By Elisabeth Turner
Amidst scheduling conflicts and course changes, some Hofstra students might have taken time to watch the GOP presidential debate last week. Ron Paul, as usual, disagreed with his rivals by proclaiming the glories of a hands-off approach, while simultaneously manipulating the host's questions.
Apparently, much of our millennial generation, as seen through the increasing presence of Hofstra's Libertarian group, finds Paul's libertarian ideologies appealing. He has already won over young people in both Iowa and New Hampshire. In an age of progressive politics and tarnished liberties, it is no wonder.
Paul said during a previous debate that he has no intention of running third party if he doesn't make it past the primaries. The young voters' population would undoubtedly be sorely disappointed if this were the case.
Paul wants to abolish the Federal Reserve and the Department of Education. He favors legalizing marijuana and believes that marriage should be solely between a man and a woman. However, he thinks that sexual preferences and civil unions should be independent of government authority. Paul doesn't find Iran's nuclear weapons efforts to be of concern, and based on his non-interventionist policies, he rejects continued support of Israel.
Considering America is in desperate need of a systematic shift, Paul's proposals might actually have the power to strengthen our rights and success as individuals and restore the American dream. For example, if we were to switch to a gold standard as he has suggested, inflation and other monetary issues could be better regulated.
But I wonder, would we, Hofstra's millennial generation, uphold his doctrines with the same deference; would we respect the lines that his proposals draw or would we form our own lines, creating an even wider and more indulgent society? Can we carry out the ‘hands off' approach Ron Paul is advocating?
No, we haven't lost grasp of compassion for the aching world or ourselves. Our virtue has however greatly depreciated because of a declined appreciation for the goodness of morality.
Ron Paul has proposed policies that could revolutionize the ways in which we as Americans think and act. The question, however, should no longer be whether or not his solutions are viable because, in fact, many of them are.
The question is if Hofstra students could carry them out in the fullness of his original intentions. If we are to be a society of the free and the brave, we must remember the viability of first surrendering our freedoms to conviction.
Let us then become a generation and a society fit to cultivate the present. Perhaps then, the annihilation of the Feds will be a marvelous idea.