“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” – Alexander Hamilton
We are a constitutional republic, designed as such due to our Founding Fathers incredible prescience. Because of their own life experiences, they were keenly aware of the inherently dangerous nature of a centralized government. In designing our republic, the Founders sought to bind the federal giant because although they saw a purpose for it, they knew that unbound, it could, with stunning speed, become usurpatious.
With time, however, our representatives have undermined the Constitution and its amendments. Like sand underneath our feet as the waves roll out, our rights have been slowly pulled from underneath us. We are left standing, but our weight has imperceptibly shifted in order to compensate.
We are now faced with a choice that many Americans find intolerable. No sand is left, and we are beginning to falter. Conservatives feel betrayed because their party has abandoned them for the green pastures of unchecked populism. To whom do we turn when the philosophy to which we adhere is no longer represented by our party?
I’m still in a period of decision making, assessing various options to make my vote count. At this point, I’m committed to writing in Ted Cruz on November 8. He is the candidate in whom I strongly believed. However, there are other options.
The heart of conservatism is libertarianism. Ronald Reagan himself said as much:
“If you analyze it, I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism…The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference, or less centralized authority, or more individual freedom, and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”
A libertarian candidate is rising, and his name is Austin Petersen. Petersen, though very young at 35, is the strongest contender in the battle for the Libertarian Party nomination. Gary Johnson is pathetic, and unwatchable, and John McAfee is a non-starter. Petersen is a grassroots candidate, and is quite a fan of Ted Cruz.
Like most libertarians, Petersen is a staunch proponent of limited government. But unlike most libertarians, he’s adamantly pro-life. That’s what initially piqued my interest in him as a viable option. Watching him debate, and give interviews, it’s clear that he’s extremely bright, and quick on his feet.
Now, there are certainly areas over which we disagree–specifically regarding the solution to illegal immigration and border security. However, the issues over which we do agree cover much more territory:
- He’s proposed a simple flat tax to cover only the most basic needs of the government, and a “penny plan” to drastically cut spending. The penny plan would cut one penny for every dollar spent on every government program until such a time as we reached a balanced budget. It’s a plan that’s been proposed by many conservatives.
- He believes we should have a strong national defense, but that our foreign policy shouldn’t include nation building. He also believes we should end all financial aid to nations hostile to the United States.
- He’s a proponent of free trade.
- He’s pro-life (unlike many libertarians).
- He’s a staunch supporter of our Second Amendment rights.
- He doesn’t simply want to audit the fed, he wants to end it, writing: “Audit the Federal Reserve first. End it through competition last.”
- He’s an advocate of “free banking.” Free banking would essentially eliminate centralized government banks, and create a monetary marketplace. Here’s a fantastic short video describing the idea of such a monetary system.
- He wants to balance security with our Fourth Amendment right to privacy, while reining in the NSA.
- He wants to end the “war on drugs,” which has thus far been a failure.
- He wants young people to be allowed to opt out of social security.
- He wants to overturn Obamacare, and find free market solutions to replace it.
Where we most strongly disagree is on the issue of immigration. Petersen is much weaker regarding border security than Ted Cruz. Although Petersen has said “the president should obey the Constitution and law” concerning immigration, he’d like to deport only the “criminal” illegal aliens (those who’ve committed violent crimes after entering the United States). He’s referred to Ted Cruz’s stance on immigration as “nativist,” which is a statement I find absolutely ludicrous.
However, if he wins the Libertarian Party’s nomination this month, he will be the only pro-life candidate on the ballot in November. Although I’m far from a single-issue voter, protecting life is an issue about which I’m passionate.
I have more research to do on Austin Petersen before I’d even come close to committing to him over a Ted Cruz write-in on November 8. However, he’s looking like a viable option for constitutional conservatives in the face of candidates like Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Go out and Google Petersen, watch him on YouTube, listen to him speaking with Dana Loesch, and make your own judgement. I just wanted to put him on your radar because if you–like me–are frightened by our prospects in the general election, Petersen might be the best option.
If we allow our freedoms to be usurped by our elected officials, we have failed as citizens. Perhaps the Trump/Clinton general election face-off is a blessing. It may be the necessary jolt of electricity that will shock us back into political coherence.
Here’s a fascinating interview with Austin Petersen to get you started: