Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul will speak at Hendricks Chapel on Wednesday in a lecture titled “Defining Liberty.” Paul served as a representative for the 14th and 22nd congressional districts in Texas. He also ran for president in 1988 as a Libertarian, and in 2008 and 2012 as a Republican.

The Daily Orange spoke with Paul to discuss his new book “Liberty Defined” and his take on issues the U.S. is facing today.

The Daily Orange: What was your inspiration for writing “Liberty Defined”?

Ron Paul: It was mainly to promote what I’ve been trying to promote for a long time, and that is the concept of liberty. There are a lot of different definitions and interpretations so I thought I’d sit down and give my view of it. I don’t think there’s anything really brand new or unique in it other than me talking about these issues and putting them into my own words.

The D.O.: What is your “manifesto” on fiscal and social issues?

R.P.: Whether it’s social issues, economic issues or foreign policy, it’s all based on one thing and that is the understanding of what personal liberty means and the rights of a person’s life and accepting the non-aggression principle, which says the world would be a lot better place if we all agreed that we weren’t going to hurt anybody.

The D.O.: What do you think is the biggest issue facing the U.S. today?

R.P.: Of course it is the lack of respect for individual liberty and that’s the broad problem that we have. When you talk about more specific issues that young people are facing, it comes around to fiscal in the sense that we have such a distorted economy. We’ve been taught for nearly 100 years that economics permits spending, deficits don’t matter, borrowing is OK and printing money is fine. Now we’re in a mess where we’re having downturns in the economy but no upturns. Really, it all comes back to the destruction of wealth represented by the debt burden that we’re facing today.

The D.O.: The U.S. is in the midst of a global crisis with Russia. What stance do you feel the United States should take in this crisis?

R.P.: I think that we should not assume that Ukraine is much of our business. I think it’s somebody else’s business. There’s a reason the Founding Fathers advised that we stay out of these kinds of things. Some of these problems are difficult so why should we be in the middle? Why do we have to take this position between one side and the other? Maybe that should be a European responsibility and we shouldn’t dump it on to a whole generation of young people who would have to pay for this. I would stick to my principles of non-intervention, mind our own business and not put any sanctions on Russia.

The D.O.: How would you stimulate the economy?

R.P.: The best stimulation would be to get rid of the income tax, quit printing money and quit monetizing debt. That means the government would have to quit spending money. If you radically reduce many of these regulations that are nothing but mischief, which is the difference between a managed economy and a free market, and I would do anything and everything to move in the direction of a free market.

The D.O.: You’ve made a few runs at the presidency in the past, what do you think of a potential run by your son, Rand, in 2016?

Paul: I think he’s doing a very good job. He has a ways to go but the one thing that I’ve warned him about is to be prepared because he’s doing it so well that once he challenges the establishment, they can get pretty nasty. Otherwise I think his organization is good and he’s doing everything that he needs to do very well.

The D.O.: What do you feel are the biggest ideological differences between you and your son?

R.P.: I don’t think there’s a whole lot. I’ve never claimed that he believes everything I do and he never claimed the other. He’s an individual who has been taught to think for himself. I would say we’re very, very close but people explain things differently and there definitely will be some differences, but there’s nothing major.

The D.O.: What issues are you most passionate about and why?

Paul: For me, it’s the passion of understanding what liberty is all about and if we recognize that and reject the principle of aggression, we would have our best chance at peace and prosperity. The other side of that is limiting government because if you have a lot of personal liberty and self-responsibility, you don’t need government to take care of us. Government can only grow by undermining this personal liberty.

Published on March 26, 2014 at 1:38 am

Contact Justin: jmatting@syr.edu | @jmattingly306