When I decided to put candidates from the LP for the presidency of the U.S. to the test right here on the website, I assumed it would be reasonably easy to do so. Surely there must be a way for these candidates to state things clearly and efficiently? Not always, unfortunately.
I now realize that the list of LP candidates may include some serious cranks with visions that properly belong in fantasy land, and whom for obvious reasons choose not to get truly specific. What you get is some sort of stream of conciousness from bizarro world that has to be read to be believed.
One of those crank candidates is Jack Robinson Jr. who somehow manages to believe he can unify not only the people of the United States but also the political parties, under some umbrella platform that in many cases completely ignores the various partisan views and interests of such parties and peoples. Robinson also seems to believe that politicians do not have specific and self-serving interests which would simply not line up with his dream of national “unity”. For instance, does he really think conservatives will join him in singing the praises of a society where drugs are no longer criminalized? Does he really think liberal progressives will join him in accepting a “ferociously capitalistic” society in which all problem-solving would be left to the business world (which by the way is not even always the case)?
Robinson tries to come off as some kind of Oracle, a know-it-all of a man who sees the solutions to end the world’s problems (yes, the WORLD’S problems), where nobody else can.
But all of this is neither here nor there. The question is if Robinson can be properly qualified as a libertarian. Because that is what he is campaigning as, and that is what i am testing here.
Well, let me ask rhetorically if a man proposing the following can be a libertarian, proposing libertarian solutions:
- Universal healthcare for Americans, and ultimately universal healthcare for the world. (including Medicare and Medicaid)
- Ending world hunger
- Income equality
- Job creation in combination with higher wages.
- An economic policy (called “Birth Loop”) that ‘’gives’’ people 50.000 dollars at age 25, in return for the promise not to live off government programs for a year.
- A strong military, capable of fighting more than 2 wars at once (read about Robinson’s less than isolationist foreign policy).
This would be achieved, according to Robinson, in combination with the following:
- Lower and in some cases non-existent taxes
- A ferociously capitalist (i.e. free market) society
- Turning government-debt into a surplus.
Here’s a nice and interesting challenge: spot the ways in which the above would end up with contradictory results, or will simply prove entirely impossible in the real world.
Here is some more:
- Make America great again through unity
- Come up with solutions all can get behind, i.e. end divisive policies.
This despite the fact that Robinson proposes what are in many ways highly capitalistic policies (except there where government must have money for Robinson’s ideals of course), highly progressive social policies, and less than libertarian foreign policy.
Does anyone see the American public, politicians and other ideologues included, singing Kumbaya around the camp fire?
Did I mention that Robinson regards American Government as a “national treasure” that should be guarded as such? Yes, quite the libertarian.
If you have the time, and the energy, read Robinson’s ideas here.
YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING!!!