October 13, 2007
by Russell Cole

I have never considered myself much of a Libertarian. I certainly do not possess a strong affinity for a free-market economy, and I do not believe that the free-market can serve as a conceptual paradigm that is deployable for the resolution of every and any social problem. For example, the horrific display of inhumanity that transpired during Katrina was bungled by the Government to say the least, and private firms would most definitely have done a far superior job; or, I should say, done a job, because the Federal Government did relatively nothing.

However, I fail to understand how incentives could have been created for private interests to interdict during the humanitarian crisis, because as far as I can imagine no profit incentive could have been present motivating private firms to do what the Federal Government appeared either incapable or so apathetic that it failed to do itself.

I should mention, however, that I am a Libertarian in respect to Civil Liberties, and, for this reason, I am naturally inclined to vote for an individual such as Ron Paul, despite his failure to consider female reproductive rights to be an aspect of the female body that is subsumed under the extension of the Right of Privacy. Abortion, nevertheless, is a tricky issue, and I am well aware that feminist groups would be up in arms over my relegation of abortion rights to epiphenomena.

I will say, however, that all too often abortion is positioned in the advocacies of civil libertarians in the front and center - over and beyond other issues that should assume equal if not greater significance among the interests of those who want to prevent the expansion of government's intrusion into our private activities. Case in point, anybody who has ever listened to the painfully pedestrian questions posed by Senator Feinstein during the Senate's Judicial Committees hearings on prospective judicial nominees will be well aware that her only concern, regarding civil liberties, appears to be the preservation of Roe v Wade.

She will ask a judicial nominee, "Are you going to overturn Row?"

The nominee's response will invariably consist of something to the effect, it would be inappropriate for me to answer such a question since it might be a consideration that arises from the deliberations I might make when adjudicating a future case.

Feinstein will then respond, "Okay, but are you going to overturn Roe?"

These instances where Feinstein demonstrates her lack intelligence would not be so disheartening if her concerns for civil liberties extended beyond merely matters related to abortion. However, let us not forget that she not only voted for the Patriot Act and its renewal, she was an outspoken supporter of the legislation. I suspect why the Portrait Act did not register in the civil libertarian sensibilities of Feinstein as an incursion to American Civil Liberties is it possess no contents related to Roe v Wade.

(Article Continues Below)

There are, of course, Democrats who are authentically concerned with American Civil Liberties, and, in fact, there are too many of them to enumerate in this context. Additionally, there are many Democrats who are sincerely working to end the ongoing debacle in Iraq. Nevertheless, it appears that none of the Democratic frontrunners are in possession of the aforementioned dispositions. Well, perhaps, they are. However, from listening to their public pronouncements, one would not be led into making inferences that any of the frontrunners, such as Hillary Clinton, would end the war immediately, and withdrawal American troops from parts of the globe where they have no business occupying, unless we are to openly and unequivocally declare America an Empire with imperial interests that stretch around the world.

Clinton, for instance, has stated on occasion that she wants American troops permanently stationed in Iraq in order to protect American geopolitical and economic interests. Even as we speak, America is in the process of building the largest embassy in the word that is, of course, furnished with all of the amenities Americans would need who are stationed in this embassy for long periods of time, such as fast food, bowling allies, and all of the rest.

These considerations have led me to depart from my routines of vote casting for candidates on ballots. In fact, I have never voted for a Republican for anything in my entire life: State, Local, or Federal. Nevertheless, at this point in time, I am strongly considering registering as a Republican simply to cast a vote for the Primary Candidacy of Ron Paul.

This has nothing to do with Ron Paul coming from the same neighborhood as me in Pittsburgh. Nor, does it matter that my now deceased grandmother was friends with Paul's in-laws, who - according to my grandmother - always said that Paul was a nice guy, but he had crazy political ideas.

I am voting for Ron Paul because he exudes integrity, and when he says that he will end the war in Iraq I believe in the veracity of his statements. I also find myself in agreement with Paul on matters related to the finance industry - the parasites who shoot craps while standing on top of the world that is carried on the shoulders of the less fortunate, whose sweet and labor contribute to our economy through the actual production of goods, not simply speculations - as is the case with the finance industry - regarding the successes or failures of those who tangibly provide for America's material conditions.

As far as ending Social Security, Ron Paul is at least honest about his intentions, and I believe him when he says that such Libertarian reforms are the least of his concerns, and would not acquire attention until more pressing matters have been attended.

I am going to vote for Ron Paul because I think that democracy in America depends upon it. No other candidate in the Democratic Primaries, at least, has demonstrated to me that they have the character and courage needed to enact the reforms to which they allude. I shiver at the prospect of being a registered Republican. However, I will make the sacrifice just to cast my one - and to be perfectly frank, meaningless - ballot for Ron Paul.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider the following:

1. Make a donation of $1 or more to help keep this website active.

2. Click Here to Subscribe to the Free Populist Party Newsletter

Russell Cole [send him email] is a contributing author to the Populist Party of America, and is the coordinator for the Populist Party's Midwest Alliance, the Midwest Populist Party.