Senator Rand Paul will introduce legislation next week to suspend aid to Pakistan until the government frees Dr. Shakil Afridi, an informant working for the CIA, who helped with the raid on Osama Bin Laden’s house. Though Paul was critical of aid in general, saying “Foreign aid has been an abysmal failure,” such efforts are really only half measures if the goal is to end aid. In fact, withholding aid in this way and promising to reinstate it afterwards only reinforces its legitimacy as foreign policy bribe money.
Aid to Pakistan shouldn’t be cut because their government has prosecuted an informant. Aid to Pakistan (and all other nations, for that matter) should be eliminated because it’s immoral. In the words of Ron Paul, “Foreign aid is taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries.”
This is another reason (on a growing list) of why Rand Paul’s philosophy is to Ron Paul’s philosophy, what CATO/Reason is to LewRockwell.com/The Mises Institute. That is to say, it’s an intellectual and ideological lightweight in the libertarian school of thought. It’s libertarianism that is grounded on a pragmatic or utilitarian foundation, as opposed to one that rests on morality and a consistent application of the non-aggression principle.
June 2nd, 2012 at 10:16 am
I think you nailed it perfectly. Rand Paul needs to be gently told to slow down and study more. I appreciate his concerns but he is not ready to be in the forefront with quick answers he has not thoroughly thought through.
June 4th, 2012 at 1:38 pm
Agreed; he and Gary Johnson both.
Johnson’s interview with Robert Wenzel is a classic example of the problems with “libertarian” politicians not familiar with Austrian economics and a sound foundation in libertarian philosophy. They crack under (the slightest) pressure and are easily turned.
June 5th, 2012 at 9:18 am
I’m really hopping that he can sit down with his father an other like minded intellectuals and realize the error in playing into the media’s game of standing up for America even when it’s wrong in cases like this.
June 17th, 2012 at 9:17 pm
Rand already introduced bills to get rid of all foreign aid (his budget), and almost all foreign (in another budget proposal). You should get your facts straight.
June 18th, 2012 at 12:12 am
From the press release linked above: “Calls for eliminating foreign aid to Pakistan until Dr. Shakil Afridi’s conviction is overturned and he is released.” I interpreted that statement to be a conditional one, meaning aid would be reinstated once Dr. Afridi’s conviction is overturned.
Maybe Rand Paul has called to end all aid, maybe it was only a political move to curry favor with libertarians, who knows? My point is that foreign is morally wrong and using it in such a way only tends to entrench it further.