Topic: Ron Paul
Ron Paul's Foreign Policy vs. James S. Robbins' Nick Flint gives his first Objectivist critique of an article against Ron Paul's foreign policy.by Nick Flint
(Libertarian)
Friday, February 22, 2008
In the article "The Limits of Law" by James S. Robbins
Mr. Robbins ends his article by asserting that the President of the U.S.A. can use his Executive power to intervene into foreign affairs of countries such as Iraq, because of Ayn Rand's ethical view of dictators.
Mr. Robbins quotes Ayn Rand's interview in Playboy magazine thus:
"A dictatorship . . . is an outlaw and can claim no rights." And she agreed that "any free nation today has the moral right - though not the duty - to invade Soviet Russia, Cuba, or any other 'slave pen.'"
Can we make the deduction then that Mr. Robbins would take this view of the world as the principle supporting his opinion that the self-interest of the U.S.A. specifically involves toppling all the worlds dictators from here until we're all done cleaning the entire world mess? Should our Federal government do this at the expense of sacrificing American individuals by draining them with more oppressive IRS force-extracted taxes, and a future of bankruptcy brought on by fiat-money-funded militarism?
Or does Mr. Robbins simply mean we had the moral right to go in and knock off Hussein and leave Iraq, with job done. I'd go for that, but not at a cost of a billion a day from our slave-state fiat treasury.
You know, Ayn Rand also said that an individual should not help others if it involves the personal destitution of your own life. In the case of knocking off two-bit dictators -- instead of going out and killing the Al Queda leadership as we vowed to do in 2001 -- I don't think this is in our self interest as U.S.A. sovereign individuals. It seems to be in the fiat Federal Reserve's interest. Funny how Iraq and Iran had both stopped holding the dollar, and started holding Euros, before we really got pissed off and threatened them.
I have a humble idea: How about doing the opposite of what Mr. Robbins recommends: instead of asking our Federal government to topple all the world's dictators via a disasterous neo-con policy, why not adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy by removing all subsidies to all world's dictators? Then those pip-squeak 'slave-pen' leaders will be toppled soon enough by their own citizens.
Dr. Ron Paul is correct in his analysis that monetary policy is tied to 'everything' wrong in the U.S.A. I think it's time to vote Dr. Paul into office. We have our Patrick Henry / Paul Revere in Dr. Paul. He's yet another intellectual offspring of Ayn Rand, and I think objectivists would do our future posterity well to ignore the 'leadership' bloggers in the media, and vote for their own values.
I like the idea of voting for Dr. Paul. He's vowed to turn the Navy around from the Persian Gulf within a day or two of becoming President. I was an independent voter, but I'll be signing onto the GOP for the purposes of voting in the primaries this year. I also find it refreshing that he's a man of integrity and is a genuine rallying point for even partisan voters, such as my parents who are registered Democrat. They both will vote for him in the General Election if he is nominated, and they're dependent on Social Security.
If you love economic and personal freedom, if you have parents dependent on welfare, if you want to solve the health care costs, if you want to stop the war in Iraq ASAP, there's only ONE candidate on the ticket with the BRAINS to understand it, the transition plans to back it up, and the proper principles to guide him against a future Presidential power-grab.
This is One More Objectivist for Ron Paul. Go Dr. Paul!!
P.S.
Hey! Osama bin Laden and gang, keep your heads down: Dr. Paul's got some missiles to shove up your asses. REF: Legislation Proposed Here|
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 38 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Nick Flint only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Nick Flint is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: James S. Robbins
Date: 2008-02-22 13:11:08
For the record, my article was written seven years ago and was not "an article against Ron Paul's foreign policy." I think you are misleading your readers by billing it that way.
Only people that have never been to war always seem to want it most. Trying to "fix" the world, is like trying to keep the ocean back with a mop, But as a Nation we could fix the Countrie's problems "PDQ". We need to focus people, and without that we will become just another Nation in one of the four world Unions, and not the Greatest Nation on Earth, Sad times, I am going to go fishin, see ya
I agree with Dr. Ron Paul's Policies. I want to comment though on Dr. Paul's immigration policies. I believe that it unfair for some Latinos, especially the Hispanic media in the US and Latin America, to attack Dr. Paul on the immigration issue. I am a Native of Mexico and I believe that the US has the sovereign right to protect its borders if it wishes to. I don't see it as an attack or anti-Latino; as the media puts it. I know that there are some Americans that do not like the presence of Hispanics in the US, but it is not all Americans. Additionally, this is a complete separate issue from Dr. Paul's immigration policy.
Univision, the largest Hispanic Network in the US, should criticize and be a much harder on the Mexican Government. It is because of the Mexican Government that Mexicans leave their country to find work and a better life. It is comical, in my view, when president Calderon says that he is going to protect the rights of Mexicans. I believe Mr. Calderon should worry about creating jobs, fixing the economy and protecting the rights of Mexicans in Mexico.
I am inspired by Dr. Paul's strength, honor, and integrity. Maybe one day, Mexico will have someone like Dr. Ron Paul, someone that will stand for what he believes.
Thank you Dr. Paul, you have truly inspired me.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-02-25 09:42:23
I think it's a bit odd to be comparing Ron Paul's foreign policy proposals to the contents of an objectivist article written seven years ago by an author who hasn't even come out one way or another about Ron Paul. I think you're creating a bit of a straw man here Nick. Why not challenge people who have actually spoken against your preferred candidate, instead?
I am a bit of a neophyte when it comes to Ayn Rand (only having read We the Living). However, the point that is missing here is to question whether or not we are as free of a "free nation" that she had in mind. I contend that we are no longer a free nation because of our financial obligations in place in all of our overseas adventurism. Our liberties have eroded at a quickening rate since 9/11.
Since reading RP's book 'A Foreign Policy of Freedom' it has become more and more clear to me that even though we may think we may not be not subsidizing dictators, the recipients of our subsidies might be doing this.
We need to go a step further and stop *all* foreign aid as well as intervening militarily into conflicts with ill-defined results.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
