Advancing Ron Paul’s Ideas Requires Compromise
By James Maier on 09/01/2012 in Ron Paul with 39 CommentsRead Time: 4 - 6 minutes
There’s something amiss about a number of Ron Paul campaign’s adherents, many of whom did little to aid the congressman in his third and final candidacy for the presidency. These Paul supporters continue to post attacks upon those who supported other candidates. Many of whom are now, often begrudgingly, supporting Mitt Romney. Other Ron Paulers doubt the electoral viability of Romney, especially in the light of the Republican National Convention and the treatment of the Ron Paul delegates. These Ron Paul voters make up a fair amount of the Republican voting block during the primaries and caucuses, and many will not support a Romney ticket because of the way they were treated.
While the disagreements with the establishment GOP are understandable, these attacks do not help their cause or the political debate in general. It is one thing to have principle, but it is another thing to slam it in the face of those whom you disagree with, thus turning them off to your “brand” of small government conservatism. Name-calling and belittling those who disagree is not a good way to convince them you are right. Dialogue is important. For example, even if two people disagree on foreign policy, perhaps they can agree on the fact that government should not be in the position of “providing” services like healthcare, or that the Second Amendment is crucial to the preservation of a constitutional republic in the United States. In other words, accept that some people will agree on arguments and issues before you can expect them to embrace an entire philosophy.
Ron Paul has respect from people across the political aisle because he advocates for intellectual debate. He talks about issues; not righteousness. To save Paul’s honor, those in the “liberty movement” should embrace his demeanor, not just his philosophy.
The liberty movement loses honor and credibility every time its members allow dogmatism overwhelm idealism. Hundreds of youth served the Paul campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire to spearhead the 2012 caucus and primary season. They made quite an impact on the residents in those states seeing the dedication and the time spent for a set of principles. But every time someone from the movement posts something inflammatory or “trolls” the Mitt Romney Facebook page, a piece of that veneer is chipped off the libertarian brand as their view of the respectable young men and women at their door in January is replaced by the view of an angry middle-aged Paul supporter on Facebook; a person whose net contribution was likely only to donate a few dollars to the campaign.
The movement is not over by any means, but many are acting as if November 2012 will be the definite end of the United States as a country with a constitutional form of government, regardless of who wins. While it can be argued that the country has suffered the loss of many liberties, that is just an indication that people within the movement need to work harder to succeed next time and to work harder to preserve what liberties remain. History tends toward tyranny; it is just a matter of how hard people want to curtail or reverse that trend, whether through political action or civil disobedience, both shown in history to be viable in changing the policies of governments.
In that same breath, the bridges should not be burnt as they still need to be crossed at some point in time. The enemies made now are not likely to help in the future and will be liabilities as opposed to assets. Rand Paul is a great example of reaching out to the establishment with his endorsement of Romney. Regardless of his disagreements with Romney, which are many in number, he was able to build a needed bridge. Even though they are not often respectful of us in the liberty movement, we will need the votes of the mainstream GOP voters when libertarian-leaning candidates run for congress, senate, and are one day nominated as the presidential candidate.
Many others have said it in the weeks prior, but the Paul campaign’s supporters and the liberty movement cannot advance by solely being an echo chamber, and at this rate, that is what it is becoming. Factions within the movement are too many in number to achieve anything viable. Factions must come to a consensus on some basic issues as other political movements do. Basic issues like the Federal Reserve, taxation, on civil liberties, and on foreign interventions overseas, need to be agreed upon. Achievable goals need to be set. And the limits of those goals need to be reasonable.
The libertarian movement that Ron Paul helped inspire and that his son, Rand, and many others are carrying on, cannot move ahead without recognizing the fact that politics is an art of compromise and coalition building. Saving Paul’s honor is going to be the most crucial task heading into the future, as his honor and the honor of the movement he inspired are one and the same.




