"I began my work on the Civil War by trying to figure out what made the old veterans tick when they were young men. It was as simple as that. I was trying to turn the old men I had known into vigorous, young soldiers. That carried me quite a distance, but it could not have taken me through years of endeavor because, after all, that feeling you could satisfy quite easily.No one expected Ron Paul to win the 2012 presidential race, not because he lacks mainstream support, great ideas, and a popular appeal, but because the American political process is completely anti-democratic and fraudulent.
The trouble is, as I got deeper and deeper into the war, there were more things I wanted to know. I wanted to know what motivated people on both sides; why both North and South carried such terribly heavy burdens throughout the war, with really a minimum of complaining. When you read about a battle like Spotsylvania Court House, for instance, with its perfectly appalling tales of suffering, bloodshed, and death on both sides, all concentrated into one rainy summer morning along the edge of a second-growth forest, you are bound to be stirred by certain questions: What motivated the men on both sides? What drove them into that? What kept them at it? What prevented them from running away? I'm not sure that I know the answers yet, but have come to the conclusion that the American man is a pretty good man, no matter what part of the country he comes from. When he sets himself to do something, he will stick with it as long as he can stand on his feet and breathe." - Bruce Catton, "Reflections on the Civil War." Pg. 225.
"The distinguishing mark of Aristotle's greatness of soul is that it is a moral, an ethical virtue. It is the correct and habitual disposition with respect to the desire for great honors, as the virtue temperance is with respect to desires for food, drink, and sex, and courage, with respect to fear. Someone could say, in the words of Hume, that Aristotle begins with "common sense." Aristotle does not say this. He himself begins with the special opinions that articulate what such a man feels and what equable people of intelligence see in the flesh. His is not a universal explanation for common humankind. Accordingly, Aristotle's way catches the distinctive outlook of a Washington or a Nelson Mandela, the statesman who stands out in goodness as well as greatness." - Robert Faulkner, "The Case For Greatness: Honorable Ambition and Its Critics." Pg. 25-26.
If George Washington and Thomas Jefferson ran for President in 2012, CNN and Fox News would shout them down as cranks, the Republican party would steal their votes, and a majority of voters would call them anti-American because they're programmed robots. That is the reality of American politics in the 21st century.
If the political process was fair, and the media was not run by evil vampires, then Ron Paul would easily become the president because he has the right qualifications, integrity, values, vision, intelligence, and independence to lead America in this dark hour.
Obamney is a machine; Paul is a man, and people want to be led by men, not machines.
Anti-Paul voters say that voting for Paul is a wasted vote, but voting for Obamney will lead to a wasted country. What's the smarter move? Not wasting away your vote by voting for a definite loser, or not wasting away your country by voting for destroyers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
A vote for Paul = wasted vote, but a vote for Obamney = wasted country.
It doesn't matter that Dr. Paul didn't win. His rise into political prominence, along with the Internet, social media, and the global alternative media, have changed things for the better. There is no going back to the era of domineering political parties, made-for-tv political candidates, and media suppression of anti-establishment voices.
Politics is changing dramatically because of the renewed sense of citizen participation and political activism. Dr. Paul's brief time in the political sun only represents a glimpse of what's to come, not only in America, but in other countries as well.
It's still too soon to measure Ron Paul's success, largely because his greatest impact is not in the political arena, but in the human mind and the human heart. He alluded to his hearts and minds strategy in a recent speech in Austin, Texas.
Dr. Paul's legacy is that of a leader of the young. He is an example that a man of virtue, common sense, and indestructible morality can survive with his head and heart intact in the dirty world of politics. If this generation is not killed off in a plague or in a war, then his impact will be felt in many nations and many political parties in the years to come.
I personally don't share all of Dr. Paul's views, but that does not change the fact that he is a hero in my eyes, and in the eyes of millions of others around the world. Ron Paul is an affirmation of the American spirit. He is living proof that America is good. In the evil age of Bush and Obama, the world needs to be reminded that America at its heart is a good, moral, and spiritual country. And Dr. Paul provides that reminder.
In the Republican debates, Dr. Paul was the only one who voiced a course of peace and understanding with Iran. The other Neanderthals stared into the camera and defended a policy of destruction and desolation. While they repeated war slogans, Dr. Paul destroyed the war propaganda against Iran with clear-headed logic and moral vision. That alone certified his legacy as a voice of conscience and peace in an era of madness and war.
But it will take time before his legacy is understood and his full impact is felt.
