Whyfore Gary Johnson?

A number of my friends are supporting Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico and libertarian wunderkind, for President.  Some of them are supporting him, I think, simply because Trump seems to be an unstable bigot while Hillary Clinton seems to be a cold, calculating, dishonest bitch.

But others are supporting him because, I think, they are actual libertarians.

I've always found it interesting that Adolf Hitler and Churchill were both painters.  Hitler in his life before the cataclysm of World War I and II, Churchill as best as I can tell for much of his life as a hobby.

I've also found it interesting that many engineers are libertarians.

It makes sense though.  Engineers are sensible people, who go to school for years and learn incredible amounts of math but then go into the work force and search for the cheapest, easiest, quickest solution that involves the least amount of paperwork and hassle.

A libertarian point of view seems to fit that pretty well.  It's pretty simple after all;  the government is going to be as small as it can be and leave you alone as much as possible.  Solutions to the nation's pressing problems will be left to the free-market and the people will vote with their dollars.  The government will defend the country but not get over involved in foreign entanglements.  And yes, the government doesn't particularly care if you toke up with some buds after binging all week long on pornography and pumpkin sex orgies because....that's your concern.  The Government doesn't care who or what you bring into your bed and, to a certain extent, what you put into your body.  Heroin, probably, is still kind of bad; but instead of tossing you into jail we are probably going to get you into some kind of treatment program.  Good luck paying for it on your own, because taxes have been cut so much there is no government program.

Have you considered the erotic possibilities of yams, but were to afraid of being stigmatized to tell anyone?  Then vote for Mr. Johnson in November.  I say "In November" because I don't know what day Election Day actually is.

Low taxes, separation of Church and State, abortions for everyone, a powerful military that watches those pesky Canadians.  All of the fiscal responsibility of the Republican Party without all their silly moralizing.

And I have to admit...It's kind of attractive.  It's the closest kind of government to what I think the Founders (with a capital F, no less) would have wanted.

But there is that vexing problem of equality.  What do we do with all the people who lose in a free market system?  Do we just let them get by as best as they will?  Do we hope that people are compassionate enough to donate to food banks and soup kitchens and other charities?  Or does the government have some responsibility to provide some base level for those left by the wayside?  A libertarian might say that these are questions all best answered by local governments and state legislatures, and maybe so; but what about something like education?  What if the people of Virginia would rather not fund public schools because they think it's not particularly important, but then the people of Ohio say "you know what, we are going to have some fantastic schools"?  Doesn't that put the kids in Virginia at a disadvantage simply because they live in a state - oh, no, sorry, a commonwealth -  whose people (perhaps the by most narrow of margins) do not want to adequately support public education?

Once you start to grapple with those kind of questions, you find that libertarian thought always needs some modulation and some nuance.  Some might just kind of shrug their shoulders and argue that inequality is not their problem and that people need to take responsibility for themselves.  True to a degree, perhaps, but I find that that sort of thinking lacks compassion.  And a politics without compassion is due to fail (just read your old, battered copy of Antigone- oh wait, you don't have one due to cuts to the public educational system.  Schade.  Do you know what that means?  Probably not, due to cuts to the public educational system).  

So I have questions for Johnson.  I want to see if maybe he can be nuanced enough to get me to buy in.  I'm not sure based on what I know about him and his thoughts that he can.  But I'd be willing to listen if he is given the chance to debate on the stage.  I think he has every right to do so, and I hope that whoever makes the decision on him being in or out will let him participate.  If the GOP and the DEMs really think they are the shit, and that a life of low taxes and unmitigated pumpkin sex is not better than what they have to offer, then they should not be afraid to prove it.    

And maybe, just maybe, if he shows up at the 36th gate with a couple dozen hot Kripsy Kreme donuts (all for me, I ain't sharing them), I will vote for him on Election day.