Anyone who knows Ron Paul, who has listened to him speak and who has read his work over the years can conclude one thing: he is a man who just wants peace and prosperity for all, regardless of your skin color, gender or political affiliation.
Of course, many people will refuse to listen or read his work because they may become triggered by his views on capitalism, free markets, United States history, foreign policy and a wide variety of domestic issues. So they may not be aware of Dr. Paul as some of his die hard followers are.
Why mention this? Well, Salon, the millennial, SJW, leftist publication recently published an article entitled “How the alt-right became racist, part 2: Long before Trump, white nationalists flocked to Ron Paul.”
As you can tell, the piece tries to tie Paul to white nationalists, racists and the alt-right. Similar to the Ron Paul Institute being a “Russian propaganda outlet,” this is a preposterous line of thinking.
Here is an excerpt from the piece:
“In our next installment, Ron Paul’s presidential campaign becomes the breeding ground for 50 shades of cray-cray.
“While future neo-Nazi Richard Spencer was struggling with white nationalism in the world of political journalism, most of the people who would later comprise the alt-right’s online shock-troops were involved in a different venture. They were fighting hard to make former Texas congressman Ron Paul the Republican presidential nominee, first in 2008 and again in 2012. It’s more than uncanny how many current alt-right leaders backed the former Texas congressman in his quixotic bids to stop GOP mainstream candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney.
“Pretty much all of the top personalities at the Right Stuff, a neo-Nazi troll mecca, started off as conventional libertarians and Ron Paul supporters, according to the site’s creator, an anonymous man who goes by the name ‘Mike Enoch.’
This is pretty rich:
“In the 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns, Ron Paul was also by far the preferred presidential candidate of the racist “Politically Incorrect” board known as /pol/ on 4chan. Throughout both of his unsuccessful runs, the forum served as a critical organizing portal and talent incubator for Paul’s youthful, tech-savvy supporters to pull off fundraising and digital feats that many political observers incorrectly attributed to Paul’s official campaign staff.
“The energy and enthusiasm of /pol/ and its associated imitators and rivals completely disappeared after Ron Paul’s candidacies ended. He did manage to become a meme within the site, however. The digital shock troops who would later become the alt-right were waiting for someone to re-energize them.
“Rand Paul’s staff hoped that he’d be able to build on his father’s success in 2016. It didn’t happen, however. In some part, that was because the senator couldn’t galvanize the emergent alt-right after he started pushing anti-racist policies and rhetoric.
“It was a road the younger Paul headed down after he faced an uproar in 2010 for saying that he opposed the Civil Rights Act’s public accommodation provision, which requires most private businesses to serve customers regardless of their race. Paul retracted the stance and began a minority outreach program. He also began telling his fellow Republicans that they could not remain a party exclusively for white people.”
This is a 961-word piece that you would expect to read from a website like Salon, an outlet void of intellectual consistency, an outlet attempting to normalize pedophilia (not once, but twice!).
To try to tie Dr. Paul to a racist, white nationalist movement is absurd.
Of course, the media have always tried to misinterpret, misrepresent and misinform when they talk about Paul, his supporters and libertarians. This has been the theme since 2007, whether it was his opposition to America’s wars or his support to end the Federal Reserve system.
Remember when the New York Times attempted to paint the great economist Walter Block as a racist? This is just another hit piece.
Leave a Comment