One thought on “Since I haven’t posted on Ron Paul in a while,

  1. Jim

    “The ‘Rothbard-Paul’ vision, far from being defeated, was vindicated by the sudden and total implosion of the Leninist project.”

    Maybe. Or maybe the Soviets knew they couldn’t sustain their regime, given that they faced Ronald Reagan and his military buildup.

    Both hypotheses are plausible. But I need something a little more than a “Did Too!” response to write off the cause for the Soviet Union’s demise to a long-term weakness in its economy rather than to Reagan’s actions.

    The timing of the Soviets’ demise — coming on the heels of the end of Reagan’s administration — is awfully convenient if you want to ascribe it to long-term, structural weaknesses. (Not that those didn’t have an effect. But claiming that the preceeding eight years had nothing to do with what happened needs argument and evidence.) Indeed, it might be reasonable to think that the Soviet Union would have collapsed sooner or later, but that Reagan’s policy made it sooner rather than later. Maybe.

    Also, the cold war wasn’t defined by the existence of the Soviet Union. It was defined by the existence of Soviet hegemony over eastern Europe. So the wall coming down in Berlin ended the Cold War, even if the USSR would have continued to exist.

    Or maybe the wall fell because of JP II.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *