As Bob Barr's presence in the popular eye becomes more frequent, and as the Libertarian National Convention rapidly approaches, his candidacy for the LP nomination of Presidential Candidate raises pertinent questions of who is Bob Barr really, and what are his actual motivations. Is he for real, or is he just a Trojan Horse for the Republican Party. by Gary Trieste
(libertarian)
Saturday, May 24, 2008
I must confess, when I first heard about Bob Barr's declaration of joining the libertarians, it was such an existentially discordant note that I just couldn't wrap my mind around it, and it soon faded from my memory like one of those weird asides in a bad dream. But when I heard it again later in a newsreport, I found myself dumbfounded, and confused. Was I hearing what I thought I heard?
Grasping for some mental foothold, my mind sought all the more likely alternatives - no, it couldn't be THAT Bob Barr. Must be someone else with same name. Maybe it was an April 1st news prank. Ok, so perhaps it was a flippant statement taken out of context, like "I would more likely watch hamsters become truffle hounds, than I will join the Libertarian Party and become a libertarian." Or more likely it was just one of those Snopes type internet hoaxes, or libertarian blog ponderances "Wouldn't it be funny if . . . Bob Barr became a libertarian"
And yet, it couldn't be true, could it?.
Certainly not THE Bob Barr that was the very iconification of the worst of big, intrusive governement. Could it be that Bob Barr?
This was the man who spearheaded and sharpened the War on Drugs, and
Instituted the notorious Barr Amendment which had undermined any legal reform in DC to legalize medical marijuana for patients with cancer or multiple sclerosis;
This was the man who authored the Defense of Marriage Act to federalize the illegalization of same-gender unions,
The man who voted for the Patriot Act, and
Who tried to illegalize alternative religious observances by military personnel (Wiccan).
This was the man who was specifically targeted by the Libertarian Party to (successfully) remove him from office, as one of the worst of the worst offenders of individual liberties.
How specifically UNlibertarian could one man be?
And yet, I saw the news reports, observed the chatter, and heard the commentary, of this man voluntarily CHOOSING to become a libertarian; jeesh, it was like . . well:
It was like hearing Hamas had decided Israel was God's chosen people after all and would accede its territory and people willingly to Israeli rule.
It was like hearing Leonid Breshnev denouncing Communism as a failed and unworkable economic system, and thereforto would begin the capitalist reformation of the Soviet Union.
It was like hearing Pat Robertson publicly asserting his conclusion that there really is no God after all, and the Bible is just a bunch of shallow stories used as a lynchpin to manipulate the masses.
Unbelievable. Inconceivable. Cats and Dogs living together.
And yet, there was Bob Barr, the personification of most everything ANTI-libertarian, declaring his allegience to libertarianism, and, by corollary at least, effectively denouncing most everything he stood for in his prior public life and career. And furthermore, so as to exponentiate the act, not only was he declaring himself a born-again libertarian, but becoming one in a really big, "I'm Coming Out", way.
No, not only was he joining the Libertarian Party, but Bob Barr campaigned for and achieved in becoming a High Party Official in the organization as the South Eastern Region Representative to the National Libertarian Party.
He reversed his stance on medical marijuana, began lobbying in behalf of the Marijuana Policy Project, and actively called for the repeal of his very own Barr Amendment. He later also publically denounced the Defense of Marriage Act that he had authored. He became a prominent active member of the ACLU. And on April 5, 2008, Bob Barr announced his candidacy for the presidential nomination by the National Libertarian Party.
So, as one cat and dog living together might ask. . .
What Does it Mean Steempy??
Well, Bob Barr has truly made a mid-life career and philosophical 160 degree turn. (would be a 180 degree turn, but there were a few stances that Bob Barr, First Edition, held that were provisionally libertarian.)
In the ensuing controversy of Bob Barr, and the confusion he hath wrought in libertarian activist circles, I have observed in the panoply of libertarian chatter, from the spectrum of left to right leaning purviews (and views coming from some other dimensions), summating their opinions about Bob Barr, and where he sits in the Libertarian universe.
The opinions I've heard (and sparred with) generally coming from left libertarians' camp, are that Bob Barr is still fundamentally a totalitarian Rightist who never really changed and shouldn't even be in the Party. That his presence here fits like a pachyderm trying to run and cavort with a herd of porcupines.
Then there are the right leaning libs who have an active running simpatico with Bob Barr, who are eager to bring him into the fold, and call him one of their own. Implicitly apologist for any political deviations Bob Barr currently has that differs from libertarian touchstones, they pine for him to reach a full conversion, and hold hope eternal that he will eventually become "one of us".
Some, many even, have taken up the wonted libertarian conspiracy tact, and firmly believe that Bob Barr is actually a Republican confederate, a fifth column member whose real goal is to trojan his way into the Party, then weaken and undermine it from within.
Others were simply inverterate cynics, always percepting things into a shallow, nihilist cast. Those from this camp simply viewed Bob Barr as a failed politician with fewer and fewer venues to ply his trade; that he came to the Libertarian camp as a last ditch effort just to keep occupied and maintain a sense of self importance. Big fish, small pond psychology. Supporting that thesis, some say Mike Gravel's similar exodus from the Democratic Party shows that the Libertarian Party is just becoming a dumping ground for used, discarded and spent politicians.
So, What's Barr Really All about, is he For Real?
Absent some "Elders of Zion" type memo imputing Bob Barr explicitly, or remote brain scanning technology, an assessment of what makes Bob Barr tick can best be distilled by the circumstance surrounding his current political incarnation.
