The Radical Center
Published in

The Radical Center

The Brutal Truth About Ron Paul

I’m sorry, but the Ron Paul story is not a pretty one, it’s not a fairy tale and it’s not suitable for children.

Let’s start with this recently ugly example. Please note the ugly racist caricatures from the hook-nose Jew—just the way the Nazis depicted them—to the black man. The enemies are Jews, Asians, Hispanics and Blacks. It’s typical racism and anti-Semitism.

Ron later posted an absurd excuse for it. Once again he blamed an unnamed “staff member” who he claims “inadvertently posted an offensive cartoon on my social media. I do not make my own social media post and when I discovered the mistake it was immediately deleted.”

If you have a Twitter account you know it’s damn difficult to post something inadvertently. In this case the person who posted it typed all those words in and then had to attach the cartoon. After he typed, and after he attached the cartoon, he then had to hit the button to post it on line. There are three separate steps to put this on line. It was NO accident. One rarely has three accidents in row. It this were a one step problem the excuse is plausible but one would still have to ask why Ron Paul staffers follow racists on Twitter.

Next consider the utter nonsense of using right-wing slurs like “cultural Marxism.” This is a term originating in Nazi Germany, where the term Kulturbolschewismus (Cultural Bolshevism) was used to describe an alleged Jewish plot to spread communism—the Jewish stereotype in the cartoon is no accident. The Nazis argued Marxism was a Jewish plot and so was capitalism, which was under the control of a cabal of Jewish “international bankers.” Many anti-Semites still push the banker conspiracy but often truncate it to say “international bankers,” knowing full well they are still signaling an anti-Semitic concept.

The Historical Dictionary of the Weimar Republic says: “ The term “cultural Bolshevism” is difficult to disengage from the extreme Right, especially Nazism. It is tied to an anti-Communist notion that cultural and political subversion are intrinsically linked. According to Alfred Rosenberg, as Bolshevism was the revolt of racially inferior elements against the rule of old elites, Kulturbolschewismus was an equivalent revolt in the cultural sphere.” Note it was those deemed “racially inferior” which is why the depiction doesn’t show any white “cultural Marxists.”

The problem is it, like many slurs and insults, has no objective meaning. It’s merely meant as a degrading term to define anyone they don’t like. Note that only liberals are “triggered,” yet you see Donald Trump and his childish followers constantly throwing tantrums over what other people say. It’s free speech when they do it, just not when you do. When you don’t like it, you’re triggered, when they don’t like it, they’re patriotic.

If you don’t like their politics, it’s political correctness. If they don’t like your politics, it’s still political correctness on your part. Only people they hate are ever politically correct, even as they throw out of the party “Republicans in Name Only.” The GOP is infamous for having extreme theocratic fundamentalists imposing political correctness on the candidates. If you don’t sign on to their big government agenda you’re out.

Ron Paul had a brief foray into the Libertarian Party in 1988—something the Party and the libertarian movement have not recovered from—and it was a disaster. Ron toned down his anti-immigration views, stifled his discomfort with gays, agreed to leave his anti-abortion views out of the campaign and with some difficulty won the LP nomination. His campaign just qualified as a libertarian one, but he was no radical by any means and was just barely over the line from being a conservative. When he lost the campaign he left the party and started multiple businesses to rake in the cash for his retirement. These used the mailing lists of libertarians who donated to him as well as the 100,000 or so names on the mailing lists of the neo-Nazi Liberty Lobby and Willis Carto. Carto was an open anti-Semite and pro-Nazi and the Paul business model openly catered to his followers.

The editor Paul hired was Lew Rockwell, a former office staff member for Paul, and a former staffer at the Conservative Book Club. Murray Rothbard, who had pushed a very hateful message on Paul in regards to gays and HIV, was a regular ghostwriter. Rockwell did most the editing and some of the writing. Ron’s campaign manager was on the staff along with Ron’s wife and one daughter.

