View RSS Feed

Libertea Party

The REAL reason the media hates Ron Paul and liberty.

Rate this Entry
It's funny watching the flowering relationship between many in the media and Rick Santorum. You see those two will start fighting again but it will merely be a lover's quarrel. The real hate from the media is reserved for those who love liberty and oppose big government.

To be employed in political journalism you take for granted that the government has a role in civil society beyond as a mere functionary defending person and property. In fact a journalist takes great pride in "being a part of the conversation" and "shaping and covering the issues". Unfortunately for them if there's no coercive role for the government to play they have no purpose to Ron Paul. Sure they are mostly liberal but they would prefer a Santorum to fight with in national issues over gays etc. rather than a situation where each local community miles apart could care less about what goes on with those gays, Muslims, etc 3,000 miles away. They need a battle for their own relevance and sense of purpose and someone like Ron Paul would deny them that fulfillment. Government is a force that gives them meaning.

I recall a survey that said most people were more suspicious of atheists than Muslims, recent immigrants, etc. The survey said they would rather their child marry a Muslim than an atheist.

All other things being equal I suspect that a liberal journalist would rather have their child married to a Rick Santorum clone than a libertarian Rand Paul or Gary Johnson. The reason is the same: they are horrified that someone would think they have no role to play in the universe. Since liberty encourages all to pursue their own life most are not offended by it. But since liberal journalists give politics the space in their lives that many others give to religion they are deeply repulsed and angered that a candidate would say to their religion: "You are alone to do as you please but what you want to devote your life to is meaningless and does not exist in reality."

I almost feel sorry for them chasing Ron Paul around. His presence to them is like dealing with an existential crisis:
There is no one given therapeutic method in modern psychology known to coerce a person out of existential despair; the issue is seldom, if at all, addressed from a medical standpoint.

Peter Wessel Zapffe, a Norwegian philosopher, provided, in his work The Last Messiah, a fourfold route that he believed all self-conscious beings use in order to cope with the inherent indifference and absurdity of existence, comprising Anchoring, Isolation, Distraction, and Sublimation:

Anchoring is the "fixation of points within, or construction of walls around, the liquid fray of consciousness". The anchoring mechanism provides individuals with a value or an ideal that allows them to focus their attentions in a consistent manner. Zapffe also applied the anchoring principle to society, and stated "God, the Church, the State, morality, fate, the laws of life, the people, the future" are all examples of collective primary anchoring firmaments.
Isolation is "a fully arbitrary dismissal from consciousness of all disturbing and destructive thought and feeling".
Distraction is when "one limits attention to the critical bounds by constantly enthralling it with impressions". Distraction focuses all of one's energy on a task or idea to prevent the mind from turning in on itself.
Sublimation is the refocusing of energy away from negative outlets, toward positive ones. The individual distances him / herself and looks at their existence from an aesthetic point of view (e.g. writers, poets, painters). Zapffe himself pointed out that his written works were the product of sublimation.
In this existential crisis they panic. They attack his policies as evil. Then they try to distract themselves by attacking him on newsletters. But he sits there like The Raven maddening them not with an national agenda to fight against but with his stern, decades long, and consistent reply of "nevermore".