Sep 052007
Part of the Applied Anarchy Series - Previous in series         Next in series

There are quite a few anarchists out there who scoff at the very notion of voting. The general argument is that voting just “feeds the beast” and is essentially an acknowledgment of the government’s authority over us as individuals. Personally, I feel these anarchists are either overly idealistic or short-sighted.

Few rational individuals (even amongst the anarchy lovin’ crowd) endorse the idea of instant removal of government. Doing so would surely lead to chaos, which is exactly what our opponents claim is the inevitable result of anarchy anyway. The problem is that chaos will simply lead to dictatorship or some other similar government oppression. What we need to do is ease our way towards anarchy and the first step in doing that is slowing the growth of government. There are two primary ways of accomplishing that and both entail voting-

  1. Divided Government –
    Keeping the executive and legislative branches in opposing hands slows government growth in some pretty obvious ways.

    • Budgetary constraints – With the legislature writing the budget but the executive approving it the most outrageous government programs are nixed before they can even begin. Remember President Clinton’s record breaking budget surplus? That would never have happened had the Congress been in Democratic hands.
    • Protection of Freedoms – The last six years have seen the fastest reduction of personal freedoms in American history. While it’s easy to blame this on 9/11, do you really think things like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act would have passed a Democratic congress so readily?
    • Less chance of war – Going to war is seldom an easy decision. But it’s a lot easier decision to make when you’re stating your case to people generally of the same mind. Every major military conflict that the United States has been evolved in over the last century was initiated when a single party controlled both Congress and the Presidency (many minor ones as well).
  2. Dismantling Government –
    Overthrowing the government is a messy and unattractive task. But dismantling the government over time will not only bring us closer to the freedom we both seek and deserve, but also be the most powerful educational tool we could ever wield. The primary reason so many people think government is necessary is that the government itself has been telling them that for generations. If elected officials actually start standing up and talking about how the free market can solve problems better than government, while simultaneously preventing new government programs from being created and trimming back existing programs, even the masses will eventually learn.

The problem, then, lies in the fact that most Americans tend to vote for a specific candidate based on one of three factors: party affiliation, name recognition, or who they think will win. Little can be done about the first factor, but the latter two are largely a result of media coverage. And the major media loves the two party system, meaning third party candidates have next to zero chance of winning any sort of national office.

Enter Ron Paul. As a Libertarian in Republican Clothing he’s the perfect vessel for change in Washington. If he can secure the Republican nomination the older “Republican Guard” will have no choice but to vote for him in order to keep the Democrats out of office. Meanwhile, his Libertarian views will siphon off a large percentage of the young people who traditionally vote Democrat, nearly ensuring victory. Of course, those Dems who do “cross over” to vote their principles will still be voting Democrat in the Senate and Congressional races, thus furthering the cause of gridlock. Add Paul’s reputation as “Dr. No” to the mix and we could very well see the fewest number of bills passed during any Presidential term in the last century. His Congressional colleagues call him “Dr. No” because he consistently votes no on any bill that will expand government.

2008 provides an unprecedented opportunity for anarchists to move the United States towards freedom. The first step in doing that is ensuring that Ron Paul gains the Republican nomination. Which means changing your voter registration to (or registering for the first time as) Republican. Once he secures the nomination it’s all downhill, barring a bullet to his brain or Bush declaring martial law.

Part of the Applied Anarchy Series - Previous in series        Next in series

  12 Responses to “Applied Anarchy: Why Anarchists Should Vote For Ron Paul”

  1. Quick update-

    The kind folx over at Primarily Paul have a handy list of all the state primaries including dates, links to the voter registration pages, and whether or not you need to be a Republican to vote in their primary.

  2. […] My Post – Applied Anarchy: Why Anarchists Should Vote For Ron Paul […]

  3. […] Republican Congressman garners supports from extremists of all stripes. Birchers, 9/11 Truthers, anarchists, and white nationalists, they all adore […]

  4. […] Ron Paul has gained the endorsement of Stormfront Radio, the Birchers, 9/11 Truthers, anarchists, and other white nationalists.? The article continues by asking, why do you think this is? Is Ron […]

  5. While I am not a free market anarchist and instead oppose the idea of the capitalist system in a way. I have been making exceptions to my anarcho-syndicalist views and registered republican (something I never thought I would do) I just want to let you know that although we share a different set of beliefs about the idea of anarchism I found your article very informative in a introspective sort of way and makes a good deal of sense. But yes I am an avid Ron Paul supporter just don’t tell the IWW on me. Insurrection in the streets and in the voting booth!

    in solidarity

  6. Good To Hear, Jonas!

    I’ve been registered as an anarchist for about 15 years now, but am also changing my registration in the next week or so. I wanted to wait until this week’s election passed. It’s the simple fact that so much of the “lunatic fringe” (of which I proudly consider myself a member) can unite behind Ron Paul that makes him such a powerful force. And it clearly shows the power of his message as well.

    Here’s looking forward to 2008, when I may actually be voting for a winning candidate for the first time in two decades!

  7. […] Why Anarchists should vote for Ron Paul […]

  8. Can someone, then, explain how Ron Paul gets away with calling himself “libertarian” despite his anti-immigration and anti-choice (as in a women’s right to choose) stances?

  9. Well, as I’m sure you know, there is no organization policing the term “libertarian” other than the public at large. So anyone can get away with using the term to describe themselves. Just take a look at those “libertarians” whose names are best known to the general public. Anyway, Paul’s not running as a Libertarian (this time), he’s running as a Republican.

    I haven’t really read (or heard) much about his reasoning behind his immigration stance, and definitely chalk that up as one of the (very few) strikes against him.

    However, his anti-abortion stance is not, in fact, “anti-choice” as you claim. He has stated that
    Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, but not because the Supreme Court presumed to legalize abortion rather than ban it. Roe was wrongly decided because abortion simply is not a constitutional issue. There is not a word in the text of that document, nor in any of its amendments, that conceivably addresses abortion. There is no serious argument based on the text of the Constitution itself that a federal “right to abortion” exists. The federalization of abortion law is based not on constitutional principles, but rather on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Roe court.

    Under the 9th and 10th amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures. Therefore the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue. So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid.

    This is very much a Libertarian stance. The federal government should, in no way, be involved in personal issues of morality.

  10. The enemy of the Anarchist is the fascist.

    I know us anarchists like to fight among our closest neighbors, but this is seriously the best choice for a serious candidate I’ve ever known.

    So he believes in private property, who care, so does every other candidate. Do we want the state first telling us that we have private property, and then taking it away when they want?

    Ron Paul may very well be able to reduce the scope of government, and if we had him in the executive branch, but a democratic congress… Oh the wonder.

  11. Welcome, Shea! Although as an anarchist I do believe in private property (I own myself, thus I own the fruits of my labor) you make an incredibly valid point about the government taking our (so-called) private property away!

  12. If your anarchists had your way….we’d have ANARCHY 🙄

  13. We can only hope! :mrgreen:

  14. I am not an anarchist, and I don’t think Ron Paul is, either. However, I fully support Ron Paul because he is the only Constitutionalist running (or has run, for the past 25 years). 😎 Our only hope for this country is to return to her moorings.

  15. Yes, I think the country would be in a lot better shape today if Ron Paul were the president.

  16. […] Applied Anarchy: Why Anarchists Should Vote For Ron Paul […]

  17. Great, thanks for sharing this article post.Really looking forward to read more. Will read on…