Leave Your Comment →
39 Comments
KJ
09.01.2012
SRSLY? What I’m seeing is Rand supporters and Johnson supporters from two sides slamming Ron Paul supporters who simply don’t want to fall in line behind their candidates. I wonder where you are seeing the other?
Philip
09.01.2012
James,
As a Ron Paul supporter myself (in the UK!), I completely agree with you. The problem is really one of image rather than substance. I reckon a large number of Republicans actually agree with Dr Paul’s set of positions, but the image of some of his supporters has not done him any favours. I would like to see many more Doug Wead types in the spotlight, and less emphasis on the angry student types shouting about ‘revolutions’. Don’t misunderstand me, I think the energy of the grassroots is great, but the overall image MUST appeal to a wider age and political profile. The tribute video which they played at the RNC Convention was exactly the sort of thing the campaign should have been airing months ago. The liberty movement has plenty of wealthy donors and, contrary to what some say, actually has a sympathetic ear in parts of the media: I have watched lots of Dr Paul interviews which were perfectly fair and balanced, supportive even, yet underneath there is a tirade of abuse from some RP supporters claiming the interview was biased etc etc. This type of reaction does the liberty movement no favours and turns off potential supporters. Keeping it calm and balanced, and yes supporting Rand withIN the republican party, is definitely the way forward.
Dave Infinger
09.01.2012
@Dave Infinger
The writer has a lot to learn about Ron Paul supporters. Oh, and that bit about not compromizing, yea that has worked well in my lifetime, not. Ron Paul stood for the same things his supporters stood for and that is freedom, how do you compromize your freedom and still live in a free Country? Silly writer, tricks are for kids, not people who read on the Internet.
Philip
09.01.2012
Your response is exactly the sort of thing the author is talking about.! Can you imagine what it must feel like to be a 60 year old mainstream Republican lady, worked for her local party for 30 years, and then her slot is taken by someone in their 20s who has just signed up 6 months ago? The lady may be quietly receptive to the libertarian agenda – she probably has gay friends, she probably doesn’t really like wars too much – but she is not going to be persuaded by someone lecturing her on pure freedom etc, especially when the lecturer is young enough to be her grandson! However with more gentle persuasion, and perhaps shown some respect, she may be prepared to listen and give some ground.
James Maier
09.03.2012
@jamesmaier
I am the writer. I worked for Ron Paul in Iowa.
I’m not saying we need to compromise, just saying we need to be more reasonable and civil.
Dee Ann Guzman
09.01.2012
@Dee Ann Guzman
Simply Amazing! The person authoring this sincerely looks at what ahppened at the convention and says Ron Paul supporters are not being NICE enough! Give me a break! Mitt Romney attempted to squash a man who has served his country for more than 30 years like a bug! He had the votes, and rather than just acting like a gentleman, he chose to not only win but be disrespectful besides to a man who has more integrity in his little finger, than Mitt and his whole campaign staff, and the RNC leadership! Shame on you!
Philip
09.01.2012
What happened at the Convention was bad, obviously. The enthusiasm and sheer dedication of the Ron Paul delegates – and his many supporters – is undeniable, and I applaud them absolutely. However the harsh truth is that the image of some (not all, but some) of his supporters over the past year or two was not at all helpful – groups of (mostly male) college students chanting ‘revolution’ and vitriolic comments about the media which, in many cases, were completely unjustified – this type of stuff just made the movement look extreme and turned off middle aged Republican voters…not good in Republican primaries! This all started long before the county conventions (though I agree that some of those were very unjust on the Paul supporters, and there was voter fraud going on), and just gave the anti-Paul sections of the media something to chew on.
Dee Ann Guzman
09.01.2012
@Dee Ann Guzman
Oh, and I want to add, you haven’t seen nothin’ yet buddy! Dogmatism, indeed! The RNC handling of the convention was the height of dogmatism!
