To paraphrase a well-worn quote, “First truth is ignored, then it is violently opposed, and then it is accepted as self-evident.”
It is human nature to avoid pain, including painful truths. Ignore the truth, avoid the pain. But when truth can no longer be ignored, it is frequently opposed because so much has been invested into the falsity that the loss of the investment is unacceptable. For this reason, those who speak the truth are often ridiculed and persecuted.
History is full of these brave men and women who have stood, often alone, and dared speak the truth at their own peril. Any schoolchild knows the Earth revolves around the sun — it’s obvious! But it wasn’t so obvious when Galileo faced the Inquisition for threatening the establishment’s version of what revolved around what. History is kind to the truth tellers, their contemporaries are frequently not.
In politics, at least in our age, we have a dearth of truth tellers, especially during election season. One would think that perusing the flip-flopping voting records of a candidate would be enough to deem the candidate void of principle or moral compass and unworthy of an honest person’s vote. One would think that actions once in office in complete contrast to pandering statements made during the campaign would be enough to get an incumbent booted. One would think that seeing that the top campaign donors of each media-preferred presidential campaign are virtually identical would be enough to make one realize that a two-horse race works best for the owner that has both his horses in the race.
One would think. But most would think I’ve merely described a dilemma shovel-ready for a “lesser-of-two-evils” argument.
What if there was a candidate who told the truth, even when it wasn’t always pleasant? And what if this candidate had the most principled and consistent voting record of any representative of the people, ever? What if this candidate’s prescient warnings years ago on the subjects for which he is most often attacked — foreign policy and monetary policy — have been vindicated time and time again? And what if this candidate, like many of our Founding Fathers who “pledged their sacred honor” and understood what that meant, was living in our time? What if you could actually vote for him?
You can. He is Ron Paul. Your ancestors, who will see as obvious the truths of our time, will thank you for it.
Douglas Mackenzie, M.D.
Santa Barbara
Comments
