SNAP OUT OF IT!: A dose of 'tough love' from a *former* neoconservative parrot by Mr. Jones
(libertarian)
Sunday, September 14, 2008
First things first: Let's get this over with:
Just in case you have not heard it enough by now: 'You've been had.' So follow along with me:
Step one: Openly acknowledge that you are unhappy with the Libertarian party "leadership" and/or the "leadership" of our country in general.
Step two: Hold up whichever hand you use to vote with (if you don't vote, any hand will do).
Step three: Give yourself a good, firm slap across your face.
Step four: Recover.
Congratulations! You've just been initiated into the 'club for sucker-citizens.' I can faithfully assure you that our club membership is a lot larger than what the national polls are suggesting, and the reason for this is actually quite simple—the vast majority of Americans have not completed the initiation ritual (yet). Most folks have a hard time making it to step one.
But, now you have no excuse. So, what are you waiting for? Permission to become angry?
It may not be necessary to rehash the fact that Bob Barr's winning of the nomination can now be considered a really bad sign for the Libertarian party (note: As a former-neoconservative myself, I was willing to rally behind Mr. Barr, hoping, with wasted faith, that his eyes had opened at least as wide as mine, and that we might learn freedom together), but certain comments I see here, and elsewhere, made by members of the Libertarian party and Americans in general, are disheartening to me.
To libertarians who desire "leaders," to those who simply want to get the most votes at all costs, and to those who will support a particular candidate, even against their gut feelings:
I am reluctant to waste my time. However, I do, along with Samuel Adams, hope for your sake that you are skilled at crouching and licking hands. I think you are encouraging the opening of a Pandora's box onto your party. After being grossed-out by what such self-compromise has done to our country, perhaps we should not have much of an appetite.*
To those libertarians who have adopted a sense of hopelessness about—well, nearly everything—as a result of Bob Barr's popularity loss among self-respecting voters of the 2008 presidential campaign:
'Disappointment' does not begin to cover how I feel. It is not so much that I am shocked by Bob Barr's true colors, mind you—few politicians are ever spared corruption by the promise of power. It's not as if I am sitting here thinking, "Whoa! What blue did that come out of?"
No — I am mostly disappointed that "we the people" are pretending to be weak. Emphasis on the word: pretending. (In other words, I just called you a fake.)
So, what are you going to do about it? Are you allowed to get mad? Maybe you should ask for permission, eh?
This campaign is not about "winning." This campaign is not about "leadership." This campaign is not about getting any one party's name out there in the spotlight. This campaign IS about education, or, more specifically, informing the people that they are free, whether they like it or not. You may one day hold me to this (if we should all live long enough): This campaign will be regarded as one of the most instrumental education campaigns in U.S. history—that is, since the writings and speeches of Thomas Paine and other pivotal founders of this nation—*and/or* we shall end up with a whole bunch of dead patriots.
'The brushfires of liberty have been set,' and there's not much anyone can do to prevent them from spreading. For once in a very long time, individual minds are being emancipated from the control of outright lies, deceptions, empty promises, and compulsory fear forced upon them by government. The good news is that our campaigning does not stop in November, 2008. The bad news is that things will get worse, before they get better. Eventually though, "we the people" will lose our tempers.
My thoughts on underdogs
Ron Paul does notwant to lead. He has made it very clear. The 'civic crown' has been turned down by 'Caesar' time and time again, even when the people of 'Rome' cried out that he should accept it. It was, as David Nolan put it, nothing less than an insult to presume that 'Caesar' would have accepted the corona civica when it was offered by—of all people—'Cassius' himself.
I think Ron Paul has a bigger goal in mind: He is trying to open doors between Americans which have been closed and locked welded shut by the establishment since before I was born. The message of liberty will not be spread from the top down; rather, it will start at the very bottom, with the citizen [oops, that is the top]—but it most certainly cannot be spread through unbreached doors. Of course, as the Barr campaign H.Q. continues to issue more and more campaign updates, the irony is compounded to deafening effect.
Libertarians need not feel threatened that the philosophy of liberty is destined to fail (even in spite of the lack of leadership and abundance of incompetency exhibited thus far by the Barr campaign). Perhaps, Mr. Barr does not have much faith in the message of liberty, or else he would not have felt so threatened to stand by the agreement that he allegedly signed onto. Enough wasted breath—political factions will be born, grow, outgrow, shrink, and become extinct. What has been kicked-off this year utterly dwarfs any mere politician or political affiliation. This revolution will attempt to take politics to a much deeper level. The political landscape will, hopefully, change to the point where voters will no longer simply pick from a platter of issues to support. Instead, they might finally start genuinely asking themselves 'why' they should support the issues (this is one reason we should have real debates in this country). The philosophy of liberty has been more than enough to pique the interest of myself—a formerly ardent neoconservative parrot turned strict Constitution supporter. It is not all that difficult to figure out 'why' someone could support such a concept, but it does require an open mind.
At this particular moment, the proverbial chicken's head has been cut off . . . but it is still running around.
Or rather, as Thomas Jefferson might put it: "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Well, Mr. Jefferson, I personally have never been so thrilled to be inconvenienced in my life. The establishment's minions, holding true to their rhetoric, expect us to believe that nothing will change as a result of the 3rd Party Conference of September 10, 2008. They think, perhaps, that it was a complete failure. I hope, especially for their sake, that they are wrong.
