TNC goes there:
As surely as Ron Paul speaks to a real issue–the state's broad use of violence and surveillance–which the America's political leadership has failed to address, Farrakhan spoke to something real, something unsullied, which black America's political leadership failed to address, Both Paul and Farrakhan, in their glamour, inspired the young, the disaffected, the disillusioned.
I see TNC's point, but really, substantively, Paul is no Farrakhan. Here's another take on how Paul's 2012 campaign has revealed the ugly hopelessness of the Rockwell strategy for libertarianism:
Look at each group where Paul did well and you see a consistent pattern. They were not the kind of bigoted voters that Lew Rockwell was trying to appeal to with this paleolibertarian strategy. Ron’s support came from voters who were most like the libertarians that Rockwell has consistently slandered.
The very kind of voters that Rockwell would dismiss as “hippies”—the young, independents, liberals and moderates—were the people who made up the majority of Ron Paul's supporters. The people that Rockwell tried to appeal to were far more likely to vote for Santorum.
The flaw in the paleolibertarian strategy was that the people they tried to win over like big government. They are not libertarians. The very kind of people that Rockwell and Rothbard attacked in those newsletters, and in other places, were the ones willing to vote for Ron Paul.
In the end, Maybe the flaws in the candidate can help us build a better set of arguments or even find a less baggage-laden candidate to advance the ideas of freedom in a multicultural world. Unwinding this behemoth of an entitlement-military-Christianist state is the cause of the next generation.
The Dish 