IMPEACHOK1
May 19, 2013, 05:19:21 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: You can also find us on the web at;              http://freedom-one.org/dolph1/                              https://www.facebook.com/groups/rsactivists
 
  Website Home   Forum    Forum    Forum   Help Search Calendar Gallery Links Articles Gallery Contact Login Register  
" The most potent weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." Steven Biko
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The Barr Factor: Antiwar libertarian ex-Republican, for president  (Read 392 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
LeftDemocrat
Global Moderator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 490


WWW
« on: April 07, 2008, 04:05:07 am »

As the antiwar faction of the Democratic Party has effectively been shunted aside this election cycle (e.g. the voter insurgency inside the Tulsa Democratic party has been quashed, it appears, with the demise of the Kucinich and Edwards campaigns), and since the Naderites have failed to link up effectively with the antiwar Greens for this year's presidential contest, focus shifts to the prospect of the Libertarian Party presenting an antiwar candidate for president:

Quote

Barr: the former Georgia Republican congressman who led the Clinton impeachment effort in the House, then later dissented from the red-state fascist tendencies manifested in the PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the Bush White House's obsession with increasing presidential power, allying with the American Civil Liberties Union to fight the growing power of centralized state authority over our lives.

It looks like Bob Barr has let himself get talked into seeking the presidential nomination of the Libertarian Party: according to my sources [writes Justin Raimondo], he does so with the full support of Ron Paul. Which means it looks like the Paulian Revolution is not only alive and kicking, it's also in the best possible position. With conservatives openly disdainful of McCain for all sorts of reasons, most of them conducive to a libertarian spin, the Barr Factor could very well play a major role in accomplishing the two major electoral goals not only of libertarians, but of all the War Party's most dedicated opponents.

One, it will deny McCain the White House. This alone fully justifies the effort and expense, as far as the antiwar movement is concerned. Obama's spokesman backed off calling McCain a "warmonger," but that lefty radio host is right. How else can one describe someone who longs for a 100-year war in the Middle East? They're trying to get him off his "war, war, war" mantra, but time and again the man condemns himself out of his own mouth.

Quite aside from his foreign policy views, however, McCain's "national greatness" brand of conservatism is openly hostile to the old-fashioned Goldwaterite limited-government ideology currently undergoing an intellectual revival in conservative circles. It remains to be seen whether great swaths of the Republican electorate are ready to defect to a third party on the Right, but if ever there was a time to test this proposition, then surely it is now.

The antiwar movement has a stake in this, on account of Barr's strong endorsement of a non-interventionist foreign policy in principle. As his Web site puts it:


Quote
"Our National Defense policy must renew a commitment to non-intervention. We are not the world's police force and our long, yet recently tarnished, tradition of respecting the sovereignty of other nations is necessary, not from only a moral standpoint, but to regain the respect of the world as a principled and peaceful nation. The proper use of force is clear. If attacked, the aggressor will experience firsthand the skillful wrath of the American fighting man. However, invading or initiation force against another nation based upon perceived threats and speculative intelligence is simply un-American. We are better than the policy of preemptive warfare."


It remains to be seen whether Barr will emphasize foreign policy issues to the degree Paul did and still does. Ron is quite popular even with antiwar leftists precisely because he always somehow manages to get in references to "our empire," even while speaking on what are normally considered purely economic questions.

A candidate arises with "out of the mainstream" views when it comes to the vital issue of war and peace. Since the "mainstream" is synonymous with support for our current foreign policy of global interventionism, i.e., a candidate fully owned-and-operated by the War Party, anyone who wanders outside the very narrow bounds of "Right" and "Left" interventionism [is to be welcomed by antiwar activists]

Barr is no newcomer to libertarian politics: he joined the LP in 2006 and was seated on the National Committee. More than that, he has been a leader among those "movement" conservatives who have dissented from the Bush administration's trampling of civil liberties, denounced the rising surveillance state, and taken the lead in forging alliances between libertarians and conservatives who take the Constitution seriously. In short, he is a man who suits the moment – the one candidate, other than Ron Paul, who can fulfill the promise of the Ron Paul Revolution and build a popular alternative to the War Party on the right side of the political spectrum.


http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12640



LP, as in Libertarian Party. Not "long-playing record."





Logged



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” Fredrick Douglass
Powered by EzPortal
Powered by EzPortal
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!