We may ask, in the rawest sense, realistically, what would motivate a still viable politician to abandon his wellspring of political power, still a source of comfort and support (in this case the superordinate Republican Party), and choose to align himself with one of weakest, smallest political parties in America? In doing so, he has opened himself up to ridicule and charges of hypocrisy from members of both parties, and rendered himself a target of suspicion.
In this act, he has irrevocably burned many political bridges and ties, alienated himself professionally from the people and places he knew best, and immersed himself into an unmoored, frontier styled political environment, populated by the very people he once publically pilloried and abhorred, and whose participants are largely unscripted in both effect and extent.
Why would a man do this, and how can it possibly serve him? It is very possible, after years of wrestling in the mud trenches that are the legislative branch, he has come to see that the fundamental principles of the libertarian view are much realer, immutable and American than the eminently maleable political designations "Right or Left", "Conservative or Liberal", "Democrat or Republican". . The only viable conclusion is that the man has sincerely experienced an epiphany. What else could it be? There can be no Machiavellian strategic gain in such actions that he has taken. After the philosophical muck he was used to trying to defend, a refreshing idealism had taken hold, and simply forced him to either live up to his personal standards, or intolerably view himself as continuing an empty facade with no substantive motivations other than to glom political power. At some reflective breaking point in his career, he had seen just too much empty politicking, too much form at the expense of content. He had seen the path of a government he originally vested pride into, methodically disassembled via expedient legislation to serve extremist goals that ran counter to the Constitution and Americanism in general, and he had seen himself caught up in the slippery slope of absolutism.
Neither does an argument imputing him with duplicitous intentions seem particularly compelling. If Bob Barr had such an agenda, then he would not have so reluctantly, and so far incompletely, abandoned his previous stances on drug legalization, a hot point item in libertarian touchstones. If he was trying to convince others that he was now a trustable, complete libertarian, it would not behoove him to still cling to non-libertarian biases.
Although it shows a disconnect between Bob Barr calling himself a Libertarian, and what he actually is, I believe that it is evidence for Bob Barr's political honesty, and shows he is not simply pandering to his audience, and is impelled to say what he believes. He has not fully purged himself of these alibertarian stances, simply because as a human being it is a hard thing to do. One does not easily take long established beliefs and magically say "begone!". Rather, even when one knows better, such errant beliefs are resilient to correction, it is an osmotic process to change one's views, and it takes a prolonged period of effort and reflection to reform reflexive responses. Eventually, the same motivations that drove him in part to the libertarian perspective will eventually bring him all the way, without need of familiar, but erroneous, reservations. My hope is that as a convert to libertarianism, Bob Barr will find himself more inspired than the average jaded libertarian who has lived with it for some time. Let's hope to see him bring the passion of the newly initiated, like an atheist who has found the light.
What Libertarians Should Expect
For the Libertarian Party, and libertarians in general, in assessing what may in the near future become a steady diet of immigrating politicians, Bob Barr may stand as the archetype in answering the questions of why, whatfor and how would others make the decision to pick a new worldview and allegience, and call it one's own.
Whether it is because of a true ephiphany and conversion, to find a political refuge for purely psychological comfort, or even to sabotage a fledgling movement, the true proof of the pudding will be in what any politician will bring in deed to the Libertarian Party, and to libertarianism in general.
Such politicians should know, that if they are sincere about adopting the libertarian stance, libertarians as a whole will invite them with open arms. However unlike other political parties, a politician will not be able to hide very long under the guise of Libertarian, without actually being so. Other libertarians will quickly call them out on any fundamental breaches of principle, honesty or consistency, as we have seen when even well liked libertarian leaning politicans like Ron Paul were the target of such criticism, by libertarians.
The standards of this political party are brightline, objective, and clear cut and enough to vet out any posers in short order.
Let us hope that Bob Barr is no poser.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 28
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Gary Trieste only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Gary Trieste 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.
Posted By: Charles N. Steele
Date: 2008-05-25 07:56:59
You've nicely documented Barr's anti-libertarian history; but rather unaccountably, with no evidence at all, concluded he must have honestly converted, since joining the LP isn't likely a rational Machiavellian strategy.
But why assume Barr is rational? Most of the positions you document above seem rather crazy (banning unapproved religious services???); and recall too that he associated himself with the Council of Conservative Citizens, sure, he later denied he knew they are racist -- hard to believe as they are so upfront about it.
He seems to me to be a fringe politician opportunisticly looking for a stage, any old stage, and somehow latched onto the LP instead of, say, the Constitution Party.
Barr's bio states that he was an official with the CIA from 1971-78. Since non-intervention is a fundamental principle in the Libertarian platform, does anyone know what role Mr. Barr played in the CIA backed overthrow of Allende of Chile and Torrijos of Panama? Thank you.
Barr's bio states that he was an official with the CIA from 1971-78. Since non-intervention is a fundamental principle in the Libertarian platform, does anyone know what role Mr. Barr played in the CIA backed overthrow of Allende of Chile and Torrijos of Panama? Thank you.
Good thoughts about Bob Barr. I think this article really captures everything. However, I would say Chuck Baldwins stance to make abortions illegal is on shaky Libertertarian ground, too. I mean, theres that whole "womans liberty to her own body" versus "what is the definition of a life?"
And the reason Jane Roe endorsed Ron Paul was specifically because Roe v Wade was *Unconstitutional.* Not based on perrsonal faith. Paul cited in the debates that he believed it was "up to the states to decide." Making a sweeping law across the 50 states is a totalitarian act.
I really like what Chuck Baldwin has to say, except as the Nominee for the Constitutional Party, Im really not sure he understands the Constitution.
