Why
I Am Not Watching the Republican Convention
by
William L. Anderson
As
I write this article, the Republican National Convention is being
shown on television, in prime time. Please excuse my lack of political
vigor, but I am not interested in having someone tell me they can
"run the government" better than the folks currently in
charge. I had hoped that the Republicans might actually try to represent
change, but I guess that is not likely to occur in today’s age of
big media and big government.
"What’s
your problem, Anderson?" some of my friends might ask. Do you
want the Democrats to take power? Do you really want Al Gore as
President of the United States? Don’t you know what these folks
would do to us?
Actually,
I do know what they would do to us and the problem with the Republicans
is that they have no clue as to the real damage the Democrats have
done. If anything, the Republicans have demonstrated through their
"inclusive" convention that the Democrats have won the
war of ideas. Instead of standing up for something, the Republicans
are talking out of both sides of their mouths, promising "conservative"
values while trying to ape their political rivals.
Since
the Republicans won’t tell us what needs to be done, and since I
have some extra time on my hands (by not watching the Republican
"lovefest" in Philadelphia), I will tell you, dear readers.
In a word, the real problems facing us are not low education standards,
racism, anti-gay prejudices, lack of prayer in schools, or even
abortion on demand.
Rather,
the problem can be explained in one word: statism.
Once
upon a time, runaway government was actually on the menu at the
Republican National Convention. I remember a few speeches in 1976
attacking big government, and Ronald Reagan actually based much
of his 1980 campaign on stopping the awful intrusions of the state.
The
problem was that these guys, however, eloquent their speeches, didn’t
mean what they were saying. They were not attempting to reduce the
burden of government, but only trying to be the folks who would
have the privilege of handing out the rewards of political patronage.
Reagan
staffed his political appointments with old Richard Nixon holdovers,
George Bush used Reagan retreads, and, should George W. win the
election, no doubt we will see a government full of his father’s
appointments.
In
other words, modern elections are mainly about which set of political
classes will assume the reins of "power." Granted, there
are degrees of abuse of power, as has been demonstrated by the lawless
administration of Bill Clinton. However, please understand that
Clinton did not invent the abuse of his office; he only refined
it and set new low standards for his successors to meet.
For
example, while Clinton and his political henchmen at the US Department
of Justice have been the ones mostly defending the government’s
actions at Ruby Ridge and Waco, remember that both incidents had
their genesis during George Bush’s administration. Ruby Ridge, which
occurred during the summer of 1992, was fully a Bush action, as
he did not leave office until the following January.
As
for Waco, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms carried out
their fateful raid in February, 1993, less than a month after Clinton
had taken power. Plans for this raid had actually been drawn up
during Bush’s tenure in office. So while Clinton and his defenders
deserve nothing but contempt for how they have handled these horrible
abuses of power, the Republicans are hardly blameless.
Furthermore,
one of the worst legacies of the Reagan Administration is the stepped
up efforts of the War on Drugs. Reagan’s "Just Say No!"
campaign turned into "Just Say No! to Property Rights,"
as federal and state agents turned to asset forfeiture as a tool
ostensibly to stop drug trafficking.
As
numerous other writers on this page, including me, have pointed
out, asset forfeiture in the name of fighting illegal drugs has
given governments vast power over individuals that has almost always
been used in the most abusive manner.
Such
laws truly threaten our freedom, and they are clearly the brainchild
of Republicans, who then set their awful example for the Democrats,
who were all too happy to be able to seize people’s belongings.
While
Republicans lambaste Gore on his truly ridiculous stands on environmental
issues, it was George Bush who strove to be called "the Environmental
President."
Those
of us who abhor the confiscatory "wetlands" policies of
the Environmental Protection Agency, the US Fish and Wildlife Service,
and the US Army Corps of Engineers need remember that these policies
were the brainchild of William Reilly, Bush’s point man on the environment
and the head of the EPA. The disastrous gasoline price spikes of
this past summer had their beginnings in the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990, which Bush hailed as the "cornerstone" of his
administration’s environmental policies.
Do
we resent the intrusions brought upon us by the Americans With Disabilities
Act? It was also the creation of a Republican administration. Do
we decry this government’s murderous military escapades around the
world? They began with George Bush’s Gulf War. (Actually, the probably
began with Reagan’s ridiculous 1983 invasion of Granada to be later
followed by Bush’s kidnapping of Panama President Manuel Noriega
in 1989.)
My
point here is not to give the Democrats a free ride. I truly despise
what Bill Clinton has done to his office and to this country, and
I have no optimism at all that Al Gore would do nothing but try
to destroy all of our liberties. Nor do I believe that all Republicans
are unabashed statists. There are voices for real freedom in that
party, people who long ago were banished from the Democrats.
I
appreciate those folks who labor to educate Americans on the evils
of abortion and the continued attempts by the state to force the
Sexual Revolution down our throats. I also appreciate those who
call for the drastic lowering of taxes and repeal of destructive
regulations upon the free enterprise system.
However,
those folks are few and have almost always been muzzled by other
Republicans who, to be honest, resent the fact that such people
are even Republicans.
That
is why this current Republican Convention is yet another crappy
tribute to statism, and that is why I plan to do anything but watch
this dog and pony show.
August
3, 2000
William L. Anderson, Ph.D., is assistant professor of economics
at North Greenville College in Tigerville, South Carolina. He is
an adjunct scholar of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute.
|