J. Neil Schulman
@ Agorist.com
@ Agorist.com
Talking today with fellow libertarian author/filmmaker/publisher, Brad Linaweaver, the seeming unstoppability of Donald J. Trump’s march to the Republican presidential nomination came up for discussion. We tended to agree that the problems the Republican National Committee and future of the GOP in blocking Trump would be costly – with blowback that might be prohibitively costly to the party.
We also agreed that there were multiple ways carrots and sticks could be used to stop Bernie Sanders from running as a third-party candidate for the Greens or another of the minor left-wing parties with established ballot lines, which if it happened could deprive Hillary Clinton of votes in a tight race the way Ralph Nader did to Al Gore in his race against George W. Bush in 2000.
But given Trump’s “America First” foreign policy speech of April 27, 2016 to the Center for the National Interest, a speech outlining a policy reminiscent of Pat Buchanan and paleo-conservatives with only a few rhetorical flourishes lifted from Neocon talking points, the necessity of the globalist Neocon/liberal alliance to put Hillary Clinton in the White House becomes obvious.
Brad suggested the possibility of a Ted Cruz or other conservative candidacy to draw votes from a Trump GOP candidacy, electing Hillary. I pointed out that by the time of the Republican Convention in Cleveland, July 18 to 21, 2016, 18 states would have closed ballot access for independent candidacies.
I then suggested a strategy the NeverTrump forces could use to elect Hillary: throw PAC support and inclusion of its candidate in the presidential debates to the candidate of the Libertarian Party, who will be on most if not all of the 50 state ballots.
Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate,
Austin Petersen
It would not matter that the Libertarian Party candidate is not appealing to social conservatives or evangelicals, though pro-life Libertarian Party candidate Austin Petersen just might appeal to them. Any of the three top Libertarian Party candidates seen on the Fox Business Channel’s John Stossel two-hour debate – Austin Petersen, John McAfee, or Gary Johnson could possibly – if well-financed by a never-Trump PAC – pull enough votes away from Donald Trump to throw the election to the establishment’s choice, Hillary Clinton.
After over four decades of marginal election returns and media invisibility, how many Libertarians would ignore the possibility of putting an actual “America First” president in the White House just finally to have their moment in the sun?
Virtually all, let me assure you.
Samuel Edward Konkin III, founder not only of the Agorist movement but of the Libertarian Party Radical Caucus in 1973, considered that if the ruling classes ever needed the Libertarian Party they would not hesitate to use it. He always considered the Libertarian Party, like all political parties, as a tentacle of the State.
To add irony, how do you think I’d feel if Donald J. Trump, the only political candidate in our time who could win the White House and pull the American Empire back from its Orwellian “Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace” Neocon/globalist policies, were defeated, putting imperialist/pro-war Hillary Clinton into the White house …. by an executive producer of the pro-Agorist Alongside Night movie, Austin Petersen?
Addendum June 22, 2016
I watched the CNN Libertarian Presidential Town Hall tonight. It’s clear my article was prescient. I don’t know that Johnson/Weld have been promised big PAC money from the NeverTrump/pro-Hillary contingent but everything they said suggests it. Weld intimated his fund-raising experience would yield fruit soon. Weld declared Trump unfit for office and “a huckster” then praised Hillary as a good public servant and qualified. Johnson refused to prefer Hillary to Trump explicitly but praised Hillary’s character and attacked Trump’s positions.
They were weak on the Second Amendment, favoring universal background checks (there goes the gun show and internet “loopholes”) and favoring a process to deny terrorists guns. Weld talked about a “thousand man” FBI task force against Isis similar to the one Guiliani used against the Mafia.
They abandoned their previous “legalize all drugs/anti-Drug War” position and explicitly said they favor legalizing only marijuana.
Perhaps responding to Ron Paul’s criticism they now say “fiscally conservative but inclusive” instead of “fiscally conservative, socially liberal.”
On abortion they moderated their “solidly pro-choice” position to “no abortion once the fetus is viable outside the womb” but did say they have no problem “on constitutional grounds” with the government guaranteeing women access to abortion clinics.
Their campaign is now officially NeverTrump and designed to move to pull votes from moderate Republicans. They don’t seem to care about losing their core Libertarian base… or electing Hillary.
April 28, 2016 - 7:17 am
I think Elder Sam Konkin’s assessment essential to consider a Libertarian Party, like all political parties, an tentacle of the State but somewhat different as Sean Gabb, British Libertarian, talks about with mutualist perspectives. And the U.K. doesn’t have a SCOTUS either. I am thinking that what may be helpful would be to have a Libertarian leaning Justice on the Supreme Court who is actually for ‘more freedom’. Another irony?