The latter two probably didn’t actually work in the office. It was just a way of moving funds into the Pauls’ accounts.

Rothbard and Rockwell conceived a strategy to purposely reach out to racists, anti-Semites and other bigots to form some sort of alliance with what became the alt-Right. Ron’s newsletters published some very ugly attacks on gays, Jews, and blacks in particular, in keeping with that agenda. But, Ron was retired, out of Congress, and didn’t really care. This went on for several years.

Paul found it wasn’t quite as lucrative as he hoped and he wanted back on the Congressional gravy train, so he ran for office again and the newsletter morphed into one by Rockwell and Rothbard, in their private capacity. When Ron’s newsletters were brought up to him in that election, he claimed he did write them (which wasn’t true) but they were being taken out of context. The Austin American-Statesmen wrote: “‘Dr. Paul is being quoted out of context,’[Paul spokesman Michael] Sullivan said ‘It’s like picking up War and Peace and reading the fourth paragraph on Page 481 and thinking you can understand what’s going on.‘”’… Also in 1992, Paul wrote, ‘Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions.’ Sullivan said Paul does not consider people who disagree with him to be sensible. And most blacks, Sullivan said, do not share Paul’s views. The issue is political philosophy, not race, Sullivan said. ‘Polls show that only about 5 percent of people with dark-colored skin support the free market, a laissez faire economy, an end to welfare and to affirmative action,’ Sullivan said.”

Later Paul’s story was he didn’t write the newsletters and didn’t even read them. It was all done for years on end without him paying any attention. This indicates his wife and daughter were not working for their salary because Paul says he was in the dark about all of it. The racist newsletters were published from 1989 to 1994. This wasn’t just a one-off thing. It should be noted Rockwell and Rothbard announced their “paleo” strategy in 1990, so the racist newsletters largely corresponded with their open strategy of reaching out to the extreme Right.

When the shit hit the fan over these newsletters, and Ron wanted to run for president again, to refill his coffers, he said he was clueless about all of it. He claimed he didn’t know who worked for the newsletter—maybe Lew could remind him—and said he didn’t want to know. This distancing upset a Nazi named Bill White of the “American National Socialist Workers Party” (Nazi). At the white supremacist site Vanguard News Forum White wrote:

Comrades:

I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.

Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.

I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy. [Over the years photos were published on various sites that showed Paul at these meetings and speaking to attendees.]

For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.

I don’t know that it is necessarily good for Paul to “expose” this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous — and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.

Bill White, Commander

American National Socialist Workers Party

White’s comment upset many of the alt-Right types who said Paul’s friendliness to them should be hidden, as it would do him harm. One said, “I like the ANSWP and the leadership you have given it, but we have to be realistic when it comes to making big political changes. Ron Paul is our first step. Please don’t ruin it!” Another feared making this public would “run good White activists out of the Paul campaign so the jews can take it over and run it into the ground.” The names mentioned by White — Buchanan, Sobran, Francis — were all associates of Ron Paul. Sobran and Francis, both wrote shockingly bigoted material and were regular contributors to Lew Rockwell site,and the misnamed Mises Institute, websites run by Ron Paul’s friend, business partner, adviser, editor and ghost-writer. It should be noted Murray Rothbard also attended these private gatherings.

Now, it is true Ron Paul didn’t write most of it, if any. Almost nothing that appears in his name is written by him. One reason his answers to public questions are rambling and confusing is because he is often ignorant about the issues, which doesn’t stop him from incoherently answering them. A good example of his lack of knowledge was his answer about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the policy which excluded gays from serving in the military. When Paul was asked about it he called it a “decent policy.” He then rambled on about “seeing people in groups” and “group rights.”

It was the “decent policy” he just praised which did that. It said gays, as a group, are excluded from the military. So, calling it a decent policy and then damning “seeing people as groups” is contradictory, but typically Paul. He then said seeing people in groups promotes ideas that people get their rights depending on the group they are in. That just after he called a policy denying rights based on group membership “decent.”

