Some supporters of Aleister Crowley have mentioned that Ron Paul shares many of Aleister Crowley’s political views. While it’s true that Ron Paul upholds the liberty of the individual as a core principle of his campaign, there is at least one major reason to vote for Aleister Crowley in 2012 anyway.
Before we get to the reasons to vote for Aleister Crowley instead of Ron Paul in 2012, let’s briefly look at some of their similarities.
- Liberty of the Individual. Perhaps more than any particular position, this is the most striking similarity between the two candidates. Unlike any other living candidate in the field so far, Ron Paul places individual liberty front and center as the one principle which informs all his other positions. For this reason alone, Ron Paul may be considered the one living candidate most compatible with the principles of Thelema.
- End the War on Drugs. Ron Paul has been scrutinized and chastised over his “radical” and “extreme” position on legalizing or decriminalizing all drugs. This is, of course, a position that has been promoted since the early 20th century by one of the first people to ever describe the recreational and spiritual use of drugs in writing (in fictional accounts like Diary of a Drug Fiend and The Drug, and non-fictional accounts such as this one), Aleister Crowley. For more information about Crowley’s position on drugs, see our post, “End Prohibition!”
- Same-Sex Marriage. Ron Paul agrees with Aleister Crowley that the state should not define marriage, but that this should be left to individuals to define for themselves, and the state should see it as just another form of contractual agreement between people. For more information about Crowley’s views concerning marriage, see our three-part series on the topic:
- Discrimination Rights. Another position for which Ron Paul has been chastised by mainstream media is his stance on discrimination. In short, he thinks that individuals and businesses should be free to discriminate against people on any basis, including sex, race, creed, age, or disability. Aleister Crowley would agree, while also prohibiting federal and state governmental agencies from engaging in or financially supporting such discrimination. See our post, “The Right to Discriminate” for more on Crowley’s position.
- Abortion. Ron Paul is very much against abortion, though he would leave it up to states to make their own determinations about whether abortion should be legal. Some people make the erroneous assumption that because Crowley’s philosophy was so radically in favor of the liberty of the individual, that this inherently included freedom to abort unborn fetuses. Not so. Aleister Crowley believed that life begins with conception, and that the fetus has a right to life, just as an adult. We don’t have a post about this topic yet, but stay tuned!
- Opposition to Subsidies. Aleister Crowley would take the same approach whether the failing institution is a small business or a central bank: let them fail.
- Religious Freedom. Ron Paul is an outspoken proponent of religious freedom, and feels that the religious beliefs of politicians should inform their policy-making, while also upholding tolerance for all religious beliefs. Although Aleister Crowley (and this campaign) support the notion of bringing the religion of Thelema and its teachings into the halls of government, this would ultimately result in an increase of religious freedom. As President, Aleister Crowley would guarantee the freedom of every person to choose any religion they wish; even dead, slave religions like Christianity.
- Armed Resistance to Tyranny. Ron Paul upholds the right to bear arms, specifically enshrined in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as a means to resist government if it should prove tyrannical. Aleister Crowley enshrined the “right to kill” as the last of five clauses in his declaration of the Rights of Man (Liber Oz), and referred to this as providing for “tyrannicide,” and therefore describes armed resistance against oppressors as a basic human right.
Here’s another thing that Aleister Crowley and Ron Paul have in common: neither of them have a chance of winning the general election. Or, for that matter, the primary. Aleister Crowley can’t win because he’s dead and British, and Ron Paul can’t win because he represents a threat to the status quo and the power of the established hierarchy. As we have seen in several of the most recent elections, those who have the ability and motivation to actually change things in a meaningful and significant way will never even make it to the ballot in the general election. For this reason, we believe that a vote for Aleister Crowley will be more effective than one for Ron Paul.
Sure, you could vote for Ron Paul, but he won’t win, and your vote will be insignificant. Nobody will take particular note of the hundreds of thousands of votes for this doomed campaign. However, if 1% of the votes are cast for Aleister Crowley, the world will stand up and take notice.
If you’re looking for more reasons to support Aleister Crowley over Ron Paul, consider the following three positions that Aleister Crowley held, which Ron Paul would oppose:
- Minimum Wage. Aleister Crowley felt that everyone should earn a living wage, which he described as including sufficient surplus as to allow a person to make investments.
- Welfare for Mothers. Aleister Crowley was adamant that, at the very least, every mother should be afforded six months to care for her newborn infant.
- Universal Health Care. Although he did not include the provision in his Liber Oz, he made it clear elsewhere that he felt that the right to health care was implicit in this document as a basic human right.
Stay tuned for more blog posts elaborating Crowley’s views on the above and more political topics!