Ashley
09.01.2012
I believe that this author speaks (or writes) a very true message. I only know what I have seen, and I have seen not only cheating from one side but embarrassing actions from another. It is completely true that others are wary and hateful of Ron Paul supporters because we are intolerant of them. It is also true, however, that you can only be walked over so much. It is difficult to respond favorably to someone who has broken rules and ignored your cries. In any relationship, there is usually fault on both sides; however, both sides must admit to it and be willing to change. I believe that the author should take more notice of the cheating by the RNC and other state conventions, but I feel he should also give more ideas about peaceful protest by the Ron Paul supporters. I feel that it’s important to be peaceful, but you should also be able to object when someone is treating you wrongly.
Zachary D Bendickson
09.01.2012
You admit we were treated horribly and then say we should just forget about it. We should follow what the GOP wants after they royally screwed us. Why would we follow a crooked party that doesnt want what we want. You dont compromise on on the core principle of what you believe in. We would be better off consolodating a 3rd party of Independents/Libertarians/Constitutionalists and leave the crooked GOP to rot. I will never support a group that does not believe in free elections. The sad part is the chances of Ron Paul winning was slim to none and they STILL were crooked about it.
des
09.01.2012
http://www.dailypaul.com/247643/ron-paul-on-compromise-and-democracy
Mike Liberto
09.01.2012
Libertarianism is the future.
Jill Greene
09.01.2012
I think people like to romanticize Ron Paul without actually considering what the consequences of his ideas, if implemented, would be. Also, he seems to be very confused about what the Constitution says concerning the Supreme Court and its functions and responsibilities.
Richard Griffin
09.01.2012
Yes, the horrible consequences of free will and responsible government. Shudder.
Jill Greene
09.01.2012
No, the horrible consequences of not having roads and sewers and trash pick up. Ever smelled a backed up sewer?
Jill Greene
09.01.2012
How about not having schools, or police officers, or fire fighters, or utility companies, or hospitals, or water treatment plants, or bridges…
Jill Greene
09.01.2012
or national or state parks, gaming commissions, parks and recreation (a HORRIBLE waste of tax payer money until you can’t use it any more), or school buses, or technology because there’d be no NASA, and you can kiss your satellite and internet goodbye, because who do you think puts the satellites and internet servers up in the first place?
Jill Greene
09.01.2012
But hey, you’d get to smoke weed, so that’s cool.
Dean Linney
09.01.2012
Nice try but Ron Paul supporters are Pissed off. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say… too soon? I was appalled by the RNC’s tactics. I am not even a Republican. I have been an Independent voter for 20 years. I will be voting for Gary Johnson. I might have voted for Dr. Paul if he got the nod. Ron himself said it best, everyone must think for themselves and vote for whomever they want to. I will not loose sleep over my vote. I will not loose sleep over all the people who tell me my vote is wasted either. My heart goes out to all of you. I truly feel your pain, and your righteous anger. I will never compromise my principals. I will be voting for Liberty any way I can. Dr. Paul does not own the word. He said himself he doesn’t hold the torch, we do.
George Manty
09.01.2012
I think it may be divisive enough that if Mitt Romney loses this election, the Ron Paulers might move to the Libertarian party. Then the Republicans could eventually dwindle down to the third biggest party. I think the same thing could happen to the Democrats, but they seem much more unified than Republicans at the moment. What’s more likely is for disenfranchised Democrats to join Ron Paul Republicans as Libertarians. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next 4-10 years with the two major parties.
Chad Peace
09.01.2012
Jill Greene I actually agree with your concern about the impracticality of many of Ron Paul’s ideals, but do not share in the oversimplification that he advocates for not having roads, etc… Roads, for example, are paid for by state governments, almost in their entirety. A distinction between the proper role of the Federal government, and a state government.
Josh Coleman
09.01.2012
@Jill…He was never trying to undercut spending to THAT extreme. Especially since the funding of a number of areas don’t function the way you seem to think. “technology because there’d be no NASA” A- technology doesn’t just magically appear in our hands straight from NASA. It comes from the private sector too. B-NASA operates under the Dept. of Defense, which would see some cuts. Keep in mind that the US outspends the next 42 countries (Russia, China, Germany, etc). RP spent over 30 years in gov’t, he knew these things wouldn’t happen overnight, which WOULD be a disaster. I’m sure his knowledge of the Constitution and the Supreme Court (which is clearly corrupt and now requires some correction) are far less than yours.
