This week's post is about Ron Paul's curtailing to different races, specifically the Latino vote. This interview on Al Punto demonstrates Paul's consistency. He does not believe in curtailing his policy based on who he is talking to. For example, even though he knows opposing birthright-citizenship will hurt his acceptance by the Latino community, he does not try to cover up that fact or stray away from the question. He explains his positions clearly and directly, hoping people will understand that he is not trying to apply his political beliefs in, what he sees as, the most objective way possible. His concept of objectivity may be different from others for if he truly prized liberty and freedom, wouldn’t he support full citizenship and easier immigration reform? Some would say that Paul’s stance on immigration is just playing towards his large base of states’ rights and Tea Party activists while other’s would say that he is protecting the liberty Americans enjoy and his interpretation of the Constitution. However, Paul stance shows a clear emphasize on legal action and individual rights. He simply wants to uphold the law and allow those who have lived in and become part of the US to legally assimilate.
Paul’s statement that he will not kowtow for the Latino vote speaks volumes in today’s political arena. We often see politicians targeting specific groups in their speeches and in a sense, favoring these groups in an attempt to gain their support in an election. Paul, on the other hand, has the same message for every group because he does not categorize people. By categorizing people, he believes true and equal individual liberty could not exist. If the government and politicians truly treated all people equally, would there be a classification of races and an active attempt to appeal to minority groups? Or is the existence and promotion of race a social fact which one cannot escape?
