If you're reading this article, there's a strong chance that you hold Libertarian beliefs and are a fan of Ron Paul. The validity of this assumption explains the title of this article. Huh?
Libertarians love to argue, defend, attack, and prove how smart they are. In short, they love to be right. You probably clicked on this article to tell me what an idiot I am. How much do you enjoy being around "know it all" types? Exactly.
What our restoration process needs to succeed is not more knowledge. What we need to succeed is more people. I have no facts supporting this, but I'd wager any amount that the average Libertarian knows more "stuff" than the average member of any other party. And going around proving how smart you are does nothing to enroll others into the cause because people hate to be wrong as much as we like to be right.
Think about how ridiculous it is that you've been taking pleasure in watching this economic meltdown. And I know you have. You've been secretly hoping that the bailout fails and America sinks into a depression. Essentially, you are saying, "I'm okay with massive pain and suffering if it means that I get to be right."
Sitting around watching the world burn so we can say "told you so" is about as productive as being the nerdy guy in high school who knows the girl he's in love with is going to get her heart broken by the jock who's using her, and rejoicing in her sadness when it happens all because maybe, just maybe she'll turn to you in her moment of need when she realizes you were right all along.
Why don't we stop making fun of the big stupid jocks, declare who we are, be that person, and go get the girl?
It's time to stop justifying our existence by making our fellow Americans wrong for believing what they believe. Don't we believe that you should be allowed to believe whatever you want? It's time to stop living into the past and create a future where it's okay to be a libertarian and then live into that future. This is exactly what the founding fathers we revere so highly did. Check out the last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence:
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress... solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies ARE... Free and Independent States, that they ARE Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain IS... totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they HAVE full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the SUPPORT OF THIS DECLARATION...we mutually PLEDGE to each other our LIVES, our FORTUNES, and our sacred HONOR.
Bear in mind that when this was signed there was absolutely no other country in the world that would have said, "Oh, I guess those British colonies are actually free states now." But it didn't matter, we said we were--in present tense. And then "for the support of this declaration" or in other words "to make these words we're saying about who we are true" we put absolutely everything on the line. You see, we didn't fight a war so that we "could be" free. We fought a war because we WERE free. And if you're a free country and another country has troops within your borders, you kick them out. That's why we celebrate our Independence Day on the day we put these words on paper, not the day the war was over. It was a commitment to our word that made the rest of the world agree with us.
So how does this apply to our cause? For too long libertarians have been "doing things" so that we "could be" something we aren't instead of declaring who we are and then keeping our word about who we are. One is taxing and always fails, the other is empowering. This is the difference between someone who does something (eats healthy food) in order to be something he isn't (healthy) and someone who IS healthy and therefore does the things a healthy person does because that's who he is.
Libertarians need a Declaration of who we are. One that is inspiring. One that causes people to see a possibility that wasn't there before. One that creates a future we can live into. It's not enough to say who we aren't, people already know that we aren't republicans or democrats. For this cause to succeed, a Declaration of who we are is in order.
First of all, we don't need to establish grievances as the first part of our nation's declaration does. We've been doing that for 40 years. I won't attempt to write an entire declaration, but one line that I feel confident would be in there in some form would be the following:
Libertarians are responsible.
I think you'd agree that this would be part of the declaration of who we are. And if we are responsible, it's time to stop blaming the mainstream media, censorship, propaganda, apathy, Big Brother, stupidity, and all of the other things we use as an excuse for our lack of political clout.
As Ghandi said, "You must be the Change you wish to see in the world." If we are the party of responsibility, it's time to restore our integrity by admitting we haven't been and pledge the equivalent of our "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" that we will be who we say we are going forward.
We spend a lot of time talking about the founding fathers. Isn't it time to take the most important lesson they taught us--how to transform a nation by declaring who we are and then putting everything on the line to keep our word about who we are--and apply it to our Campaign for Liberty?
I am willing to contribute to the writing of this Declaration of Freedom. I need your help.
On July 3rd, 1776, few people believed we could be a free country. We told them we were. And then lived into it. On October 30th 2008, few people believe our Campaign can succeed. That is because they don't know who we are. It's time we tell them.
Your Fellow American,
John Armstrong
strongarmedjohn@yahoo.com
As always, unlike the NFL, the author not only grants permission but encourages any rebroadcasts, retransmissions, accounts of, repostings of this article in part or full to your blog or anywhere else to promote the Restoration of our Republic.
