I just read on my friend Pete Eyre’s blog about a sad direction that C4L seems to be taking. The organization has supported Ken Buck, a pro-war candidate:
This sickening statements comes from Buck’s website:
My son is a third year cadet at West Point. I’m very proud of my son’s decision to serve his country. He understands the risks involved. He also understands there is a price for freedom in this country and he’s willing to stand up and shoulder that burden. For so many of our brave men and women today, that means shouldering the burden in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We definitely need to continue a major effort in Afghanistan. We are told this effort will take at least 10 years. It will require both military and civilian personnel to help build up the country. The generals on the ground tell us we are likely to be in Afghanistan for the long term with a difficult and complicated mission.
As Colorado’s Senator I will always look first to the advice of the generals, and I will strongly support the mission of our troops who are in harm’s way.
Now, I have to say as a former supporter of C4L, I don’t particularly care for conservative values. I don’t care for progressive ones either. I care for what is right, and just, true, and good. So I find it quite offensive that the money that I and other members have contributed in part goes to funding an over a quarter of a million campaign for some Republican Senate candidate whose views have nothing at all to do with the message of peace and freedom and who represents nothing but your average conservative war mongering bigot.
Pete states his suspicions about a new direction that C4L leadership seems to be taking:
… John Tate, C4L’s head neglected to touch on non-interventionism while addressing the attendees at the 9-12 march in DC. Many believe it was not an accident.
Not that I HAVE to point this out, but just in case there is some confusion, this is from C4L’s own statement of principles:
With our Founding Fathers, we also believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy. Inspired by the old Robert Taft wing of the Republican Party, we are convinced that the American people cannot remain free and prosperous with 700 military bases around the world, troops in 130 countries, and a steady diet of war propaganda. Our military overstretch is undermining our national defense and bankrupting our country.
Naturally, the grassroots members are rebelling.
The story just got mentioned on the Huffington Post and a comment left on the Denver Post article to which it links is for me, the epitome of how far C4L has strayed from its founding:
With everyone from Dick Cheney, to Tom Tancredo, to the Campaign for Liberty supporting Ken Buck, it is no wonder he is the only Republican candidate that can unify the GOP base and ensure victory in November. I support Ken Buck!
I do recognize that C4L has helped introduce individuals to the ideas of liberty, at least initially before it was co-opted by those seeking to avoid the “non-interventionist” plank of their mission to cater more to the pro-war right (and their wallets). But no one should get a free pass or be exempt from being held accountable for their actions. And we’re seeing that – the market, in this case those that had previously supported C4L – is responding as some that had previously supported C4L vow not to do so anymore.
The missteps by C4L higher-ups only underscore what politics is – a dirty, morally bankrupt system in which everyone seeks to live at the expense at everyone else. Let’s walk away from that great fiction and instead choose to not try to control other people. For more on this, check out Voluntaryism.
What Pete refers to as voluntaryism is precisely what I have always referred to as anarchism in my blog. (Whether or not it is expedient to use that term is a different, albeit very valid question.)
If there is one thing that I have always appreciated about C4L, and Ron Paul for that matter, was their efforts to get out the word and educate people about truth, freedom, peace, noninterventionism, and Austrian Economics. And where anybody anywhere does these things, whether he is a politician or not, I still fully appreciate it.
But I, too, have recently realized that it is indeed a complete fantasy to believe that one could ever accomplish liberty, peace, and happiness for all, or even just a little improvement, through political action.
This recent incident is just another proof that politics corrupts, always and everywhere.
The most convincing piece I have ever seen on the futility of political action comes from Stefan Molyneux and is well worth watching:
In short: If you think it is unrealistic for you to think that you can join your local neighborhood mafia, and turn them against themselves, then don’t even start fantasizing about succeeding in doing that to the mother of all mafias, the government.
… so until I hear a clear and decisive statement from C4L disassociating from this nonsense, I am taking my link to their site off my blog.
4 thoughts on “Campaign 4 Liberty Supports Pro War Candidate”
Thank you so much for posting this, I really do appreciate it! :)
Very disturbing. I was under the impression that Ron Paul and the Campaign for Liberty believed in a four point program, including the text excerpted below.
Since they evidently do not believe as I do, I shall withdraw my support, as well.
Here is what I believe, and thought they believed:
“The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.”
I think C4L is at a crossroads now … http://www.economicsjunkie.com/john-tates-statement-regarding-the-support-for-ken-buck/
I’m glad to hear that our donations were NOT used. A group of individuals in Colorado paid for the ad:
The Colorado program was funded by a small number of Colorado activists. The funding for this program came ENTIRELY from this small group of new C4L donors.
So for all our great grassroots who are wondering why we might not have used this money elsewhere, I can say two things: First, we WILL have similar programs in MANY other places soon, and second, we did NOT use any money raised generally by Campaign for Liberty to run these ads in Colorado.
Here’s a follow up from the Colorado State Coordinator – http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31973