America’s Great Presidents (Part III)

America’s Great Presidents (Part III)
by James Kilbourne

In my last two political articles, I named America’s greatest presidents and indicated how they advanced freedom throughout the country and the world. I briefly sketched the history of political parties in America, and stated my conviction that the Republican Party is the best vehicle through which to advance a libertarian agenda. In the next election cycle or two, we will have a unique opportunity to make great advances towards the kind of government and society we all want - if we can overcome our own perfectionism and great capacity to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Americans are tired, and by the end of George W. Bush’s second term, they are going to be exhausted. Since the war in Vietnam, this country has been divided into hostile camps, each making villains of the other and each declaring Armageddon if the other takes power. Over the years, the party faithful in both the Republican and Democratic camps have become more polarized, responding positively only to their most extreme candidates. On almost every important issue, Americans are presented with alternatives that make them uncomfortable. For example, the quickest way to win over party loyalists on the subject of abortion, if you are Republican, is to scream: “Life begins at conception!” - and to refuse any compromise that would allow abortion at any time under any circumstance. The speediest path to the heart of a true-believer Democrat is to declare: “Life begins at birth!” - and to refuse to grant any rights to the fetus no matter if it is viable. This subject stirs up great hatred on both sides, with resulting confrontations and, often, violence.

I have two things to tell you:

1) There are good and serious people across all political spectrums who have different viewpoints on abortion.
2) The vast majority of the American people strongly disagree with both extreme positions, and want a woman’s right to decide her own fate to be balanced with the right of the unborn child to life after a certain point in its development.

My purpose in presenting this example is not to start a debate on abortion. My purpose is to ask you to remember the function of politics, and to show you that we have an opportunity to advance an agenda of freedom to a new, considerably higher level.
The goal of politics is to enable people to live together with as much justice and as little violence as possible. In a democratic republic, individuals have rights that the majority cannot take from them. Apart from this area, the elected representatives speak for those who elect them. In philosophy, truth determines what is right. In politics, a majority determines what will be considered right. In philosophy, you need to make clear your opposition to the least contradiction to your principles; in politics, that is a sure way to lose elections. Successful politicians select a few goals that are achievable in the time period the voters have granted them, and try to offend as few people as possible on other issues. Politicians who are ethical try to identify an agenda in keeping with their philosophical convictions. Ethical politicians who are successful pick an agenda that will inspire the country’s citizens and get them elected.

It is my contention that in the next presidential election, Objectivists and libertarians need to identify issues that are vital to promoting a free society where solutions are left to the individual and not to the state. We have to convince 50% of the voters - plus one - to agree to our agenda, or we are going to lose to some pretty determined people who want America to go in an entirely different direction. If you agree that the economic principles of the Republican Party are more in line with a libertarian approach than the Democrat’s more statist principles, what we need to do is to broaden the Republican view of personal freedom in some areas, create a platform that states these principles, find a candidate who can accept them, get him or her nominated by the Republican Party, and go on to win the general election.

In several areas, this candidate will have to adjust current Republican programs to make them more acceptable, and will have to build on the successes of the second Bush II term. The recent political evolution to extremes and the resultant deadlock will make a libertarian agenda palatable to a majority as long as we have the courage and imagination to present it correctly, and the wisdom to show Americans that there are consistent principles at its base.

We need to have the courage to accept the fact that we are winning the war of ideas. The opposition in American politics - the left, as represented by the Democratic Party - is bereft of ideas. The contest of ideas that will occur in the Republican Party is between the economic libertarian sector and the Christian right sector. We need to stress the issues that these sectors have in common. For the foreseeable future, I believe that they have enough in common to support the same candidate, if the agenda is thoughtfully established.

The battle in 2008 for the Republican nomination will be between Christian right candidates and libertarian right candidates. Once a candidate has secured the nomination, he or she must present an agenda that has appeal to the broad center in America. No one can tell the exact issues that will surface in an election four years in the future, but I believe we can foresee the clash of ideas that will occur. In that spirit, I want to propose the following agenda topics that will get a libertarian Republican nominated, then elected. I will not exhaustively define and defend each item at this time. That is our work to do leading up to the 2008 campaign.

Ideas that appeal to the united Republican base and represent a continuation of the basic Bush agenda:

1) Security through strength and an aggressive effort to confront terrorism at its source, rather than passively at home.

2) Limited government, through deregulation, federalism, and lower, flatter taxes.

3) Progress on debt payment through growth vs. raising taxes.

4) Pro-business, pro-investor policies that minimize government interference in decision-making.

5) Energy independence through sane environmental policies and domestic deregulation.

6) A gradual dismantling of the social welfare system, primarily comprised of Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.