Paul then went into saying “if there is homosexual activity in the military that is disruptive is should be dealt with.” Yet, DADT had nothing to do with disruptive behavior. A service member could be drummed out of service even if he never had sex; merely for acknowledging he was gay. Ron doesn’t know what the law did. The other Republicans piggybacked on Paul’s answer and said they all agreed. DADT was NEVER about disruptive behavior, harassment or anything similar. Ron didn’t know the facts, which didn’t stop him from holding an opinion and spewing rhetoric that contradicted himself. (Below is the video, Paul’s answer is the first 1 minute of the recording.)

After Ron no longer needed to use the Libertarian Party he rushed back to the Republican Party. He also dropped his membership in a mainstream church and allied himself with a hard-core fundamentalist sect and openly embraced theocratic candidates. He published a “Statement of Faith” on a fundamentalist site filled with loving, caring, tolerant articles…Yes, that’s sarcasm.

The Constitution Party and Ron Paul

The site Ron wrote for ran things such as: “Filthy Sodomites Can Begin Serving Openly by Summer.” The link is to a story that says “Gay Soldiers Can Begin Serving Openly by Summer.” The publication changes the word “gay” into “filthy sodomites.” The tag on the story was “fagotts,” it has to be embarrassing when one can’t even spell insults correctly. Another headline was changed to the following “Can Hotels Discriminate Against ‘filthy sodomite couples?” One of the main writers at the site was Rev. Chuck Baldwin, a far-Right fundamentalist minister who ran for president on the theocratic Constitution Party. Paul endorsed Baldwin in that election. (The photo is of Ron Paul campaigning for Baldwin, who is to his left.) Paul openly endorsed the extremist and misnamed Constitution Party, and hasn’t lifted a finger for Libertarian candidates since.

Here are other stories they ran around the time Paul wrote for them.

House Passes Sodomite Bill
Sodomite Anglican priest dying of AIDS pleads for new drug
Pro-Sodomite Republicans Court Religious Broadcasters
Harry Potter and Sodomite Witchcraft
Another Pro-Sodomite Republican to Explore 2008 White House Bid
Abortion Foes Honor Pro-Sodomite Republican
Senate OKs Bill With Sodomite ‘Rights’
Pro-Sodomite McCain to open office in Iowa
Students Flee Forced Sodomite Agenda
Pro-Abort/Sodomite State Hammered by Flood”
More Sodomite Sex from Republican Senator
Fires in Sodomite State Cost U.S. Taxpayers Millions
Laura Bush Attends Sodomite Swearing-in Ceremony
Abortion. Sodomite Studies Considered
Sodomite Blogger Outs GOP Congressman’s Chief of Staff
‘Public Persona” of a Sodomite Republican
Sodomite Congressman Altered Immigration Law to Further ‘Gay’
Agenda Paper: Republicans Fear This Sodomite

The Pattern

Let’s look at the long-term pattern. By the late 1980s and into the mid 1990s, Paul published a series of newsletters, which used vicious language to depict gay, blacks and others Americans. In addition he published material endorsing bizarre conspiracy theories about “international bankers” the “NAFTA Super Highway, the Bilderbergers, the CFR, etc. The newsletters had Paul’s name emblazoned across them. He was listed as the writer of the articles. He was listed as the editor of the newsletter. He admits being the publisher. His signature was on a letter smearing gay people and sent to individuals soliciting them to subscribe to his publication.

In 1996 he didn’t deny writing the material, he only complained others took him out of context. By 2001 the newsletters were a liability and he started claiming he didn’t write the material, others did. Today he claims he didn’t even know it was being written, and didn’t find out about them until years later. Yet there is video of him promoting them and claiming he writes them from the period he claims he wasn’t doing so. He was willing to promote it and take the profits from it, but denied any active role in it or responsibility for it.