©2008 John Armstrong, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Friday, October 31, 2008
Last modified: Friday, October 31, 2008
The views expressed in this article are those of John Armstrong only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John Armstrong is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by John Armstrong of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By John Armstrong |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-10-31 05:24:51
Speaking for myself, I prefer to emphasize positives wherever possible. It's not easy, because so much of what we need to talk about involve negatives. I think the main reason libertarian thought hasn't taken hold for most people is that we don't emphasize the positives enough. My challenge to you, and to all libertarians and liberty-sympathizers, is to find ways to do just that.
Liberals are a favorite target of many libertarians (not to mention conservatives), but they do one thing particularly well. They sell the positive side of their vision. Nevermind that we don't think that the positive side is all that positive when you look at it up close. That's not what most people see. Most people see what detractors like to call the "bleeding heart" side, which is just a negative way of saying that liberal doctrine tends to win hearts and minds by appealing to the real needs of real people and making their claims that their way will help fill those needs.
That overall communication strategy is what we need to learn to implement for our message, and since our philosophical approach really will create circumstances in which all people can meet their own needs rather than depending upon Big Brother to do it for them (something liberals can never accomplish), it would stand a better chance of gaining wider acceptance than we've accomplished so far.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-10-31 06:25:14
well John, you already know what I believe in. How about adding something like:
"libertarians believe our lives are to be cherished, and that no one or no government has the right to extinguish that life. all are born equal."
i remember walking into the EU parliament in Brussels and reading their constitution and being shocked that the first thing was a statement against capital punishment and the sanctity of life. the founders missed that 220 years ago, so lets add it now
of course we need to add a disclaimer about self-defense... doesn't do anyone's liberty any good if you allow another to steal it without cause
Posted By: Master C
Date: 2008-10-31 07:42:28
Dear John,
For those who want to climb on a BANDWAGON that's going somewhere, vote for BARACK OBAMA.
Look at these qualities and you will see how prepared he is for whatever difficulties we encounter:
1) Barack Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review. He also taught CONSTITUTIONAL LAW at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004. His educational credentials are superior and his judgment is sound.
2) Barack Obama has been scrutinized by magazines, newspapers, radio and tv commentators, other candidates, his opposition, political blogs, and the news media for more than 21 months. Books have been written both about him and by him, innumerable articles and feature stories have covered every aspect of his life – and his family – so that he has been thoroughly analyzed, discussed, and investigated.
3) Barack Obama has been in 29 national debates, televised and broadcast by very capable questioners, he toured all 50 states and several special provinces as he went through 53 primary elections so that his views on every issue that someone wanted to question him about were analyzed, discussed, and evaluated.
4) Barack Obama has put forth very detailed, comprehensive, specific programs on 26 different subjects from energy to poverty to the (so-called) war in Iraq. He discusses each program in detail, and spells out how it will be funded on his website.
5) Barack Obama has attracted and recruited very highly-respected and capable people to assist him in running for office and to serve in his administration when he is elected. These are people with a great depth of understanding and expertise about every subject that he will face as President, both men and women.
6) Barack Obama has energized new and traditional voters to contribute more money to his campaign than any politician in history, which indicates their support, confidence, and desire to have him serve as our chief executive.
7) Barack Obama has met with foreign leaders, military leaders, business professionals, and Congressional leaders about our country’s most troubling problems. He has discussed these issues with them, and offered his opinions as to how to improve them.
8) Barack Obama, as a member of the US Senate, has had to review spending priorities, budget allocations, and government policies for every kind of national issue from healthcare to bank reform to the (so-called) war in Iraq.
And, perhaps even more important than these other items,
9) Barack Obama has NOT voted or supported the misguided positions of the rabid Republican right regarding such issues as abortion, gay rights, stem cell research, original intent of Supreme Court justices, and the (so-called) war in Iraq.
I know that these points won't make ONE BIT OF DIFFERENCE to someone who is already against Obama for other reasons ~ perhaps racial, perhaps envy, perhaps bitterness about the failure of your own candidate to have a chance in the election ~ but Obama is better EDUCATED, better SPOKEN, better INFORMED, better off FINANCIALLY, and better SUPPORTED by other people than any other candidate. He has LOTS of experience, he's been through LOTS of scrutiny, and he has LOTS of answers.