7) Pro-freedom agenda for religion. The problem for many Christians is not that they want to impose their beliefs politically on others (although many, unfortunately, do); it is that there is a strong anti-religious bias in public institutions such as the public schools and governmental agencies. Libertarian Republicans need to stress that the only real solution is to ultimately replace public education with private education; then parents can determine which school will best educate their child. Working towards this goal, most Christians will support programs, such as vouchers, which give private institutions a chance to better compete with public institutions.

Also, society needs to have a much more neutral position on religion in all institutions, as the separation of church and state is aimed only at preventing public establishment of a religion, and not at making those who practice religion second-class citizens. The current effort by the left to remove all religious symbols from public buildings and publications is particularly aimed at Christians, who are understandably angered by it. Republicans can keep a large portion of the religious right by understanding this fact and defending a Christian’s right to a place in a society where they are the vast majority.

8) The defeat of judicial activism. The last half century has seen the judicial branch of government take on the duties of the legislative branch. Picking judges who believe it is their job to determine the intent of the laws rather than to substitute their own opinions is an issue that unites libertarian and Christian Republicans.

Ideas that challenge the Bush Conservative agenda, but will draw some support from the Christian right and the general populace:

1) Pro-freedom agenda for scientific experimentation and quality-of-life issues, such as life support, stem cell research, public health and reproduction questions, etc. Bush’s position is in step with most Christian leaders on most of these issues, but a large number of Christians, in some cases a majority, have come to different conclusions. Where possible, libertarian Republicans should offer broad, centrist steps that lead in the direction of individually responsible decision-making and away from government interference with science.

2) A neutral position on the question of gay marriage. Libertarian Republicans should champion complete equality on the question of civil unions, and should encourage the federalist system to experiment and reflect the changing positions of each state. Private institutions, such as churches, should determine their own definition of marriage.

3) Immigration. Since 9/11, I have come to believe that a country must have the right to know who has entered its territory. I believe that an immigration policy that addresses security matters and stresses a realistic understanding that it is different economic conditions among countries that determines the flow of people across borders will appeal to the broad centrist views of most Americans. We have to show respect for law by fining those who have entered our country illegally, but we need to balance this with an understanding that our laws in this area have been highly unrealistic. I believe that great progress will be made on this issue before the next election, but a libertarian Republican candidate will need to champion the free movement between among nations of people who correctly identify themselves and have clean records. A guest worker program, such as proposed by Bush, doesn’t go far enough to address the problem. There has to be a way for people to earn citizenship.

The connecting point for libertarian and Christian Republicans is capitalism and the freedom to follow your own moral compass. There are many Christian rightists who want to impose their values on society, it is true, but there are just as many who only want to be free to follow their own values. It is the latter group that libertarian Republicans need to attract.

Agenda for the national election

The battle for the election will be between the moderate libertarian Republican candidate and the statist Democratic candidate. The winning agenda for this conflict is the one that has a consistent freedom-oriented approach that fosters individual responsibility and ownership. Philosophy and history support the libertarian Republican approach. Prosperity, justice, and freedom are on our side; stagnation, irresponsibility, and poverty are on theirs.

Who are the potential libertarian Republican candidates who could be nominated and elected? It is vitally important to select a candidate who can prevail over the Christian Right candidates who will surely seek the nomination.

There are two attributes that some potential libertarian candidates possess that would result in the least loss of Christian right Republicans, and also attract the most general voters. At this point, I see the following three candidates as capable of running on a libertarian Republican agenda and who would bring to their nomination one of these additional, perhaps election-winning factors:

1) Star power: There are a two candidates who are so famous that they would bring additional voters to their side in both the nominating process and the general election: actor-turned-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (we have a little matter of changing the Constitution before he could run), and America’s mayor, Rudolph Giuliani.

2) Base splitting: African Americans and single women vote disproportionately Democratic; Condoleezza Rice would certainly shake things up with these two groups.

In the 20th century, American politics was essentially a battle between Liberal and Conservative, with the Liberals prevailing for most of the first two-thirds of the century, and the Conservatives dominating the last third. “Liberalism” has become a pejorative term in American politics; “Conservative” will become one shortly. It is time for libertarians to present an alternative, but it will only be a winning alternative if we command the vital center of American political life. In establishing libertarian philosophy, none of us thought of ourselves as centrists. However, political victory will only come to centrists in America. It is my opinion that, broadly speaking, libertarian Republicans need to offer solutions that emphasize giving the individual more of the tools to solve his own problems and pursue his own wealth, vs. the Democratic alternative of political, one-size-fits-all group solutions that have not worked in the past.

The question is: can libertarians tolerate having their ideas accepted by the majority? Are we ready to be RADICALS FOR MODERATION? We have been eloquent as challengers of the mainstream; can we now find the courage to represent it?

May the philosophical battle rage on. Meanwhile, let us claim our political victories.

Discuss this Article (27 messages)