Following a recent letter to the editor and its feedback, it may be appropriate to remind everybody that Ron Paul will never be president. This is not up for debate.
But maybe this contributes to his appeal with the new brand of political hipster — those so determined to be “anti-establishment” that they’ll even support the candidate with the ideology that most shamelessly nourishes the very injustices these people believe they’re cognizant of. Forgive them, they know not what they do.
I think it’s a mistake to call Ron Paul a libertarian, especially where his identity as a libertarian is a point of pride for his supporters. I would call him firstly a wannabe anti-federalist, a label I use as a polite euphemism for “his constitutional interpretation is dangerously regressive for anyone who isn’t a white, property owning, well-to-do male.” Paul’s brand of anti-federalism envisions the federal government more or less as it was before the 1930s, while a libertarian is more concerned with libertarian ends than with strict constitutionalist means.