Vote for BARACK OBAMA! The RIGHT MAN for THIS TIME in our nation's history.
Master C
Posted By: Charles
Date: 2008-10-31 07:57:03
I very much enjoyed your article, Mr. Armstrong, and agree with most of what you've written.
"Master C",
It seems you've missed the point.
Best regards,
Charles
Posted By: Savious
Date: 2008-10-31 09:06:47
Dominant or submissive?
I think that is our underlining problem. We want more control over our lives, we are responsible, we seek a government that provides only the infrastructure for us to either succeed or fail in.
Libertarian’s talk of free market, personal responsibility, personal achievements, and non interference from the government. These are all traits of someone who likes to be charge, someone who wants to take their own destiny into their own hands. In short, we are Dominant.
That isn’t the case for the rest of the nation however. Universal health care may not be the smartest way to handle our needs, but it is the easiest. Child tax credits, food stamps, health care, welfare, seat belt laws, helmet laws, Social Security, and HUD… are all examples of where people have submitted to the greater authority, trusting that they will be taken care of. In short, they are submissive, and seek a Dominant to take care of their needs.
Think I’m wrong, how many wives have said “I wish he made enough that I could stay at home like my mother did.”
First they removed the natural order of the Dominant submissive relationship. By pushing for law after law, in a quest to make us all equal, and then crushing anyone who tried to show independent thought, they created an environment that lacked people who are Dominant. Once the Dominants where removed, or unable to act, the government stepped in and assumed the role.
Unless we can provide a counter to the dominant government, a way to show those who are submissive that they will be taken care of, we will never gain ground.
Posted By: Emzad
Date: 2008-10-31 09:19:36
I think that one of the problems we face in solidifying and uniting more than just the core libertarians is that we need to be okay with the idea that a candidate is only 'mostly' okay. I am not wild about Mr. Barr, but I ‘mostly’ agree with him, so I support him because he is the closest candidate I have to my own views on liberty. I am not completely comfortable about it, but I get over my reservations in order to help the cause.
I too believe that a libertarian is responsible, and sees life as sacred. I also believe that libertarians should work at cultivating, and supporting diversity on every level, and be respectful to the thoughts and feelings of those around them. You do not have to agree, but do not belittle the person who has expressed those views, it only
Posted By: djvinny
Date: 2008-10-31 09:51:14
Hey Master C! You got to be kidding me about OBAMA! You said Obama is Better Educated? Better informed? Better spoken? OBAMA lacks that basic understanding of economics and that's an irrefutable fact! OBAMA has no idea how to stop Fiat Monetary currency. He’s lacks the understand of a Free market society. We claim to have a free market yet we allow the Federal Reserves a “Private bank” by the way to dictate to the market the interest rates? Having a Private Bank control our nation monetary systems is unconstitutional! You say that OBAMA was a constitutional Lawyer? Well then, that just demonstrates his ignorance even more, He better know that ONLY GOLD AND SIVLER ARE LEGAL TENDER. That’s in the Constitution! Also Congress is the only ones who can Coin money. Not a private Bank. You really need to study Austrian Economics and Read Ludwig Von Mises and Henry Rothbard to have a real understanding about how our government needs to run its monetary policies. You come out and have a list about OBAMA and expect us Libertarians to be persuaded into believing that he’s the most qualified candidate? Are you kidding me? You obviously don’t know too much about your own Candidate! And I can, and will say that will great confidence! The reason that I could say that is do to the fact that OBAMA is in the CFR which is the Council of Foreign Relations. Also OBAMA is trying to pass an unconstitutional LAW which is called the Global Poverty Act [link edited for length] Not only is this bill Unconstitutional but OBAMA was one of the main sponsors of it. You said that OBAMA is a constitutional Law? WOW he’s must be really stupid or really oblivious of the constitution to pass this type of bill! OBAMA has nothing on RON PAUL AND THAT’S A FACT!!! Ron PAUL is the Thomas Jefferson of our day! OBAMA is the Alexander Hamilton of our day, and that’s not a compliment. Just because I’m not voting for him doesn’t make me a racist I will not vote for him because he’s a lair, Hypocrite, and not trust worthily. We believe in RON PAUL so much that 70 of us got RON PAUL on the California ballot as a write in Candidate Always vote for Principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost. John Adams
Posted By: Desh
Date: 2008-10-31 10:04:27
I think that you have hit the nail on the head. I could relate to every paragraph, especially about the evil grin on my face about the current economic situation. I agree that we must define ourselves, not by those we oppose, but through our beliefs and actions.
