Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Andrew Sullivan endorses Ron Paul
Andrew Sullivan endorses Ron Paul and Barack Obama, for reasons almost identical to my own. I have found it odd that my views on who I'd support for both parties is so inline with his over these past few months. I still do, and I'm still thinking about it.I am reluctant to apply labels to myself, in the past I've described myself as a puzzle of seeming contradictions, with a sense of humor:
- "I'm a a pro-nuclear green - a gun-toting democrat - drug-taking republican - a libertarian that believes that without unionisation no-one would be literate enough to read Atlas Shrugged - a communist that's passionate about protecting private property - a socialist that hates slow trains -
I'm a red blooded reactionary that's tired of overreacting to everything. I want some peace, some quiet - and I want to be left alone, to think, to sort things out, to write some stuff down, learn from it, and eventually - act on it. I want to have the sense of calm and peace and direction that I haven't had since AOL added itself to the internet."
I'll add that I think the best label I can apply to myself today is that I am a
a libertarian leaning green, an abashed technologist that fervently believes that more technology is the answer to many more of our problems, particularly the wars over energy. I'm ambivalent about how to achieve energy independence, for example, the ethanol subsidy is the wrong way, but (for example) federal government requiring federal offices to switch to non-oil based energy supplies (be they nuclear, coal, gas, solar, wind, geothermal, etc) I'd absolutely support as a way of establishing a saner energy market.
I differ with libertarians on a whole slew of issues (notably on the use of force). I looked at mother jone's excellent Venn diagram the other day, and A) found I was mostly in the Ron Paul circle, and B) found that I didn't fit into any of the categories that fit the various libertarian factions, although somewhere between "Paleo" and "Techno" would be a somewhat descriptive spot.
I differ with democrats for thinking everything can be solved with a government program, and on many more fronts, largely related to fiscal conservatism.
I differ with republicans (the investment class) for not wanting to invest in better government. The Federales could definitely use a CTO. And I don't care what my neighbor does in his bedroom.
Most of all, I hate today's political discourse for seemingly having no room for science or technology, which is both the cause of many problems today (had we not learned to crack oil or the atom, what would today be like?), and the solution. My first principle is not based on ideology but on the scientific method, and the second principle, historical examples of what worked and what didn't.
My support of Paul's candidacy is based largely on one fundamental - that so vast and diverse a country as America cannot be governed from Washington, except on a very limited number of fronts, already laid out in the constitution - that there exists, in America, enough space and differing people to house nearly every political construct ever thought of. Through individual people, alone and in groups, all forms of government should be able to be tried by the people: under a federal government that doesn't cost much, doesn't give a damn, and stays the hell out of the way.
Go Ron Paul!
Labels: election 2008, Ron Paul
¶ 10:22 AM
