Yesterday, 07:23 PM
When you use the "He's right you know" meme, if you're only talking about the part where we disagree on how libertarian Rand Paul is, you should probably delete the rest of the post if you don't really endorse the rest of what they are saying..
Pierz was attacking Rand Paul with distortions and at times outrageous slander, saying that they don't support Rand and trying to make him out to be an enemy of libertarianism, when in reality that is totally ridiculous. If you pay attention to Rand and what he is doing, you know he is fighting for us on all fronts. It is in our strategic interest to support Rand, whether we are small government conservatives, paleo conservatives, libertarians or anarchists. That's why most of us are here. It's pretty obvious that living in a free market with a 1% tax with a balanced budget and hard currency is preferable to living with an 80% tax and fiat currency and huge debts and socialism - even if both systems are immoral, one is clearly better and more worth living in than the other. If we can agree on that, then we can agree that doing what we can to reduce the size and scope of government and increase freedom is beneficial to our lives, even if it is not the final answer or best answer.
Rand is a Constitutional Conservative, that is what he claims, and that is an accurate description. I said I personally consider him libertarian (you don't have to) because he is libertarian on every issue that pertains to what he is doing in DC, he votes libertarian, and libertarians are essentially Constitutional Conservatives, but not all Constitutional Conservatives are libertarian. Libertarians and I argue anarchists should support Constitutional Conservatives in general when it serves their strategic interests of reducing state power. There are a couple of minor and non-issues that Rand Paul isn't libertarian on, there is not any big issue that would be reason for a person not to support him or to even use to criticize him as not being a pure libertarian. It is ok to point these issues out, but they should not be emphasized because they aren't worth emphasizing or using to criticize in a non-friendly way. Rand is in the area where the libertarian spectrum starts to fade but I wouldn't say he is totally out of it. Like you said he could be considered a big "L" libertarian and if he claimed that title I wouldn't argue against him, but I can see how it doesn't serve his strategic interest in congress to be labeled a libertarian, Constitutional Conservative serves his strategic interests and he happens to fit well in that framework for someone who is largely pretty significantly libertarian.
Now, we can argue what voting like a libertarian looks like. A libertarian would vote for a 0% income tax like Ron Paul said he wanted. Is voting for a reduction in taxes and spending, or even a freeze that will help balance the budget when you consider "baseline spending" goes up 5% a year? Well, it depends.. when the alternative is to increase spending and never balance the budget, I would say that is libertarian.
There is no reason not to support Rand Paul at some level and it is foolish to actively attack him (friendly critiques are totally ok) - it serves your strategic interest to have Rand in the senate fighting for your freedom because he is trying to push the country in a more libertarian direction on every issue that really matters.