Through my involvement in the Republican Party, I have come to realize that there is a distinction between those who call themselves Republicans and those who live by conservative principles. I do not wish to offend anyone with the points that I must make, as I know that many, if not most of our Republican leadership operate under the most admirable intentions. My demur lies not with this framework itself, but with the occasional lack of consideration for political principles within it.
I believe that the moral prerogative that charters the party cannot be cast aside merely at the bidding of the mechanism itself. I am of the belief that our party no longer serves principle, but is more focused on winning elections. I do not believe, as I have found many others do, that winning elections ought to be our ultimate goal. Winning an election is a means to an end, not an end itself. Our end, if it be just, is the implementation of sound policies -- those that are requisites for a free society. Certainly, the Republican Party realizes great victories in countless elections year after year, but seldom it seems are the principles that we find so reputable nearly as victorious. It saddens and concerns me that we often see that the most important standard that our candidates are held to, is one of mere victory. If this is our goal, then we really have no goal at all.
The message of America -- that of peace, liberty, and prosperity – has loosened its guard. The inclination of power, which inevitably seeks nothing but its own advance to victory has permeated our leadership. We are failing in our sacred duty of self-government, which is to offer compassionately to one another the contract of liberty, and to stand relentless in defense of the moral action which that ideal necessitates. Will we continue to mollify this decree, a responsibility as intrinsic to ourselves as the rights which it defends? If I see that my enemy is winning, my inclination ought to be to fight harder, not to drop my own flag, and lead the charge with theirs. But that is what many conservatives did in this last election. They have lost their faith in the Republican Party and of the once sacred values of conservatism that are no longer evident.
Our Republican candidates must adhere to some very basic criteria. The party must reject candidates who do not accept the fundamental precepts of natural rights, or the American notion of federalism. They must understand the moral consequences of human action as broadened to the wider sphere of economics, and the system that most effectively incorporates that action -- the free market system. We must see in them a deep respect and concern for human life, and a boundless consideration of the human spirit. They must value individualism over collectivism and statism. We should expect that they would do honor to the Republican Creed.
These candidates will be bound by their oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States to the best of their ability, and if that binding is weak, we should assume that their understanding of the proper functions of government is just as weak. The Constitution is not perfect nor is any human capable of being a perfect Constitutionalist. But without the constituting of a philosophically sound mandate on the purpose of government, there can be no rule of law by which justice is maintained, and no civilities by which we may improve our governance. Foremost, candidates must understand and abide by the mutual contract of liberty, the piPce de résistance of the American ideal. I believe this is a very broad and flexible set of standards.
One of the worst things that we can do is support more candidates who will dismantle and distort the message of limited government even further. There are Republicans , in name only, who show no qualms in vehemently declaring their "progressive" policies (in this context, this means Big Government). Over the years, I have preserved a portion of society's collective memory which reminds me that an alike vein of progressive "Maverick" policies brought no-holds-barred welfarism to the United States and that "Change" is what Hitler brought to Germany in 1933.
There is indeed an ideological lineage around and within the Republican party that I am proud to count myself as a subscriber to -- embraced whether wholly or in part by the likes of Barry Goldwater, Walter E. Williams, Howard Buffett, Jeff Flake, P. J. O'Rourke, Gary Johnson, Felix Morley, Robert Taft, Ron Paul, Bob Marshall, Ken Cuccinelli, Calvin Coolidge, and many others. But this gives no credence to the policy of rubber stamping.
If we are to save our Republic, it must be done by individuals such as ourselves, through education and political action. The former is my primary aim, and with the latter, I must proceed carefully. Thus, while I can vote for whomever I wish in the privacy of the voting booth, I do not want to be dishonest or misleading in my intentions. I would imagine more respect for me would be lost if I were to simply lie instead of making a principled decision that you might not agree with. It is regrettable that I cannot commit to always abide by the by-laws of the Republican Party, in particular the section that requires me to support the Republican nominee for every respective office if that candidate does not demonstrate through practice, adherence to the conservative principles that are the very foundation of our great nation and to the Republican Creed.