Ron Paul has elaborated on his views in his books, in speeches, and in interviews. During the debates, however, when he has a national audience, he doesn\u2019t always present his views has persuasively as he could.\u00a0 In my last article, I suggested ways in which Ron Paul could respond to challenges regarding his views on foreign policy and national security. In this article, I speak to criticisms concerning his position on drugs and the charge of “racism” that has recently been brought against him once more.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s start with Paul\u2019s position on drugs.\u00a0 Congressman Paul should approach his objectors along the following lines:<\/p>\n
\u201cMy critics, especially my Republican critics, spare no occasion to misconstrue my positions on many issues; yet they are particularly careless with the truth when they address my position on (recreational) drugs.\u00a0 Contrary to what has been said, I do not <\/em>favor the legalization <\/em>of <\/em>drugs.\u00a0 What I favor is an end to the federal <\/em>government\u2019s so-called \u201cwar\u201d on drugs.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cTo put it more bluntly, I believe that while drug usage, like every other self-destructive habit, is bad, I believe just as strongly that the federal <\/em>government\u2019s criminalization <\/em>of drug usage is vastly worse.\u00a0 Drug usage is harmful, yes, but, like the usage of alcohol, tobacco, and any number of other products, its harm is primarily self-directed<\/em>.\u00a0 And like these other activities, the harm is always self-induced<\/em>.\u00a0 In stark contrast, the criminalization of drug usage by the federal government is harmful alright, but it is a harm that is imposed <\/em>upon all Americans<\/em>.\u00a0 In criminalizing drug usage, the federal government strikes a blow at nothing more or less than our very liberty.<\/p>\n \u201cThis may strike some of us as a stretch. But to the skeptics among us, I pose this simple challenge: would our liberty increase or decrease in the event that the federal government declared \u2018a war,\u2019 say, on obesity, and then proceeded to mandate a diet for only \u2018the obese\u2019 among us to follow?\u00a0 Even if you were not numbered among \u2018the obese,\u2019 and even if you acknowledged that obesity is a bad thing, the answer to this question, I am sure, strikes you as obvious.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen the federal government imposes laws upon all of the states, and when these laws forbid the purchase of potentially self-destructive products, liberty has been denied, for it is at once unconstitutional and immoral for the federal government to act thus.\u00a0 When the state governments forbid drug usage, they do not act unconstitutionally; they do, though, act against the spirit of liberty, for liberty consists in nothing if not the freedom of the individual to make choices for himself and to accept the consequences of doing so.<\/p>\n \u201cIf I favor \u201cthe legalization\u201d of drug usage because I oppose the federal government\u2019s criminalization of it, then all of us who believe that lying, gambling, alcohol consumption, tobacco usage, and marital infidelity should not <\/em>be criminalized are just as guilty of favoring these <\/em>activities.\u201d<\/p>\n Now that Congressman Paul is surging in the polls, some establishment Republicans have taken to resurrecting the time worn charge of \u201cracism\u201d against him.\u00a0 This allegation is based on some racially incendiary remarks that were printed in some of Paul\u2019s newsletters decades ago.\u00a0 Paul has repeatedly insisted that he was unaware of the comments, and he has just as frequently rejected what had been written.\u00a0 Still, because the proverbial dirt on Paul is scarce, his critics can\u2019t resist playing, as Congressman Allen West recently characterized it, \u201cthe last card in the deck:\u201d the race card.\u00a0 Radio talk show host Michael Medved has even gone so far as to insinuate a link of some sort between Ron Paul and Nazism<\/em>!<\/p>\n Medved\u2019s charge is simultaneously laughable and disgusting.\u00a0 Hence, it doesn\u2019t even dignify a response of any kind.\u00a0 But to the charge of \u201cracism,\u201d it would be nice to hear Dr. Paul reply something like this:<\/p>\n \u201cInterracial animosity has been responsible for much ugliness throughout our history and that of the world.\u00a0 The ease and frequency with which rival partisans, ever ready to score cheap political points, hurl charges of \u2018racism\u2019 at one another divests the word of meaning and, in the process, threaten to marginalize the very real evils to which racial animus has far too often given rise.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cStill, it is hard to see how, of all of the candidates in this race\u2014and, for that matter, all of the politicians in WashingtonD.C.\u2014I <\/em>should be on the receiving end of this allegation.\u00a0 If ever equality had a champion, I am it.\u00a0 Yet it is the only morally defensible form of equality for which I fight: equality before the law.\u00a0 <\/em>There can be no liberty unless there is equality before the law.\u00a0 It is liberty and equality for all <\/em>Americans that I advocate.\u00a0 There is nothing\u2014<\/em>not a single thing\u2014in my quite extensive record in Congress that so much as remotely suggests otherwise.\u00a0 If there was, my critics would have long ago seized upon it. That they have not reveals just how flimsy is their case.<\/p>\n \u201cNot only, however, have I steadfastly refused to lend support to any measure that would result in treating Americans of some races differently than those belonging to other racial groups.\u00a0 I have just as ardently fought to insure parity of treatment of Americans of all races.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe so-called \u2018War on Drugs,\u2019 for example, has had a devastating impact on black communities throughout the country.\u00a0 Crime, violence, and higher rates of incarceration for blacks are among the poisons produced by this prohibitively costly enterprise.\u00a0 Yet I alone among the candidates of this race demand an end to it.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cMy commitment to racial equality and liberty for all can also be seen in the way of my conflict with the other candidates over foreign policy.\u00a0 They are committed to an imperial foreign policy that during the last decade has been justified in terms of \u2018the War on Terror.\u2019\u00a0 The overwhelming majority of those who have been deleteriously impacted by it are people of color, namely Muslims and others of Middle Eastern descent.\u00a0 I, on the other hand, oppose this imperialism.\u00a0 As president, I will see to it that we do unto others as we ourselves would be done by.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is indeed a peculiar sort of white \u2018racist\u2019 who advocates domestic and foreign policies that would improve <\/em>the plight of untold millions of non-whites.\u00a0 And it is more than a bit ironic that those whose policies have proven to be, quite literally in many instances, destructive of the same number of non-whites should be the ones calling me a \u2018racist\u2019!\u201d<\/p>\n Ron Paul\u2019s ideas are worth a hearing.\u00a0 When addressing a national audience, he should see to it that they, <\/em>not the straw men of his opponents, are heard.<\/p>\n Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.<\/p>\n originally published at The New American\u00a0<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Ron Paul has elaborated on his views in his books, in speeches, and in interviews. During the debates, however, when he has a national audience, he doesn\u2019t always present his views has persuasively as he could.\u00a0 In my last article, I suggested ways in which Ron Paul could respond to challenges regarding his views on…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":399,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-330","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n