coach is screwing up this and the coach is messing up that. I would always thank the coach for doing that thankless job, because not only did he have to do all the work setting up everything for us, but put up with all the whining. The others did not seem to realize that he was making it so that we could just show up and play, and not have to do any work beforehand.

    Even if there really is no way to stop TPTB at least we can say we tried to do something by supporting Ron Paul.

  7. Zuma says:

    http://www.dailypaul.com/198865/hr-3166-enemy-expatriation-act

    i’m curious if the users on ronpaul.com in any way reliably reflect his views after reading this. if so -if Paul actually does oppose the Enemy Expatriation Act -i’d be interested in seeing words of his to such effect…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.