Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Presidential Candidates and the Status Quo

Dear Bob,

I participated in the January 5, 2016 “Libertarian Angle,” webinar sponsored by the Future of Freedom Foundation, with the Foundation’s president, Jacob G. Hornberger, on the topic: “Presidential Candidates and the Status Quo.”
With the presidential race for the White House beginning in earnest, now, in 2016, the discussion focused on the reality that all of the candidates share, in general, a common presumption that it is the duty and role of government to widely intervene, regulate and control the personal, social and economic affairs of the citizenry.

They may differ where, how, and to what extent the State should intrusively impose itself on the peaceful activities of the American people, but none are willing to stand up, defend and argue for the “original intent” of American Constitutional government, under which the government is the narrowly defined protector of people’s rights to their life, liberty and honestly acquired property, rather than its violator.

This extends to the candidates’ support for America’s interventionist ways in foreign affairs as exemplified by the disastrous and destructive sequence of events that have resulted from U.S. military intervention is Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and, now, Syria. At home it has served as the pretext and condition a dramatic growth in the intrusive surveillance state, able to pry into virtually any nook and cranny of the lives of Americans, which no candidate is willing to challenge root and branch.

One should not expect, therefore, any significant turn toward liberty, regardless of who wins the “key” to the Oval Office in the White House. For now, our task, as friends of freedom, is the continuing educational role of reawakening a proper understanding of freedom and the free society.


1 comment:

  1. It seems to me that Rand's rhetoric has improved. He sounded more classically liberal at a recent New Hampshire speech to me. The rest are completely hopeless.