Skip to main content

Who is Wayne Allyn Root and why he is bothering the Libertarian Party?


This is why people often don't take Libertarianism seriously.

From Third Party Watch comes this statement from Libertarian Party Presidential hopeful Wayne Allyn Root upon his return from Great Britain:

I learned many lessons on my trip to UK this past week. The most important one is that the solution to any problem is simple- less government, lower taxes, more personal responsibility, more rights for the individual, more choice, more free market competition (to solve the education and health care mess), and far more freedom. That’s the Libertarian message. That’s not the message you’ll hear from any Democrat or Republican Presidential candidate.


I'm not really sure how Wayne learned this in the UK--I'm not even sure what a guy supposedly pursuing the US presidential nomination is doing in London in the first place.

Here's the problem: pure ideologues of any stripe scare the hell out of me. Anybody who thinks "that the solution to any problem is simple"--from a Libertarian, Progressive, or any other perspective in between--is someone you don't want anywhere near serious power.

Political ideologies provide a conceptual framework for thinking about the world, not a blueprint for solving individual problems.

Try to remember that if you want anybody to take you seriously as a candidate for anything.

Comments

Unknown said…
Wayne Allyn Root is contesting for the 2008 US Presidential Elections as the candidate of the Libertarian Party. To campaign for the election, he has planned to start a TV reality show to be broadcast in the countries of US, Canada and UK. He is also writing a book 'The Conscience of a Libertarian' to make campaigns.
That's all nice, but doesn't respond to the inanity of his comments that every political problem has a single simple solution.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...