A Platform For American Greatness

Web Search This Subject

By: John D. Hamilton

Since I do not belong to any party or political organisation that I can point to for "talking points" or ideological positioning, I am outlining my presidential campaign platform for you here. It's a relatively simple platform based upon a relatively simple (yet crucial) concept--individual rights and the proper type of government to protect those rights.

All specific positions on any particular subject, therefore, should be easy to ascertain even if they are not explicitly listed here; after all, this is not meant to be an exhaustive listing of each and every possible position on each and every possible subject. I will touch on a number of "hot button" issues herein, but will detail more extensive positions in upcoming articles.

1. The Primacy of Individual Rights

My platform is based upon the philosophical fact that each person, regardless of geographic location; political or religious affiliation; race, creed or station; possesses one undeniable right: the right to their own life. All corollary rights derive from this basic root--and no person, organisation or group can morally, ethically or rationally  deny and/or infringe upon this right and its corollaries.

Since a person does in fact hold the title and the right to live his or her own life, they must also be free to think, act and produce to survive. This means that, as corollaries to the right to one's own life, a person must hold the right to freedom; the right to create, own, buy and dispose of property through voluntary interaction with his or her fellows; the right to free association; the right to express themselves on any subject; the right to further their own knowledge as far as they wish to take it; the right to pursue whatever goals they feel will insure their happiness and comfort--all free from coercion and physical force by any other persons, groups, organisations or governments.

My platform rejects anything contrary to these facts of reality.

2. Politics

My platform rejects all notion of "politics" as that word holds meaning today. The word, as it is used today, signifies little more than the seeking of greater power and control by one group over another--and since this is contrary to the primacy of individual rights, I would seek to educate people to see beyond such harmful notions. Politics is a branch of philosophy, and that is how I will use the term in explaining my platform.  I would seek to point out that political parties, as they exist today, are contrary to an individual's best interests and should be avoided and rejected by anyone interested in freedom and truth. They have no place, no power and no function in a free society based upon individual rights.

3. Government

Since individual rights are a primary, then no one may properly trample or usurp the rights of others. It is for this reason that a system must be implemented of insuring that this does not happen. This is the sole reason for a government to be instituted, and the sole power a government may utilise. Since a government is nothing more than a collection of individuals seeking to accomplish a common, voluntary goal, a government cannot possess more rights than any of its members or citizens. Such a government, in fact, cannot hold any rights that isn't delegated to it because of it's unique protection and enforcement capabilities. Such a government must be strictly delimited in function and scope to prevent abuses by morally and ethically bankrupt individuals (i.e. criminals). This is the meaning of the term "a government of laws, and not men."

The Founding Fathers recognised this, and went to great lengths to institute vast arrays of checks and balances to prevent government becoming the people's ruler instead of the people's agent. That is why the only proper form of government for a free society based upon the primacy of individual rights must be a constitutional republic...that is the only form of government which prevents one group or mob from attempting to usurp the rights of any single individual, and the only form which recognises the concept of "the consent of the governed.".

My platform recognises three, and only three, functions of a proper government...these being the military, to protect the individual from foreign invaders; the police, to protect the individual from criminals; and the courts, to settle disputes and punish those proven to have violated the rights of others. There are no other possible functions available to a proper government that wouldn't claim some arbitrary power over the individual. My platform would seek to eliminate any functionality currently held by government that is contrary to the primacy of individual rights, and to place that functionality into the realm of the private sector where it rightfully belongs.

Those elected to serve us in government are to be caretakers and "operators" only...caring for the mechanics of government and operating the machinery which provides the proper functions of government; no more, no less.

4. Economics

Since each of us has the right to our own lives, we must have the right to deal with others in an uncoerced, voluntary fashion. The only possible economic system suitable to this fact is capitalism...not the mixed, semi-Statist version America practises today, but laissez-faire capitalism, where all of us are free to trade, do business with and work for whomever we choose, to mutual benefit.

Government interference in the economy is irrational and illogical in that it places unwarranted and unnatural power into the hands of bureaucrats and power-seekers...power that government cannot rightly claim, since, as individuals, we cannot coerce others into doing our bidding. It also opens the Pandora's Box of providing an avenue for moochers, leeches and power-seekers to seek favours of bureaucrats and government representatives. For this reason, there should be a strict separation of economy and state--for the same reason that there must be a separation of church and state. My platform calls for an end to bogus, irrational and unwarranted interference in the nation's economy by the State, and would insure that the playing field for economic matters would be as fair, rational and open as possible--by allowing the individual to make the decisions regarding any and all economic matters pertaining to his or her life.

5. Religious Freedom

Contrary to what many would have you believe (typically those who seek to use their religion as a means to gain and exercise power and control over the individual), America was not created as a "religious nation." While it is true that one of the reasons the original settlers fled England was religious persecution, it wasn't the only reason--nor was the reason simply to found a strictly religious nation from scratch.

Religious participation is an individual's choice, and its practise must be voluntary--since no religious group or dogma may claim power over the individual. To that end, my platform calls for total and complete separation of Church and Government. Government has no right to prescribe, nor has it the right to limit or deny participation in religious activities. Religion or any other dogma has no reason to be a part of government, whether by edict or implication.

---

The above is a condensed, basic outline of my platform. I will follow with a few examples of certain "hot button" issues that current political practitioners use in their attempts to gain and control power, and how I would seek to deal with them under my presidency.

