Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
From Ron Paul to Mary Ruwart: The rEVOLution continues As the two major parties will again be a choice between Big Government Candidate A and Big Government Candidate B, it is important that at least one party offers voters a libertarian choice. If Mary Ruwart receives the Libertarian Party nomination, voters will have that choice.by Jeremy West
(libertarian)
Monday, May 5, 2008
The Ron Paul rEVOLution
The Ron Paul rEVOLution has been an immense success. It has brought a myriad of people into the freedom movement. It has convinced thousands of the principles of liberty, and it has shown countless others that they are not alone in their beliefs.
Ron Paul is the most libertarian person that I know of who has run for the presidential nomination of either major party in my lifetime. And let's face it, the two major parties are all the vast majority of Americans pay any attention to when it comes to politics.
Now that most of the primaries are over and it is clear John McCain will be getting the Republican nomination, who can Ron Paul rEVOLutionaries turn to? The Libertarian Party has been the political home for liberty lovers for the last three and a half decades. Now that it is clear there will be no libertarian nominated to either the Democrat or Republican parties, shouldn't we support the party that has historically represented our beliefs?
The problem is that there are many less-than-principled libertarians running for the Libertarian Party nomination this year. As the two major parties will again be a choice between Big Government Candidate A and Big Government Candidate B, it is important that at least one party offers voters a libertarian choice.
If Mary Ruwart receives the Libertarian Party nomination, voters will have that choice. Mary Ruwart is a longtime libertarian activist and writer. Her views on hundreds of issues have been published over the years on the Liberator Online. And her book, Healing Our World, is available free online. It explains the principles of liberty clearly and concisely.
Finally, Dr. Ruwart's communication skills are excellent. She can explain the principles of liberty in succinct sound-bite form to conservatives, liberals, and even statists.
I will leave you with an excerpt explaining how taxes constitute aggression (from Healing Our World)which shows the exceptional communicative abilities of Mary Ruwart:
If we decided we wanted a new neighborhood park, how would we go about getting one? We could call together other individuals who want the same thing and could raise enough money to own and operate the park through donations, by selling stock in a corporation set up for that purpose, or through other voluntary means. If those who did not participate in the fundraising effort decide later to use the park, we might require them to pay an entry fee. Obviously, we would be relating voluntarily and non-aggressively with our neighbors. If George didn't want to be involved as either a contributor or a park visitor, we would honor his choice.
Of course, another way we could proceed would be to vote for a tax to purchase and maintain the park. If a large enough gang of our neighbors voted for it, George's hard-earned dollars would be used for a park he didn't want and wouldn't use. If he refused to pay what our gang dictated, law enforcement agents, acting on behalf of the winning voters, would extract the tax, at gunpoint, if necessary. If he resisted too vehemently, George might even get killed in the scuffle.
Indeed, taxation and other forms of aggression-through-government are so taken for granted in our culture that one of our most popular sayings is that "nothing is certain except death and taxes." Yet slavery was once as universal. Taxation is thought to be indispensable to civilization today, just as slavery once was. Advocates of taxation claim that since most people pay assigned taxes before the guns show up, they have implicitly agreed to it as the price of living in "society." Most slaves obeyed their master before he got out the whip, yet we would hardly argue that this constituted agreement to their servitude. Today, we have an enlightened perspective on slavery, just as one day we will have an enlightened perspective on taxes and other forms of aggression we now think of as "the only way."
Just as our ancestors rationalized slavery, we've created the illusion that taxation is legitimate. Like the volunteers who continued to shock the victim at the insistence of the scientist, we feel our actions are justified, perhaps even noble. We believe that we can create a world of peace and plenty if we are given a free hand to force those selfish others to do things our way. We feel taxation is indispensable for certain necessities (e.g., defense, clean air and water, helping the poor, etc.). Instead, as the following chapters illustrate, aggression in any form only hurts others and ourselves. We reap as we have sown.
If you enjoyed this article, please use the buttons above to digg it and subscribe to The Jeremy West Column. Then enjoy my other articles below:
The views expressed in this
article are those of Jeremy West only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Jeremy West 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.
Is Mary Ruwart pro-life? If not, then she cannot be the next standard bearer for the Ron Paul revolution. Paul supporters should look instead to Chuck Baldwin, the nominee of the Constitution Party, who actively supported Ron Paul's candidacy through numerous articles over the past year, and whose positions line up with Paul's to a tee. Baldwin is not an anarcho-capitalist (or any other kind of anarchist), he, like Dr. Paul, is a constitutionalist.
I don't think breaking up Ron Paul supporters is the way to go in securing a seat in office. We're taking one following and breaking it up into several. Would it not be better to stay strong with Ron Paul and write him in if necessary?
Too much money will have to be spent just getting her name on the ballot. Ron Paul has already launched the revolution on the Republican side. What we need is a pro-freedom Democrat in the mix, too (if there is such a thing).
Eric, Mary Ruwarts personal oppinion on the issue is irrelevant to the powers of the Federal government. Her and Ron Paul share the position that the Federal government is inappropriate authority to govern medicine, domestic crime, and reproductive rights, and is not authorized by the Constitution, but the states are not prohibited. If there's one thing you should've learned from Ron Paul is, pro-life and pro-choice is a false dichotomy when pro-responsibility is the solution.
Bruno, in many states write-in votes require an expensive fee be paid or they're not tabulated.
Elias, the Lp will be on the ballot in 49 states come November. They're already secured ballot access in 28 states, and have a fund just for ballot access. www.lp.org/index_ba08.htm The Lp has never failed to field a presidential candidate. He would'nt have to worry about ballot access. It's taken care of. All he has to do is get his poll above 15% so he can get himself included in the debates. The R3volution will take care of the rest.
I should also mention the "sore loser" law does not apply to national elections. He can be on the general election ballot for another party even though he was a Republican candidate on the primary ballot.
This Lp option is very much available to us, to Ron Paul, and we should'nt be quick to dismiss the idea, nor should he.
I would be very happy to have either Ron Paul or Mary Ruwart for our next president. But we should not split up our vote. Somehow, those of us who love freedom and the constitution must pick one and deliver all of our votes for that person.
Posted By: Nicolas Martin
Date: 2008-05-07 09:55:50
Because of her position on child-adult sex, Ruwart's campaign is DOA. Her position is apparently that a pre-pubescent child may consent to sex with an adult, and this stand, to say the least, is repulsive to most Americans, if not most libertarians.
Nicolas that may be a misrepresentation of Mary Ruwart's words. According to the page you linked to, Wayne Allen Root makes that claim and Mary Ruwart denies it.
"In his answer to the same question, Wayne Allyn Root's campaign manager claimed Dr. Ruwart said "pedophilia is OK" in her book "Short Answers to Tough Questions." Mark Schreiber said he paid $100 to have the book shipped overnight to him and that it contained that phrase and the words “a contract exists.”
He also repeated the call, posted on Mr. Root's website, for Dr. Ruwart to withdraw from the presidential race.
Dr. Ruwart then used the three minutes she was planning to reserve for the evening session to answer this false accusation. She pointed to copies of "Short Answers" and invited convention attendees to read page 43 to prove to themselves those phrases do not appear. "
I havent read her book so I can't say one way or the other. But from the article it sounds like her intent is to prevent cases such as one where a 17 year old boy is convicted of statutary rape for having consensual sex with his 16 year old girl friend.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