Assume he had a change of heart, and no longer holds to those bigoted views. What has he done since then? He continued to associate with people who promoted the very kind of views from which he wanted to be disassociated.

He wrote for Covenant News, which clearly is obsessed with anti-gay hatred. Those headlines are so extreme they look like something Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist would hold up at one of their hate protests. The language at Covenant News is as extreme and hateful as that published in the Paul newsletters a few years earlier. If Ron Paul was trying to move away from that sort of hate mongering, he did a very bad job of it.

In 2008 Paul endorsed fundamentalist Baptist minister Chuck Baldwin for president. This is a man who was a state leader in the Moral Majority. Baldwin wrote for groups such as the racist VDare web site and the crazy site of Alex Jones, where Paul also appeared.

Ron Paul never abandoned his associations with the bigots who were ghostwriting his newsletter. One major reason Paul will not expose the main author he used is because they remain tight friends. Ron Paul indicated the author was unknown to him and he doesn’t associate with the man. In truth, they work together all the time and Paul regularly has material appear on the man’s website, a site that also published racists and anti-Semites, such as Sobran and Francis on a regular basis—until their deaths. Francis was the publisher of a crude openly racist publication and Sobran had been fired from conservative National Review for anti-Semitism.

The Alt-Right Infestation

Since then Paul and Rockwell’s misnamed Mises Institute has continued to promote bigots and white nationalists, such as Hans Hoppe. Rothbard got his start in the 1948 segregationist campaign of Strom Thurmond’s States’ Right Party, but during much of his life he kept it on the downlow except in private conversations. By the time of the Ron Paul newsletters Rothbard was talking it up again and after Paul’s newsletter folded he helped create the Rothbard-Rockwell Report where Rothbard came out of the closet on race, going so far as to defend the anti-Semite, white nationalist and former Klanner, David Duke. He said, “there was nothing in Duke’s current program or campaign that could not also be embraced by paleoconservatives or paleo-libertarians…”

One racist activist, writing as Peter Bradley, praised Rothbard saying:

I never met Rothbard, but Sam Francis and several others told me he was on the same wavelength as American Renaissance on racial issues. Michael Levin was a frequent contributor to the RRR for the four years I subscribed to it. He wrote very honestly about things such as black crime, race and IQ, and the media whitewash of black failure. Hans Hoppe, … wrote that America could keep its racial identity and still have immigration by selecting immigrants based on IQ and race. Jared Taylor’s book of essays, The Real American Dilemma, received a favorable review by Paul Gottfried in a 1998 issue of RRR. The RRR’s forthrightness on race got it lambasted by David Frum in his 1994 book Dead Right. Frum was particularly displeased about an unflattering essay on the moral character of Martin Luther King.

Out of this swamp of bigotry that circulated around Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, and Lew Rockwell spewed forth a swarm of white nationalists who think they are the epitome of libertarianism. Ron’s embracing of these extremists gave them the permission to claim white nationalism is consistent with libertarianism. Conservative Rockwell’s embrace of a juvenile form of anarchism doesn’t make him a libertarian.

Fundamental libertarian principles include individual rights, not collectivist assumptions based on race, national origin, sexual orientation or sexual identity. All the petty hatreds of the alt-Right are outside the libertarian framework.

Today, relatively small gangs of online trolls, who seem to have nothing better to do, scurry about destroying the libertarian brand by pretending their bigotry is somehow libertarian. Ron invited them in. He’s appeared at meetings dominated by these people. Yet, Paul himself, barely qualified as a libertarian and did rather pathetically as a candidate. Libertarian Party candidates such as Ed Clark, and Gary Johnson, far surpassed the sad vote totals of the crazy Uncle of the libertarian movement.

See Ron Paul and His Bizarre AIDS Theories for more information.

If you wish to support these columns visit our page at Patreon.

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
James Peron

James Peron

James Peron is the president of the Moorfield Storey Institute, was the founding editor of Esteem a LGBT publication in South Africa under apartheid.