Abortion

Individual rights are primary...they are the source of all other rational, moral and ethical rights. That being the case, there can be no rights for arms, legs, nostrils or toenails, even though these are all living organisms. The fact of the matter is that they are all "parts" (or attributes) of a human being who, as a whole, does possess rights; none of them are capable of living without the whole on their own, and cannot possibly be in a position to claim any rights..

The same must be held true of a foetus; while it has the potential, under ideal conditions, to become a human being, there is no guarantee that it will. It is a potentiality, and a potentiality cannot possibly possess rights, since by definition a "potentiality" doesn't yet exist. It is especially absurd to claim that a potentiality has more rights than an actuality. To that end, the issue of abortion has no place in government edict or influence. It is an individual, voluntary decision that must be left to those personally involved.

The only power a government could claim regarding abortion is in enforcing the scientific fact of life. At some point, the potentiality does become an actuality, and at that point, abortion is tantamount to murder. I do not claim to know at which precise moment that transformation takes place, but I would remove from the sphere of government influence any restrictions, denial or bans on first trimester abortions between anyone seeking an abortion and those medical professionals who wish to offer them. By the same token, those who held the view that any abortion was morally wrong would be free to refrain from having one.

Marriage, Specifically "Gay Marriage"

Relationships are intensely personal, private affairs...and to whom we decide to enter into a relationship with voluntarily is no one else's business, especially government's. Nor is it government's right or prerogative to grant special favours, rights or privileges to certain relationships over others. To that end, my presidency would view marriage for what it is; a voluntary civil contract entered into between two persons seeking to protect and express the commitment of their relationship. The only time government would have reason to become involved would be to mediate and settle disputes, such as one person breaking the marriage contract in some manner or of insuring that the mutual decision to terminate the marriage contract doesn't adversely affect anyone else involved. There is no reason, power or right for government, or indeed any uninvolved third-party, to restrict, seek to deny or otherwise interfere in such a contractual process.

My presidency would recognise the right of those who wish to decorate their marriage contract with some ceremonial or religious trappings, and would indeed recognise the right of those organisations providing such ceremonial and/or religious trappings to decide which persons they may or may not wish to voluntarily provide those decorations for. But in no way, shape or form would or should government restrict such contracts in and of themselves, between two consenting adults regardless of sex, creed, colour, or some other attribute unrelated to the facts of the love and devotion to be recognised and cemented by the marriage contract.

Drugs

While there is little doubt that most any drug (whether it be caffeine, alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, aspirin or  heroin) can present unhealthy side effects to those who choose to use them, government must recognise the right of the individual to make that choice him or herself based upon their own knowledge and desires. We have already seen the disastrous effects of government prohibition of substances and activities which it has no right to become involved in; that in and of itself should be enough.

The fact of the matter is, no one has the right or power to prevent an individual from living his or her own life--whether we may think they are irrational or foolish or not...the price is theirs to pay. The notion that "society" has a voice in the matter is just as ludicrous as saying government has a say in it. Both cases require the abdication of individual rights to be true.

Government's only voice in the matter is through the courts if and when an individual's use of drugs becomes an infringement upon the rights of others to live their lives. It would and should be punishable to place another person in jeopardy by operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs, for example. It would be punishable for someone to commit any crime as a result of drug usage or as a means of obtaining drugs, just as it would be illegal to steal a car so you could go shopping or get to work. The fact of the drug usage would not detract from a person's actions while under the influence.

To that end, my presidency would call for the removal of all laws aimed at prohibiting a person from using drugs as they deem fit, and would hold those who provide them accountable as to the purity, content and claims made as to the drugs they sell, as in any other product or service.

Foreign Policies

American government has no reason to exist except to protect the individual rights of American citizens. To that end, government must hold--and practise--a consistent, rational and moral foreign policy. American government should have the right to refuse recognition of any outlaw (meaning totalitarian, dictatorial or other non-free) nations, and to take those actions required to insure that American citizen's rights are protected. American government has no right to arbitrarily invade or provoke any other sovereign nation, providing that said nation is not posing an imminent threat to America or American interests.

America can and should assist any other nation in repelling invaders if the situation warrants--but not as an obligation. America had the right to answer Kuwait's call for military assistance in repelling the invasion of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, for example--but not the obligation. Indeed America, as a nation dedicated to freedom and protection of individual rights, would have the right to invade any outlaw nation--but only for the express purpose of insuring the ability of the citizenry to institute a proper government itself, and providing we possessed the rational, economic and physical ability to carry out the action logically, quickly and without unnecessary risk to America or its citizenry. Our invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein's regime was morally proper, but rationally unsound in its inception, planning and execution and should not have been carried out under the circumstances, especially with a more important enemy to contain and eliminate in Afghanistan and other terrorist-supporting states.

American foreign policy should act to reward freedom and promote free trade with each and every nation who wished to participate. It should not be used as an agent of protectionist economic policies, however...that is not the proper function of a government, but the proper function of a free market.

---

I hope that this brief introduction into my platform and goals goes some way toward explaining not only my candidacy, but illustrates the direction that America must take if we are to maintain freedom and greatness. In the coming months I will discuss each of these issues in greater detail, as well as explain and outline other important goals and ideals.