January 8, 2008

How can one not think of conspiracy theories having just observed an improbably simultaneous media attack on Ron Paul the day of the New Hampshire primary? A remarkably successful attack that made him plunge from 14% in the polls to an 8% actual vote? After weeks where we heard little about Paul from the mass media and beltway “libertarian” bloggers? TNR from the left, Fox News and talk radio from the right, and piling on from beltway “libertarians” who made a point of loudly repeating the TNR smears and dumping Ron Paul on the day of the primary. Your eyes and ears did not deceive you, all this happened. It is not the result of a criminal conspiracy, but if one uses “conspiracy” as a metaphor for social networks and economic incentives, there is a strong sense in which conspiracy theories accurately, if metaphorically, explain what happened.

The reality behind the conspiratorial metaphor is the social networking between denizens of the Beltway, who sport a wide variety of political labels but are, relative to the rest of the country, a monoculture. I lived there. I went to these parties. These denizens range from the journalists who report the mass media news to various think tank and university scholars at the Cato Institute, George Mason University, and so on. They study Ayn Rand, then marry Andrea Mitchell and testify against tax cuts. Vast amounts of federal money, that stuff that is taken out of your paycheck with such automatic ease, flow into the Beltway area. Directly and indirectly, almost every person who lives in or near the Beltway depends on the very income tax that Ron Paul declared he would abolish — with no replacement!

Many of these paycheck vampires call themselves “libertarians” and inspire us with their libertarian rhetoric to support them with our attention, our blog hits, and our tuition money as well as the tax money that already funds them or their friends. But at the first sign of political incorrectness, all these below-the-Beltway “libertarians” have dumped Ron Paul like yesterday’s garbage. Now they can rest easy that they will still be invited to the parties thrown by their lobbyist and government employee and contractor friends, who for a second or two got worried by all those Google searches that Ron Paul might have some influence, resulting in some of them losing their jobs (end the income tax with no replacement?! The guy is obvioiusly a kook, and we don’t invite the supporters of kooks to our parties!). Now everybody around the Beltway can go back to partying at the taxpayer’s expense. All the money will keep flowing in, hooray!

The lesson millions of young libertarians have now learned from our mass media and our beltway “libertarians”? Libertarian electioneering is futile. Voting is futile. Democracy is futile. It’s hip to be “libertarian.” But anybody who actually wants liberty is a kook, as can be proven by their association with kooks. Beltway wonks posing as “libertarians” are happy to write things to inflame your hopes for liberty that they don’t really mean. Then they make sure that we elect the politicians their friends want — the ones that will enslave your future to pay for full social security for Baby Boomers. The ones that will send you off to foreign lands to kill and die. Not only the journalists who hang out with the government bureaucrats and lobbyists, and not only the politicians who talk sweet while they drain your paycheck and kill your fellow human beings, but even the beltway “libertarians” are happy to let a whole new generation of libertarians go down the tubes in order to keep their Beltway friends happy.

12 Responses to “January 8, 2008”

  1. quizinator Says:

    Brilliant! I especially liked the one-sentence biography of Alan Greenspan:

    “They study Ayn Rand, then marry Andrea Mitchell and testify against tax cuts. “

  2. The Orange Line: anatomy of a smear campaign « Formerbeltwaywonk’s Weblog Says:

    […] here for more analysis of why beltway “libertarians” engage in anti-libertarian […]

  3. David Macko Says:

    They are all vile vermin and traitors. Remember them and treat them with the contempt and disgust with which Benedict Arnold was treated after the First American Revolution. There is only one basic difference between these scum and Arnold. He at least shed blood for the Revolution before he committed his unspeakable treason.

  4. js290 Says:

    For libertarianism to have any meaning, it must be discussed in the context of non-coercion and laissez-faire free markets. In that context, this smear against Paul isn’t even an interesting conversation.

  5. Joe Allen Says:

    The irony is that the blowback might help Dr. Paul. Many leftist were considering supporting Dr. Paul for his anti-war stance, but had big objections to Paul’s implied connection to the Cato institute. Lefties hate Cato and this messy divorce bumps up their opinions of the good doctor.

    Also there is the obvious wrath of libertarians like me who now see the beltway fake libertarians for what they are. Reason and CATO are in much worse shape than the campaign of Dr. Paul. They have incured everlasting enmity from freedom lovers and scorn from respectable journalists.

  6. georgedance Says:

    Thank you for writing ths. It hasn’t killed the campaign, though; even though TNR put out another piece today, the day of the Michigan primary, the vote held up – and the MSM seems more interested in Paul beating two of the Fox News Five this time, than in following up Mr. Kirchik’s ramblings.

    So I’d disagree with your cynical conclusion about the effect on the next generation. By and large the young people in the Paul campaign were expecting it to be attacked, and while some will drop out, most will remain and get a bit tougher from the experience. They’ll learn that electioneering can be dirty, but not that it’s futile; I have a feeling they’ll become more determined to win: if not this November, maybe in Congressional elections in 2 years’ time.

    Otherwise, I share your sentiments. I don’t have the first-hand knowledge you do of the Beltway Libertarians, but I was thinking along those lines; and I’m glad to have the eyewitness confirmation.

  7. MikeT Says:

    I can’t think of more than a handful or articles that Reason has published in the last few years that were worth reading, except to gawk at. Hopefully Reason will get the kick in the teeth it needs now that Radley Balko has taken over.

  8. Anonymous For Paul Says:

    LuLz, Andrew “AIDS aint that bad after all” Sullivan.

  9. FTW08 Says:

    “and while some will drop out”

    That’s the problem bro, there is NO REASON for anyone to drop out. Ron Paul IS NOT RACIST AND HAS NEVER BEEN.

  10. RonPaul4Ever Says:

    I used to wonder why Reason always published an negative article about every Libertarian (or even slightly libertarian leaning Republican) presidential candidate.

    Now I know.

  11. Megha Says:

    Well written. I always like these type of article. I am enjoying it.

  12. http://mihammadmmicky.Soup.Io Says:

    Howdy, I do believe your website might be having browser compatibility issues.
    When I look at your site in Safari, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it’s got some overlapping issues. I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Apart from that, fantastic website!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: