By LEE BALLARD

My son mentioned in a 2008 phone call that he was “impressed with Ron Paul.”  I was stunned – too stunned to ask why, what or how much.  You see, this son is a lot smarter than I am – and more liberal.

Until then, Ron Paul had been a caricature: the 10-foot x 8-foot banner on the house down the road, the straw-poll winner at a nutcake convention, someone one notch less bizarre than the John Birch Society.

(Why am I thinking of that old episode now?  Because the nutcakes have taken over the bakery down in Raleigh, that’s why.)     

Anyway, after my son’s comment, I started giving Paul more attention and more respect.  I found him easy to understand.  Most politicians dip and dodge; Paul says, “Here I am.”

I found his ideas of “freedom” – a standard part of libertarian philosophy – really somewhat appealing. Everyone should be free to live as he or she chooses. That lines up well with liberal beliefs that led to such as the civil rights movement. Suppression of individual rights is a basic wrong of history.

But that’s not what Paul and the libertarians mean by “freedom.”  They use the word as a verbal tool in their anti-tax campaign.  They envision a land where government involves itself in the lives of its citizens only when absolutely necessary (they mention prohibiting rape, murder, robbery, fraud).  If government doesn’t do anything, it doesn’t need money, so it taxes less, and people with money get to keep theirs.  Everybody takes care of himself in this world.  This is their idea of individual freedom.

It’s a deceptive philosophy. It’s a selfish, prideful world.. At its core, it’s contrary to the teachings of all religions, including those of Jesus.      

It’s also a primitive philosophy. This model of government was the norm for centuries. Rulers owned their subjects. An occasional ruler, like Isabella I of Spain, set up departments of government to care for the needy, but these rulers were the oddity.

In 2008, I would have said that libertarianism could not possibly govern anything in the modern era – nation, state, even a small county like mine. 

In the past, yes. Calvin Coolidge governed by libertarian philosophies.  (Prior to H.L. Mencken, a contemporary of Coolidge’s, “libertarian” was synonymous with “anarchist.”) Debt was an abomination to Coolidge. He vetoed spending bill after spending bill, even flood relief and veterans’ pensions. Herbert Hoover continued his policy of non-intervention, and he gets the blame for the Great Depression.

Then in 2010, the Tea Party swept in libertarians, in Washington and in Raleigh.  Now my “can’t govern” opinion is being tested. 

Well, whatta ya know, we’re watching the U.S. House of Representatives, gummed by Tea Partiers, happy to block everything that comes their way. Their leader says yeah, they’re not passing new legislation, but they hope to repeal some.

And Raleigh? They’re not Coolidge-ite libertarians really. Sure, they’re doing some tax-cutting, but these Tea Party folks are activists. They’re intervening all over the place. 

I stand by my view that libertarianism can’t govern in the 21st century. What’s going on in Raleigh ain’t  governing.

(Footnote: I hadn’t talked to my son about Ron Paul since he made his comment in 2008.  I called him while I was writing this.  He said, “Ron Paul had some good, rational ideas about a lot of things. But he got wacky when he talked about money.”)

•

Lee Ballard lives in Mars Hill.