An anarchist? Ron Paul? I can almost hear you out there--"Surely he's joking."
I'm not, and stop calling me Shirley. Think about it. Ron Paul has taken a good, hard look around America and hates everything he sees. He hates the Iraq war. He hates the rest of our foreign policy. He pretty much thinks we shouldn't have a foreign policy. He hates our bloated and meddlesome federal government. (What's that they say about stuck clocks?) He hates abortion. He hates the Treasury and floating currency. Basically, he wishes it were 1796 and he could wear a powdered wig without being ridiculed in public. While Ron Paul himself has no fondness for anarchy, the same cannot be said of his devotees. It's not an accident that they celebrated their hero on a day named for Guy Fawkes, perhaps the greatest anarchist in the history of the English speaking world.
If you hate something about our modern society, chances are Ron Paul agrees with you. Passionately. Ron Paul doesn't go for half-measures or speaking in measured tones. Everything he sees is a threat of biblical proportions. If you're the kind of person whose neighbors call you a crank, you probably see Ron Paul as a kindred spirit. And chances are he's with you on the subject for which you've achieved your notoriety in crankdom.
In many ways, the Paul phenomenon parallels Howard Dean's 2004 campaign. Like Paul, Dean resided outside the mainstream of both parties.
Dean was the only candidate in 2004 who ran as an explicitly antiwar candidate. And thus, the centrist governor of a tiny New England state became the darling of radicals everywhere. Like Paul, Dean had a decidedly non-political personality, which gave his supporters' blather about "a movement" a dollop of extra credibility. Also like Paul, Governor Dean raised a fortune on the internet.
You may recall that Dean's fundraising guru, Joe Trippi, loudly boasted that he had cracked the code for turning the internet into a money tree that a skilled political advisor like Joe Trippi could shake at will for any candidate willing to retain him. When last heard from, Trippi had signed on with the Edwards '08 campaign. When the Edwards campaign was last heard from, it was cueing up for public financing, Trippi's boasts having proven hollow.
In fairness to the Dean campaign, the erstwhile Vermont potentate was much closer to the mainstream than Ron Paul is. That's why Dr. Dean came a lot closer to the nomination than Ron Paul will.
SO WHAT does the Ron Paul campaign mean? At a practical level, it's difficult to tell which party Paul will hurt more if he runs as a third party candidate in the general election. My hunch is that he'll hurt the Democrats more. Ron Paul's supporters tend to be angry over just about everything. Such people are more likely to be Democrats than Republicans.
On a grander level, the Ron Paul campaign has shown that a candidate who appeals to a motivated fringe can make some noise. After all, people who are willing to be Tased just to interrupt a soporific John Kerry speech and berate the senator for allowing Republicans to steal the 2004 election from him are probably also willing to write a check for a candidate who speaks to their frustrations.
In 2008, that candidate is Ron Paul, the undisputed owner of the "Don't Tase Me Bro" vote.
Dean Barnett is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
|
