Thursday, May 20, 2010

Rand Paul is against racism everywhere except in Capitalism

Below is a really long interview by Rachel Maddow of Rand Paul. He's the new Kentucky Republican senate candidate and Tea Party adherent.

He doesn't directly answer her one essential question, which is: Do you think businesses should be allowed to not serve black people? Instead, he uses lots and lots of words, says he thinks racism is abhorent, that he would never support anything or anyone who is, but that, in the end, yes, the part of the civil rights law that allows black people to eat at countertops with white people is government intrusion into business.



This is like saying that you are a big environmentalist, that you totally support people who take care of the earth, and would not support any business or organization that pollutes. But also, it is government intrusion to have laws that make it illegal for businesses to intentionally dump poison into rivers.

He quickly retracted what he said today, but I actually find it refreshing that he would say what he actually believes for a news cycle. I wish more Tea Partiers would do that. I still wonder why they don't angrily denounce Social Security and Medicare as the biggest examples of the socialism they hate so much.

7 comments:

PG said...

Do you think he was named Rand for Ayn?

Samuel said...

The cleanest argument I've heard if you run into this type of libertarian argument is "They believe that, if America were a good society, our tax dollars would be spent to pay police officers to taser and evict peacefully-shopping African-Americans from stores just because the shopkeeper doesn't like their faces. That's what Rand Paul thinks a good society looks like." (http://delong.typepad.com/)

PG said...

It's just extremely odd that just as the Tea Party goes to great lengths to demand that they are not racist in any way, shape, or form, their first big candidate makes this kind of pronouncement...

Dan S said...

Ironic that Paul made a big point not to distance himself from the Tea Party after his victory, and heartily embrace what it stood for. Now it looks like the Tea Party needs to distance itself from Paul, or continue to get valid criticism that it is racial fear that motivates a lot of their stances and behavior.

Fingtree said...

I believe Ron Paul named his other son McNally?

Robert Sievers said...

This might be a first, but I am general agreement here. Rand really missed the boat on this answer.

The Jim Crow laws were a total government intrusion into pure capitalism. Enacting one law to insure there could not be local laws to impinge upon the unrestricted flow of trade is the libertarian ideal. Everyone must have equal access to the marketplace.

Rand really flubbed that one.

PG said...

Robert, Rand didn't miss the boat or misspeak. He has said the same thing for years. That's why he was asked the question (originally by NPR). He remained true to his ideology. The conservative columnist Ross Douthat wrote that Rand "was too proud to acknowledge the limits of ideology, and to admit that a principle can be pushed too far." Unfortunately, too many conservatives are equally uncompromising and simply refrain from speaking what they believe in their hearts.

But I'm glad we seem to agree on something anyway.