Liberty and the GOP

Following the marathon filibuster last week, Senator Rand Paul took time today to evaluate the state of the Republican Party. While speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference Paul spoke out against the outdated structure and ideas of his party as well as his fellow peers. Although not formally responding to Senator John McCain’s comments last week where he referred to Paul and several others in Congress as “wacko birds,” in reference to their stance on the Obama administration and CIA Director John Brennan’s drone policy and the filibuster that accompanied it, his comments were clearly aimed that way. Paul took a stance separating himself and creating a more visible line of partisanship within the ranks of the right.

The GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered. I don't think we need to name any names, do we? Our party is encumbered by an inconsistent approach to freedom. The new GOP will need to embrace liberty in both the economic and the personal sphere. If we're going to have a Republican party that can win, liberty needs to be the backbone of the GOP. We must have a message that is broad, our vision must be broad, and that vision must be based on freedom.

There are millions of Americans, young and old, native and immigrant, black, white and brown, who simply seek to live free, to practice a religion, free to choose where their kids go to school, free to choose their own health care, free to keep the fruits of their labor, free to live without government constantly being on their back. I will stand for them. I will stand for you. I will stand for our prosperity and our freedom, and I ask everyone who values liberty to stand with me. Thank you. God bless America. (Paul)

Making several references to liberty in his speech, Paul makes it clear that the Republican Party has diverted from this concept with their inconsistent approach towards responsible government. Senator Paul’s philosophy is clear, republicans don’t need to be reinvented with new concepts and ideas they need to fundamentally change; a change that reverts back to what can only be defined as classical liberalism, at least in the sense of “economic and personal” liberty.

            How does one foster responsible government among the ranks of the immoral politician? More importantly, how does one revert a party and even a congress in such despair to accept a fundamental concept like liberty that has been abandoned for so long the mere definition is foreign to them? Challenging the opposition and even more importantly your own party to conforming to these standards like Senator Paul is attempting is a start. But blame falls elsewhere. First, unawareness of Americans in context to constitutional rights can account for a portion but the need for expedient action coupled with unawareness has guided us to our current state. As soon as problems are revealed there exists a need for prompt action. As we discussed there are two theoretical approaches to liberty, one where liberty has an instrumental value and the other where liberty has emotional value. The immediate call to action requires the instrumental or expedient process which in turn promotes unnecessary legislation that gradually has lead to our current condition of a depleted economy. As an obvious need for action exists, the importance of not resorting to expedient action is significant. Senator Paul’s call for a Republican Party that stands for prosperity and freedom is a step towards accountability and responsible government but if Americans continually choose haste our problems will continue.