Questionable

There is absolutely no question at all that in the South Carolina debate this week, Paul said that America invited 9/11. ~John Tabin

Actually, there is quite a lot of questioning of this very wrong assessment of Rep. Paul’s words.  Most people not already apparently predisposed to loathe non-interventionist arguments don’t think Paul was saying this, nor do they think he was “blaming America.”  To blameAmerica would be to blame the American people or the country as a whole or even the government, and it would involve accusing one or all of these of being culpable for 9/11.  Strictly speaking, virtually no one in America does this, and certainly no conservative or libertarian non-interventionists do this.     

Note that the whole language of “inviting” was Goler’s.  Paul ignored the drift of the tendentious, leading question and tried to provide a substantive answer about the negative consequences of policy instead.  Paul advocated understanding; he wasn’t using the language of blaming and excusing.  In any case, that is typically the language of the left.  If I could have told him what to say, I would have told him that he should have said, “No, of course America didn’t invite 9/11–what a stupid thing to ask!  I’m here to talk about substantive policy issues and our broken foreign policy, and all you can do is waste our time with pathetic rhetorical games.  No wonder the media failed us in the months prior to the invasion–you’re not even asking the right questions!”  But Dr. Paul is more longsuffering and generous than I am.  

Mr. Tabin refers to Paul’s position as one of “radical pacifism,” which is utterly false and, I’m sorry to say, all together too typical of critics of non-interventionists.  If someone doesn’t support unconstitutional wars of aggression, he can only take this view out of a rejection of all war!  As do all conservative and libertarian non-interventionists, Ron Paul acknowledges the right of self-defense and believes that wars can be fought for self-defense.  He thinks American wars ought to be declared, as the Constitution requires.  If this is “radical pacifism,” you can count me in. 

Mr. Tabin’s article is titled, “Will Libertarianism Survive Ron Paul?”  Mr. Tabin may not have chosen this title, so the question may not be his, but about this title let me just say that if libertarianism survived because libertarians went around denouncing Ron Paul it wouldn’t be worth very much.