Ron Paul, the most human candidate
Defending politicians is risky business. Despite all incentives; when they endorse one’s interests, share similar opinions and promise to advance their constituents’ agenda, citizens feel almost an instinctive reflex to hedge glorifying statements in protection of their candidate’s credibility. Perhaps it is because politicians will not allow a meaningful period of time to pass between an utterance in their support and the media’s discovery of past unethical behavior, contradictions in convictions and actions and worst of all, corruption. To support a politician is to be willing to sacrifice one’s credibility. Ron Paul — as far as the public is concerned — is among the very few politicians with some identifiable human characteristics. The man is consistent, consistently wrong some may say, but consistent nonetheless. Even more surprisingly, he seems concerned about this nation more than he is with power, money or popularity. His stance in congress reflects that of David’s when he faced Goliath, except this time, as nature has prescribed, the giant repeatedly crushes the scrawny. Only Paul would have a legislation success rate of 0.3 percent and continue enacting bills incessantly, with hopes of crafting a better America. His tenacity is admirable.
To attribute Paul’s unpopularity and lack of success in passing legislation to either insanity or his error in deliberation is unfair. In the words of Orwell’s Winston Smith, “Sanity is not statistical.” Our political system, with its campaigns and splendor, has become overly-simplified; creating titles as empty as those of race, except surprisingly “Democrats” or “Republicans” do satisfy almost perfectly the stereotypes. When we struggle to box Paul into either one of the categories and fail, we say “Libertarian” or “Independent” or any other title we may fancy, but he never seems to fit perfectly well into any box. Perhaps this is because he is human and humans are complex, with attitudes and convictions that sprout from different experiences and perspectives. It is odd that our political spectrum has been reduced to a mere left or right, and no one seems to notice that perhaps not every human being who abhors taxation abhors marijuana, as if some divine necessity connected the two. Paul is not scared of unpopularity, what he fears is the overly bloated and ever expanding government which threatens our civil liberties.
Before considering him seriously as a presidential candidate, Americans may ask him to remove the aluminum foil from his head, and accept that not everything is a conspiracy. Yet, imagine how greatly this nation would benefit by having genuine politicians in office: This would be true democracy, representing American citizens’ numerous and sometimes conflicting interests and diversity of thoughts with an unyielding conviction.