No Coercion

As many of you know, Ron Paul has reacted to the less-than-diplomatic recent comments and actions by the Libertarian Barr-Root campaign by endorsing Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party for president. While I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Paul, this endorsement is unconscionable. It would have been far better for him to continue his policy of non-endorsement than to indicate to his legions of followers that a theocratic political party should be preferable to the party devoted to a free society.

In case, dear readers, you are not familiar with the abomination known (quite farcically it seems to me) as the Constitution Party, here’s the preamble to its platform:

The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States.

This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been and are afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.

The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.

Even if you share this party’s belief in stories about magic written by Middle Eastern nomads two millenia ago, no defender of true freedom could countenance the Constitution Party’s blatant desire to use the force of government to promote their religion.

Further, although there are certainly some libertarianish items in their platform, a great deal of their planks involve government aggression against individuals. Things like opposing trade (and implying Americans have some kind of ‘right’ to their jobs), supporting state-level restrictions on drugs, prohibition of fractional-reserve banking, taking a hard line on immigration, prohibition of abortion (in all instances), supporting government definition of marriage and prohibition of various sexual activities, and a whole host of other categories in which the party believes the government can legitimately invade the person and property of the individuals in its jurisdiction.

Ron Paul had a chance to point his supporters, most of whom are seeking a free society, to the Libertarian Party (where they could have grown in their understanding of pure liberty and the idea of a stateless society); but he chose, because of Bob Barr’s childish behavior, to send them to a party based on aggression, ancient mythology, and a muddled, internally inconsistent political philosophy.

That, to be scientific, really sucks.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!