Dr. Ron Paul joins Jeff Deist to talk about his decades as a congressman fighting the Fed, his efforts to legalize the use of gold and silver as untaxed currency, and his involvement with sound money initiatives in states like Arizona and Wyoming. Plus, Dr. Paul shares some great anecdotes about Reagan's Gold Commission, Alan Greenspan, and Paul Volcker.

Just when you thought our Syria policy could not get any worse, last week it did. The US military twice attacked Syrian government forces from a military base it illegally occupies inside Syria. According to the Pentagon, the attacks on Syrian government-backed forces were “defensive” because the Syrian fighters were approaching a US self-declared “de-confliction” zone inside Syria. The Syrian forces were pursuing ISIS in the area, but the US attacked anyway.

The US is training yet another rebel group fighting from that base, located near the border of Iraq at al-Tanf, and it claims that Syrian government forces pose a threat to the US military presence there. But the Pentagon has forgotten one thing: it has no authority to be in Syria in the first place! Neither the US Congress nor the UN Security Council has authorized a US military presence inside Syria.

So what gives the Trump Administration the right to set up military bases on foreign soil without the permission of that government? Why are we violating the sovereignty of Syria and attacking its military as they are fighting ISIS? Why does Washington claim that its primary mission in Syria is to defeat ISIS while taking military actions that benefit ISIS?

The Pentagon issued a statement saying its presence in Syria is necessary because the Syrian government is not strong enough to defeat ISIS on its own. But the “de-escalation zones” agreed upon by the Syrians, Russians, Iranians, and Turks have led to a reduction in fighting and a possible end to the six-year war. Even if true that the Syrian military is weakened, its weakness is due to six years of US-sponsored rebels fighting to overthrow it!

What is this really all about? Why does the US military occupy this base inside Syria? It’s partly about preventing the Syrians and Iraqis from working together to fight ISIS, but I think it’s mostly about Iran. If the Syrians and Iraqis join up to fight ISIS with the help of Iranian-allied Shia militia, the US believes it will strengthen Iran’s hand in the region. President Trump has recently returned from a trip to Saudi Arabia where he swore he would not allow that to happen.

But is this policy really in our interest, or are we just doing the bidding of our Middle East “allies,” who seem desperate for war with Iran? Saudi Arabia exports its radical form of Islam worldwide, including recently into moderate Asian Muslim countries like Indonesia. Iran does not. That is not to say that Iran is perfect, but does it make any sense to jump into the Sunni/Shia conflict on either side? The Syrians, along with their Russian and Iranian allies, are defeating ISIS and al-Qaeda. As candidate Trump said, what’s so bad about that?

We were told that if the Syrian government was allowed to liberate Aleppo from al-Qaeda, Assad would kill thousands who were trapped there. But the opposite has happened: life is returning to normal in Aleppo. The Christian minority there celebrated Easter for the first time in several years. They are rebuilding. Can’t we finally just leave the Syrians alone?

When you get to the point where your actions are actually helping ISIS, whether intended or not, perhaps it’s time to stop. It’s past time for the US to abandon its dangerous and counterproductive Syria policy and just bring the troops home.

Published on Jun 9, 2017 - Jeff Deist, president of the Mises Institute, on what libertarians (and even progressives and conservatives) ought to aim for, and why handing out U.S. Constitutions in Iraq might not be the most effective strategy.

Self-Determination, not Universalism, is the Goal
By Jeff Deist - 05/29/2017
...
Certainly there are universal normative principles found in libertarianism, especially natural law libertarianism. All humans have a right to sovereignty over their physical bodies and minds, a right to own justly-acquired property, and to freely associate (or disassociate) with others. Self-ownership and property rights are central tenets of libertarianism.

But many parts of the world disagree with those tenets, whether we admit this or not. Universal social norms, cultural attitudes, or policy prescriptions are a very tough sell beyond the West. While libertarians can universally condemn slavery, or authoritarian collectivism, it’s quite another thing to suggest how other societies ought to organize themselves politically. Yet consistent universalism requires this. Gay rights in America means gay rights for Saudi Arabia, open borders for Germany means Monaco also must open its doors to refugees, and Texas-style open carry is the prescription France needs to prevent another Bataclan. If US military intervention is justified in Rwanda, it must be justified in Syria. How can a universalist libertarian argue otherwise?

The fundamental problem with universalism is that so few things really are widely agreed upon. Universalists exhibit a special kind of hubris, one that smacks of neo-colonialism: the insistence that others must believe as we do, if only we show them the obvious superiority of our thinking.
...
More: https://mises.org/blog/self-determin...versalism-goal

Being libertarian is trendy right now, so much so that many actors, activists, politicians, media personalities, financial gurus, professors, scientists, and authors call themselves libertarians, even when they don’t really qualify philosophically and fundamentally.

To compile this list, our editors defined a libertarian as a consistent advocate of free-market capitalism, minimal government, and social tolerance (thus distinguishing libertarians from conservatives). Their motto might be “Keep government out of the boardroom and the bedroom.”

Our first effort to rank the 100 most influential libertarians came from a recent survey of libertarians carried out by FreedomFest, “the world’s largest gathering of free minds.” More than 10,000 people participated in the survey, identifying over 200 individuals whom they deemed most influential within the libertarian sphere. We also combed through many online sources and consulted with several well-connected and informed libertarians to compile this list.

Still, a list like this is subjective at best, and should be viewed as interesting and informative, rather than definitive. We very likely missed people who should have been on the list, and we welcome your input and correction for future editions. Moreover, while selecting only 100 is difficult, coming up with a ranking is even more subjective. We tried to rank the entrants in what we believe is a somewhat logical order of influence, but we certainly recognize that many readers (and perhaps even some people whose names are on the list!) may take exception to the ranking.

Finally, it is important to note that we chose to leave out a few individuals whose credentials as libertarians might be less convincing, such as Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Howard Stern. We may well change our minds on these omissions, but for now these individuals are left off the list.

1 Ron Paul — Perhaps no one has done more to bring the libertarian platform into the national spotlight than Ron Paul, the former United States Representative from Texas and three-time presidential candidate. He has also authored several books of libertarian philosophy on economics, education, foreign policy, and freedom.

2.Rand Paul — The Republican Kentucky junior senator and son of Ron Paul has been credited with bringing libertarianism into the mainstream by advancing the movement’s torch lit by his father. He has been one of the loudest voices against government overreach in Washington, particularly on issues of revenue, privacy, and justice.

3.Thomas Sowell — The Hoover Institution’s Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at Stanford University is a writer of distinction having authored nearly three dozen books on economics, social policy, and race, and his works have been collected in several others. Sowell is a National Humanities Medal winner for his libertarian-conservative writings and a longtime syndicated columnist, until his column was retired last year.
...