Oren Stryker
09.01.2012
Jill seems to be a deep thinker. Just the way the parties like them to be.
Johnny Ritchie
09.01.2012
Ron Paul stepping over the less fortunate as a public servant is almost as bad as Romney feeding off them as a Public Servant. Obama 2012.
Michael Sullivan
09.01.2012
#1 best ever ! With him from the start ! Some of them call him a nut !
Dean Linney
09.01.2012
You convinced me Johny! what was I thinking! Obama2012! ROFLMAO!
Nancy Benhardus
09.01.2012
And you aree the judge of roighteousness on the part of the decisions of others???
Kathy Jones
09.02.2012
Jill most of the things you point out is state not federal. Feds job is to protect the borders of this country and to follow and enforce the constitution and the laws of this nation.
James Nobles
09.02.2012
Ron Paul is an anarchist, like most libertarians. There is nothing “intellectual” about his ideas unless you consider the destruction of modern society to be an intellectual pursuit.
Kevin Hall
09.02.2012
He’s an imbecile.
Ken Warner
09.02.2012
He authored over 620 pieces of legislation in his 20 years as a Representative, not one passed. Ron Paul regularly added earmarks that benefited his district and then voted against them when he new they would pass so that he could say he was the one voting “against” spending measures. These are not the actions of a capable legislator or public servant, but those of a nut case.
Ken Warner
09.02.2012
And the one piece of legislation that he coauthored that passed, was to thank NASA for their work on the space program, an agency that he once said was unconstitutional and a waste of tax payer money. Nut Case.
Jill Greene
09.02.2012
Ok, I live in PA. I see what happens when the federal government tightens the purse strings. It means state money gets tighter and tighter, it means that local municipalities dont have access to the programs they used to have, they can’t develop the way they could have before, and everything comes to a full stop. no new construction, no new development, no progrees. nothing. I refuse to believe that so many folks here are so naive to think that the states get NOTHING from the federal government to do the things they do.
Jill Greene
09.02.2012
Josh, so when Ron Paul proposed a federal law restricting the ability of the Supreme Court to hear cases involving the constitutionality of state constitutions restricting the rights of gays to get married…who determines if that federal law restricting the Supreme Court’s prerogatives is constitutional or not? Yeah, don’t need to be a constitutional scholar to work that one out.
nader paul kucinich gravel mckinney baldwin ventura sheehan perot carter
09.02.2012
Revolution on their minds … the children start to march. Against the world in which they have to live … oh, the hate that’s in their hearts. They’re tired of being pushed around and told just what to do … they’ll fight the world until they’ve won and love comes flowing through, yeah! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRhZISswW_k
Justin Buell
09.02.2012
Sort of agree.
But Libertarianism also needs it’s… Anne Coulter, if you will.
James Maier
09.03.2012
@jamesmaier
We do, but I don’t think that people need to make themselves that. I’ve given up arguing on Facebook with people who are unreasonable.
Matthias P. Mathe
09.02.2012
It’s too bad that sharing your honest beliefs and listening attentively to other’s beliefs to reach a compromise is now considered “a movement.” Kinda what this country is based on right?
James Maier
09.03.2012
@jamesmaier
FROM THE AUTHOR: Just to clarify to those commenting on this who think I’m opposed to Ron Paul’s ideas… I was a Ron Paul supporter. Reading his book “The Revolution” is what convinced me to become a libertarian. I volunteered for his campaign and spent a week in Iowa in preparation for the Caucuses.
I am just trying to suggest that those of us who were Paul supporters take more of a civil tone with our message, and not stoop to the level of the RNC and those who decry us.
Use logic in your arguments, not vitriol. Do not attack those you disagree with; inform them with sound reasoning.