You will never become anything when you are simply trying to become an 'opposite'.
Libertarians get a bad rap because people don't understand what we believe in, and in all honesty we aren't given the respect that (I think) we deserve by "those in power". I know that I'm sounding like the broken record that you just wrote about, but it's time that we start the old fashion "word of mouth" approach. The internet is a great key in our success, and keeping a level head, backed by factual statements, will shed a little light on what we really stand for (and not necessarily what we stand against). I have influenced several people at my place of work with this attitude.
Keep up the good work!
-Desh
www.deshman.com
Posted By: Gigaplex
Date: 2008-10-31 11:01:44
We are people that promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.
How's that? It's basically the C4L mission statement so this has already been done.
I'll tell you the real reason why we haven't succeeded yet but you won't like the answer. We haven't succeeded because most of the people who really care about liberty have stayed away from powerful political organizations. They join the libertarian party and the constitution party and not vote, etc. so even fragmented as they stay away from positions of power.
If we really want to succeed we have to take over the political organizations that are already in power rather than try to make our own and we need to all be under one roof rather than separated. I'm talking about taking over the GOP. We already have enough people and we have already begun this process. If you're not already on board, now's the time to sign up.
We can't win without the robovoters - that's what the LP has proven. That's the cold hard reality. But the bright side is that there is a way to do this and it has even been done in the past by other political groups so it has even been through testing and succeeded!
Posted By: John Armstrong
Date: 2008-10-31 19:40:52
Master C,
I posted the shortest blog I've ever written and submitted it for publication a minute ago. And I did this while in my Cowardly Lion outfit in New Orleans.
Happy Halloween,
JA
Posted By: Doob
Date: 2008-10-31 20:11:14
AMEN. And I'm not a religious person.
Posted By: Scott
Date: 2008-11-01 14:54:18
No party, including libertarians, should be quick to claim the cause of the Campaign for Liberty as their own. It was born out of an awakening of people of all political affiliations. Why should a libertarian claim more ownership of the C4L than a republican? They both hold the same views, in their true forms, but seem to forget that fact and go along fighting with each other. The premise that the C4L will fail if the Libertarian Party and it's members don't proclaim their intentions and put them to action is taking ownership of this great movement, and that is wrong. I am not saying that putting your words to action is wrong, but it shouldn't be such a divided effort. Like those who were part of the Revolutionary War, everyone had difference of opinion. Could we not find common ground somewhere? After all, Thomas Jefferson was both a Republican and a libertarian in the true sense of those words, and usually both Republicans and Libertarians love Jefferson. So let's start reaching out to each other and finding out what we both agree on. Who knows, we may just find that we are more like each other than we ever knew, and more Republicans may turn away from their neoconservative leaders if they have somewhere to turn to. Unite or Die.
Posted By: lono1
Date: 2008-11-01 16:51:01
Hey Obama lovers,
Milo A Nickel, former President and COO of Louisiana State Newspapers wrote this article that I thought was very interesting. For all those who did not get a chance to read it, I thought I would share it with you.
" I have been asked the question, who is Barrack Obama? Truthfully, I don't know.
Millions of Americans are getting ready to vote for him to be president of the USA, the Commander and Chief, a world leader and yet they don't have the slightest idea of who he is, where he comes from and what he stands for other than the carefully packaged imade prepared by the Democratic Party and protected by the national news media.
Anyone who asks legitimate questions or raises concern about his experience or his ability or his track record or whether he is a true American patriot are immediately dubbed a racist because he is black!
but there is one local citizen, unlike me and most of you, who has taken the time and trouble to research the issue and who asks the questions presented herewith. He didn't ask me to present the question; I asked him if I could because i believe they are legitimate questions and deserve answers. The questions follow:
Did you ever think about the rapid rise of a first term senator to this high elevation? This presents a lot of questions as to whom and where the push comes from.
Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California. He is very open about his 2 years at Occidental; he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. "Barry" (that was the name he used all his life) during this time had 2 roommates, Muhammad Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan. During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia, next Hyderabad in India, three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family. My question- where did he get the money for this trip? Neither I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they were in college. When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York. It is at this time he wants everyone to call him Barack- not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia? It;s not cheap to say the least! Where did he get money for tuition? Student loans?Maybe. After Columbia he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000 a year. Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in new York.