I don't really care which presidential candidate you choose to support in November. I'm not going to solicit your vote for any particular 3rd party candidate, because frankly, I don't know who to vote for at the moment; Instead, I challenge you to do something drastic. For me, that involves getting angry enough to actually vote for the first time. A sizeable chunk of Americans do not even vote. They think that voting is a complete waste of time—taking up the very same mindset I once had: "It is just one vote." Maybe we need to step up the campaigning, because they don't seem to understand how many of us there really are. Maybe you could do something as simple as putting a bumper sticker on your car which might provoke others stuck in traffic to think, while waiting for the light to turn green. Maybe being drastic involves writing letters to your party "leadership," but don't restrain yourselves. If you are mad, let them know it! (maybe you could slice up your party membership card and mail-in the pieces—I don't know—I'm just making suggestions). Hell, they may take one look at them and toss them in the trash. Well, fill up their trash cans! Do something. Americans should be banging their fists on the reset button. Stop pretending to be weak!
. . . and stop waiting for someone else to grant you permission.
* "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!" – Samuel Adams
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 13
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Mr. Jones only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Mr. Jones 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.
"The two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy." - Carol Quigley
Cynthia Mike Dennis Jesse Ross Jimmy
And the men* who hold high places Must be the ones who start To mold a new reality Closer to the heart
Posted By: Coming back to the LP
Date: 2008-09-15 05:01:45
Actually, I have the opposite impression of Mr. Barr.
At the outset of his campaign, I was concerned. Bob Barr was at first a little hesitant to distance himself from some of his voting history. But, as the campaign has moved along, I find that Mr. Barr is moving closer and closer to the pure Libertarian corner.
Of course, there are all kinds of Libertarians in the Libertarian Quadrant of the Nolan chart, and Bob Barr is certainly there, in the heart of our movement. He may not be radical enough for some, or a little to the right, but he is one of us.
Bob Barr has been standing up for our future too. He is fighting hard against the Ballot Access Laws that restrict our chance to present our views - now and in the future. He is helping all future LP candidates to get on the ballot and be heard. His actions will make it possible for even more pure Libertarians to run for President.
Finally, Bob Barr did the unspeakable, but correct thing by not participating in the Ron Paul press conference. Dr. Paul was misguidedly painting all the alternative candidates as "OK" by him so vote for any of them. But with two socialist-earth-nazis and one theocratic-christian-mullah on the dias, Dr. Paul was embarrassing himself. I understand why Mr. Barr refused to stand with the other three.
Now, had this been some worthwhile announcement, such as the set up a a 6 way debate with these 4 already accepting, that would have been a good idea. And attending would have been more palatable, though still unnecessary.
But, these other candidates are NO WAY CLOSE to being Libertarian, and Bob Barr rightly resented being painted with the same brush.
Unfortunately, a few Ron Paul groups have got their undies in a bunch over this. Poor Babies. They are cultish worshipers of Dr. Paul and irrational in their responses. They would never have supported the LP or Bob Barr in any case. They will write in Dr. Paul's name, even where such votes are not counted. They donate no funds. They generally do not donate or campaign for the LP's other candidates. Most of his supporters have stayed in the Republican party as dissident Republicans. I wish them luck in redirecting the R Party, which at this point is mostly a coalition of interventionists, theocratic-socialists, and religious wackos - more of a Recommucratic Party.
It is in fact disappointing that after having been the LP nominee, Dr. Paul could not continue his campaign as the LP nominee, or steer his supporters toward the LP. But, his age, health, and time of life and the health of his wife are understandable reasons for his sudden winding down of his campaign.
Meanwhile, for those of us who actually want to reduce the size and power of government, it's time to back Bob Barr, the LP and the other LP candidates around the country. We need to roll up our sleeves and get to work. The whiners, crybabies, and the out of power group of looters that wants to get a hold of the LP again, to line their pockets, should be ignored.
"It is the time for a New Beginning, America!" I can still hear the Ed Clark commercials, we've been off track since the 1983 LP takeover.
Support Bob Barr. Support the LP. Support your state and local LP candidates.
I am afraid I have to respectfully disagree with Coming back to the LP. I do not think that Ron Paul’s conference with the 3rd party candidates was a bad idea. I feel that his message was not just for his libertarian followers, but to all of those independence, like myself, who are frustrated with both of the “majority” parties. I like Dr. Paul because he is an honest man, a person of consistent character. I do not agree with him on every issue, but I believe that his character is such that I would vote for him. Barr does not accomplish this for me, nor do any of the 3rd party candidates for that matter. Ron Paul was the first politician I could see myself voting for. However, his conference of the 3rd parties got me thinking, “I could stay at home and not vote, like I was planning on doing, or, knowing that Barr does not stand a chance of winning… I could send a message of irritation to the majority parties by trying to advance a 3rd party candidate instead.” I am not a libertarian, a republican, a democrat, a green party or constitutional party member. None of these groups have given me enough reason to become part of their party. I am interested in diversity, so that all Americans can feel that it is okay to pick the party that resonates best for them, and not just the one that has the most media coverage. For me, individuals like Paul and Lawson, who I have contributed to their campaigns, are worthy of my vote, but I do not expect them to be for everyone. Paul’s conference was a signal and an encouragement to people like me, independence, that it really is okay to throw your vote in with a 3rd party, and not just the lesser of two evils.
