Having read and watched the Libertarians struggle with 3rd party status for 20+ years, it’s not surprising that these struggles continue in the wake of the two major parties, even if both seemed to be straining at the seams this year, what with Sanders dragging the Democrats to the left, while the GOP has started hemorrhaging membership because of the erraticism of the Trump campaign. It sometimes has the scent of the eternal about it.
However, for those libertarians who have real ambition to be on the national stage, the recent performance of Presidential nominee Gary Johnson must be especially heart-breaking – because he seems to be promoting a simplistic, isolationist nonsense as a philosophy that will really tar the party & brand for years to come with the epithet of “know-nothings”. A few days ago Johnson drew a blank on the contested city of Aleppo, in Syria; shortly after he couldn’t think of a single foreign leader that he admired, despite prompting. Now consider this report from TPM:
“Five days after the interview Andrea, I still can’t think of a world leader that I respect,” Johnson said. “I mean, having never been involved in politics before, I will tell you I held a lot of people in this country on pedestals thinking that they were role models. I got to meet them up front and personal and found out that they were empty suits.”
“When it comes to talking about a foreign leader that you respect, that you admire, I have a hard time with that one,” he added. “That’s politics. That’s just who I am.”
When Mitchell pressed him further on the issue, reminding him that foreign policy was part of president’s portfolio, Johnson suggested that his lack of knowledge on the topic was actually an asset.
“You know what? The fact that somebody can dot the Is and cross the Ts on a foreign leader or a geographic location, that then allows them to put our military in harm’s way,” Johnson argued.
“We wonder why our men in service and women suffer from PTSD in the first place,” he continued. “We elect people who can dot the Is and cross the Ts on these names and geographic locations as opposed to the underlying philosophy which is, let’s stop getting involved in these regime changes.”
This is a profoundly unserious proposition for an era in which military weaponry can strike from so far away with so much power. Even when cross-bows were the epitome of military power, it was worthwhile for leaders to understand what was going on in the kingdom next door; today, ICBMs make it imperative that we understand what is going on across continents. Does he really reject monitoring the leadership of North Korea as they attempt to build nuclear weaponry that will reach the United States?
At its heart, this is a rejection of knowledge, and I can say with some confidence that this won’t sit at all well with most libertarians. Many software engineers are libertarians, and data, which we gather, shepherd, and interpret, is a close cousin to knowledge. More generally, libertarians rely on the economic research and knowledge of such economists as Hayek to bolster their ideological positions, and so they have to at least pay lip-service to knowledge. Suggesting that knowledge leads to doom should be considered a heretical notion by the rank & file – and I think it will strike many libertarians that way. I no longer monitor the “establishment” libertarians, and I don’t know how easily Johnson obtained the nomination – and if he remains as popular with the base. But I think this reprehensible statement may mark the end of the political career of Johnson, and possibly his running mate, William Weld, as well.
It’s one thing to suggest that perhaps we interfere with other countries too much – I’d even have some sympathy for that position, on a case by case basis – but to suggest ignorance is a virtue is well beyond the pale.
And if you’re still considering a vote for Mr. Johnson, rufe on The Daily Kos has taken the trouble to enumerate the Johnson/Weld ticket’s positions on some issues here. An example:
2. Civil Rights
- Gary Johnson supports the use and expansion of private prisons, which are rarely audited for compliance and create a financial incentive for incarceration
The positions strike me as little more than surface thinking.