By 'chance' he met Antoin "Tony" Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago. Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery this year. Rezko was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association. About 2 years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School? Where did he get the money for law school? More student loans? After law school, he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Gailand. Guess what? They represented Rezar, which is Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago. In 2003, Rezko threw an early fund raiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendeiland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money' for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwood District of Chicago for $1.66 million (less than asking price). With ALL those student loans- where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezco's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchl, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased. Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.
Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett was Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without talking to her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran! Do we see a pattern here? or am I going crazy?
On May 10, 2008 The Times reported , Robert Malley, advisor to Obama, was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas" which controls Gaza and is connected with Iran. This past week, buried in the back of part of the papers, Iraqi newspapers reported that during Obama's visit to Iraq, he asked their leaders to do nothing about the war until after he is elected, and he will "Take care of things".
Oh, and by the way, remember the college roommates that were born in Pakistan? They are in charge of all those 'small' Internet campaign contributions for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The poor and middle class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East?
And the final bit of news. On September 7, 2008, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that was made on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Obama on talking about his religion said "My Muslim faith". When questioned, "he made a mistake." Some mistake !
All of the above information I got on line, if you would like to check it- Wilkipedia, encyclopedia.
Barack Obama;Tony Rezki; Valerie Jarrett; Daily Times-Obama visited Pakistan in 1981;The Washington Times- september 7, 2008; The Times-May 10,2008.
Now the BIG question- If I found out all this information on my own, why haven't all of our "intelligent' member of the press been reporting this?
A phrase that keeps ringing in my ear- "BEWARE OF THE ENEMY FROM WITHIN"
Are your questions answered- or have they just begun?
Posted By: Pete
Date: 2008-11-02 07:30:49
I see the C4L being the local, boots on the ground, face to face organ for informing our neighbors about candidates and issues pertinent to maintaining and strengthening Liberty at the local, state, and national levels, as well as having a national presence. We will train people how to become involved,in the political party of their choice. C4L itself should be nonpartisan, but friendly with such entities as the Libertarian Party, the Republican Liberty Caucus, and the ACLU. Over time, I'd like the C4L to become the 'Consumers Union' for Americans who believe in the Constitution, the ones to check with in order to get the straight scoop on a legislator or issue.
So, I do not think that C4L should be viewed as an arm of the Libertarian Party. In fact, and some might view this as heresy, I'd prefer that the LP become more of an ideological organization in which the members typically have a 'dual citizenship' as Libertarians and also as working members of one of the major parties. Maybe that's how it works already, and I am betraying my ignorance. If so, please accept my apologies. As a liberty loving Republican, I hold the LP in high regard and look to them for Libertarian views on different matters, but have not yet voted for a LP candidate.
After this election, I plan on getting out and walking my voting precinct on behalf of C4L. As an icebreaker, I'm thinking of using the Wall Street bailouts which is of course a negative message, but following up by talking about empowerment of concerned citizens in the political process, which would be positive. We'll see how it goes!
Posted By: Marco Collina
Date: 2008-11-02 15:43:34
How can one offer their vote for the office of President of The U.S.of A. to a person who is clearly arrogant , conceited and more importantly disrespectful of what our Nation Represents. Either they are themselves ignorant or they are not Proud to be an American... if they are ignorant, we must educate them...if they do not like to live the American way...then they do not deserve the blessing of life in this country. I believe Barack Obama is a wake up call for America. Our Nation has been going down the wrong path for quite some time now and it is time to correct it's course. Barack Obama is the culmination of a corrupt Government that has not represented the interests of it's people. It is time for the People that Truly Love their country and what it has represented since it's creation to make themselves heard. This Land was blessed by God with the opportunity to have the Liberty that people are entitled to as a God Given Human Right . It is not the right of Government to Change our way of being from Independents into Government Dependents..., . It is time for us to defend our God Given Inalienable Rights ...
Posted By: Angela Williams
Date: 2008-11-03 20:01:48
Mr. Armstrong,
Thank you for your article on Libertarians. I thought it was very informative as far as ideas go for the Libertarian Party. I've just recently joined their Party and look forward to promoting all of the positive ideas on our platform.
Thanks again for the ideas!
Sincerely,
Angela Williams
LP Member