Friday, September 18, 2015

Rand Paul's Horrific Choice to Replace Alexander Hamilton on the $10 Bill

During Wednesday's Republican presidential debate, the candidates were asked what portrait they would like to see on the $10 bill, given that Treasury Secretary Jack Lew has announced that the portrait of Alexander Hamilton will be replaced on the bill by a woman.

Rand Paul was given the opportunity to respond first. I thought he missed a golden opportunity to respond by saying that it wasn't who was on the bills of the country but whether or not the currency was backed by gold that was important, and moving back to such a gold-backed currency should be a focus, not who is pictured on the currency.

And, he should have continued, "Let's have an independent audit of Fort Knox so we can see how much gold the Treasury actually owns."

As a second option, I wondered, and I am sure may other libertarians wondered, if he would have the balls to name Ayn Rand, or perhaps the less controversial, Rose Wilder Lane.  But, typical Rand , he didn't.

Instead, he went with the horrific Susan B, Anthony. There is one type of person I truly can't stand and that is someone who is an activist in favor of somehow expanding the state for "the common good."

Some people have problems with blacks, or Jews, or gays or Muslims or Hispanics. I don't have problems with any of these groups, but show me an activist group that hates those advocating any expansion of the state and I am in.

Susan B. Anthony fits into this category. She is most well known for her advocacy of women's suffrage, which is an expansion of those who vote in government elections.

In a recent comment. Walter Block explains why this was a bad idea.
 Yes, blacks and women should not have been given the right to vote, and, now that they have it, it should be taken away from them (I’m sure if the NYTimes sees this, they’ll stop their quote right there, and ignore what follows). But the same applies to whites and men. No one should “vote” in the fully free society, which I define as anarchistic, in which case “democracy” would not be in operation. Your reasoning for taking away voting rights is impeccable. It should apply to everyone, not any one particular subset of the population.

What most don't know is that Anthony's advocacy for expansion of the state went far beyond her camapign for women's suffrage.

 In 1853 Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton founded the Women's State Temperance Society with the goal of petitioning the State legislature to pass a law limiting the sale of liquor.

She also held the Neanderthal anti-trade position and promoted a policy of purchasing American-made goods.

She was also one of the first "equal pay" activists.

Here's Dr. Block, once again, this time on the problems with equal pay advocacy:


Bottom line: Rand went with a politically correct choice that turns out, from a libertarian perspective, to be absolutely horrific. Maybe he should be looking more carefully into the politically correct positions he adopts, and be reading a little more Walter Block.



  1. The PC religion even invaded the money. They were called the Founding Fathers, not the Founding Fathers and Mothers. Oh well, the more worthless the money becomes I guess it only fits that it should be degraded further by some PC choice.

  2. Before the God-King Lincoln, no politician was on the currency.

    In my opinion, all currency should have images of the Chairpeople of the Fed. That way, when we're using $100s as toilet paper or napkins, the common folk will know just who was responsible.