Ron Paul Money Bomb: Proof that Freedom Works
Here’s quite an interesting article about the money-bombs Congressman Ron Paul received in the fourth quarter of last year. The author, C.J. Maloney, basically argues that the money-bombs are proof that freedom works and that carefully orchestrating everything always produces lesser results than letting people sort it out themselves. Not only that, it also proves, according to Maloney, that it’s also proof that transparancy works as well. After all, would Ron Paul supporters have donated as much money as they have if Paul had not shown his fundraising totals at any given moment on his website?
Maloney writes:
In his famous essay The Pretence of Knowledge, Austrian economist Frederic Von Hayek spoke to his belief that no matter how intelligent they might be, a small group of men, even a few thousand of them (even if they all had Ivy League Ph.D.s), could not come close to the aggregated knowledge of all their fellow citizens in their millions. Von Hayek’s warning to would-be planners can be summed up in a saying my mother used to drill into our young Irish heads – “Let Go and Let God.”
In other words, some things it’s better to let alone – like your fellow man. As Bloomberg’s Caroline Baum said, it’s best to leave people be because “you never know where the next big idea or product will come from.” It is a practical argument for freedom; its capacity to release superhuman, really cool events upon humanity – like Victor Pelevin, the iPod, and (in this instance) the money bomb.
In the boardroom discussions at the Ron Paul camp, that was the argument bandied about, that was his brain trust’s thought process, that’s why they decided to take a leap of faith and post their supporters’ numbers and generosity in real time – democratic, open, and trusting. No other candidate can hold a candle to this, and it all happened because Ron Paul read an essay penned by a now dead man and preached it to his followers.
Jon Bydlak (all quotations in this column are from him) spoke about Hayek’s essay during our call, stating that its underlying argument “allowed us to get over our fear of going transparent.” The entire concept of trusting that someone, somewhere, somehow would come along and think of how to raise that cash “fit with the model of our campaign,” it fit with Ron Paul’s governing principles.
He’s quite right: Paul took an enormous risks by setting a clear - and very high - fundraising goal, especially when he decided to combine this setting of goals with complete openness about the amount of money he had raised at any given moment. It could’ve come back to bite him.
Yet, Paul believed that encouraging people to work hard, to donate, to being creative, would pay off. And he was right.
Does this mean that Paul’s government philosophy is exactly right? Of course not. But it is once again proof for something all conservatives and libertarians can agree on: freedom produces more results and more prosperity than enslavement.
H/t to reader Robert.
I think all candidates should be browbeaten into giving clear, easy to understand information about:
a- How much money they have at any given moment
b- How much of the money is small quantities from individuals
c- How much of that money is from businesses and what size they have. How much of it is from interest groups and which groups are they.
d- They’re voting record score according to every interest group that donates money to them.
I’ve tried looking some of this information up on many candidates, and although there is information out there, I’ve never really seen anything that gave totally clear answers.
Kudos to Ron Paul for transparency. I disagree vigorously with him on a number of issues, but I appreciate integrity greatly.
Don’t worry, Lynx. As far as campaign financial disclosure goes, what the campaigns lack in clarity they make up for in obfuscation….
LMAO, thanks, that’s a great consolation…
I don’t know who will be the next president, but I do know that if in 2016 (2012 is incumbent time so not so important) fundraising continues it’s ascent in importance, it’s going to seriously cost more to elect presidents than to, say, educate the whole of the nations children, which seems rather sick.
More seriously, Lynx, there are some decent resources for candidate research. None of them are perfect, but both Politifact and FactCheck are useful in fact-checking the mudslinging. Washington Post has an excellent online database of Congressional votes with links to financial disclosure forms, which is useful for some of the candidates’ past behavior and funding ties. If you go over to Stubborn Facts blog and go down the left-hand linkage column you’ll find more helpful links to reference sources left, right, center, and non-aligned in the "Resources" section, "Politics" subsection. Money-searching is tougher, but if you’re willing to plow through it all OpenSecrets.org has a searchable database that many people find a LOT more user-friendly than the FEC site. (Pretty much anything is more user-friendly than the FEC site…).
My favorite is opensecrets.org. I especially like that the candidate I have chosen was flying SouthWest airlines and staying at the Holiday Inn.
How potential candidates spend their money is just as important as how they raise it. We must also account the most candidates usually spend large sums to raise money such as expensive private dinners.
By they way, Ron Paul has been upgraded to cheapest private rental jet. This allows him to go to more speaking engagements per day and he lives far from the international airport and close to the regional airport.
Ron Paul, 2008, FTW. We are tired of the lame stream media, the yellow journalism, the lies, the wars, the broken dollar, the identity politics and the military industrial complex. America is waking up to freedom and liberty. Its our last chance to have them again if we chose to walk with Ron Paul. If we don’t chose him, we will become more authoritarian and America will no longer be what the founders wanted it to be and it will become a hell on earth with a dropping standard of living.
When I was a small child, I was taught about Jesus and the bible, and as an older child I learned a little about revelation. I’ve always suspected that someday, I would have a choice that would mean everything in this matter, as they warned. Not because I believed everything they said, but far from it. I am a Christian, but not a very good one. Because I distrusted most of what they said, I set out to find the truth myself.
As I compare this person’s record to his (and our country’s, and my) principles, I am left with a choice that could be no clearer, in the midst of a contrived political and economic dust cloud created by the dust of the rest of the candidates dancing to Nero’s fiddle. If the MSM’s camera’s were to zoom out a little, I believe we’d see how small their party really is, and where the people’s real support lies.
They have tried for over fifty years to tell us (the people) what we should think and want, and how their minor sins would deliver us the fruits of righteousness. But there is no righteousness in sin, and no rest for the wicked. All the others must furiously maintain the facade to support their deceptions, while their outside support diminishes with every inconsistency brought to light.
For years I avoided calling myself a Christian, opting instead for a label of Atheist, to avoid comparisons to the hypocritical organization that many churches become. But now that I have found an example of the integrity that so rare, but is possible even in DC, I can no longer remain lukewarm. I must choose a side. My side is for the truth. According to the bible, God IS the truth. So maybe an Atheist who serves the truth can be a better servant of God than someone who calls himself a Christian, but follows and knowingly perpetuates falsehoods. Maybe that’s why this Christian can respect and appreciate so many different beliefs (one point I made earlier was gleaned from a Muslim ex-roommate of mine), because I have always sought the truth, especially in the face of bold lies.
No matter our beliefs, most of us understand that if we base our lives on these lies, we may as well build our castles on the shifting sands, while pricing them in falling dollars (and probably heating them with oil).
Blessed be Ron Paul!
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain