Monday, 2 January 2012

The Economist defaming Ron Paul

The Economist's Lexington column of December 31st, 2011 continues the magazine's campaign of defamation against Republican Representative Ron Paul, currently a candidate for the Republican Party presidential primaries.

Week in, week out, The Economist has been supporting Mitt Romney for the Republican primaries. Every time any other Republican candidate rose in the polls, The Economist issued a tirade against them, always recommending the Republicans to choose moderate and electable Romney.

However, the latest column by Lexington on Ron Paul has tresspassed the line between criticism and defamation. Throughout the column Lexington keeps name calling Paul and his ideas as "hater", "whacky", "no-hoper", "rumpled", "obsession", "crusader", and "anti-government conspiracy theory [that] attract a lot of wingnuts". So much for The Economist's "measured" writing style.

Ron Paul is no nutty, as neocons and the Washington Post describe him, nor racist, as liberals and the New York Times want to portray him. He has stood by his ideas for decades in an unwavering fashion unknown to any other politician. His main policy is that he will "never vote for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution", which is not a bad method to maintain the government's policies within the electorate's mandate.

It is unlikely Paul will win the Republican nomination. However, his surge in the polls is a welcomed respite for all of us who have advocated the libertarian ideas against all odds, defamation and slander, and a much-needed encouraging voice of support for the few of us libertarians who are condemned to ostracism by the main-stream media, the establishment and its beneficiaries, and the easily-misled population.

Although I am utterly outraged and disgusted at this column, I sort of expected it since The Economist has shown an increasing scornful disregard towards the libertarian theories and proposals. It may be possible that "their relentless drift to the right might just lose the Republicans the election" (Lexington dixit) but this is: 1st, no problem and no business for readers who are not registered as supporters of any American political party; and 2nd, a complete lack of understanding of what libertarianism means, as libertarianism is NOT on the right or on the left but where the Nolan Chart indicates (here).

Therefore, a big "dislike" to The Economist and courage to libertarians.

Love and Freedom.

No comments: